Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

Angry Shareholders Confront a Bloated CEO

By Sam Pizzigati, AlterNet. Posted June 2, 2007.


At a recent Qwest annual meeting, shareholders expressed anger over management's salaries and perks. Their frustration -- and management's rationalizations -- tell us a great deal about profits, power and the state of corporate America today.
Advertisement

Qwest, the giant Denver-based phone company, is riding high these days. The telecom came before shareholders last week, at the company's annual meeting, with nearly $600 million in 2006 profits -- and a whopping share price hike -- to happily report.

Who deserves the credit -- and reward -- for that stunning "performance"? Give the brass ring, says a grateful Qwest corporate board, to company CEO Dick Notebaert.

In 2006, Qwest bestowed upon Notebaert $1.1 million in salary, $4.1 million in bonus, $760,000 for country club memberships and assorted other perks, and stock grants and option awards worth $16.7 million.

Over the course of the year, Notebaert also collected $18.4 million cashing out stock options he picked up in previous years and, to top things off, saw $8.4 million of his previously awarded stock grants vest their way into his personal portfolio.

Depending on how you define what gets counted in annual CEO pay, Notebaert in 2006 made somewhere between $16.5 million (Denver Post) to $33 million (Minneapolis Star Tribune).

Researchers at Institutional Shareholder Services have a somewhat different perspective on Notebaert's paycheck. Of every $100 in corporate net income that Qwest's 38,000 employees generated last year, they point out, $4.16 went the CEO's way.

In effect, this most generous reward proclaims to the world that Dick Notebaert's contribution to his company's success last year was 1,600 times greater than the average Qwest worker's.

And what exactly did Notebaert do to merit such a king-sized share of the fruits from Qwest's success? Last week, at the Qwest annual meeting, shareholder Linda Baggus wanted an answer.

Baggus, a high school teacher, observed that she makes $55,000 a year.

"How is the service that you render," she asked CEO Notebaert, "so much more valuable than the service I render?"

Notebaert offered no specifics in his reply. His pay, he explained, depends on his "performance" and reflects the realities of a "very competitive market" for executive talent.

"Different jobs," he summed up, "get different pay rates."

Other shareholders at the Qwest annual meeting had a more specific take on the elements behind the company's latest profit upsurge.

Under Notebaert, pointed out a Salt Lake City widow of a retired Qwest employee, retirees have had their life insurance coverage slashed from "a full year's salary to $10,000." Healthcare benefits have also been capped.

Workers still on the job have felt some squeezing, too. A pending federal lawsuit, for instance, is charging that Qwest call center workers have been forced to work overtime without getting "properly paid."

Schoolteacher Linda Baggus asked Notebaert, at last week's meeting, if he'd be willing to plow $10 million from his CEO pay to restore full life insurance coverage for Qwest retirees.

"No," came Notebaert's answer.

That wouldn't be the annual meeting's only piece of negativity. Four shareholder reform resolutions, all designed to put the brakes on "runaway CEO pay," went down to defeat after Qwest management mobilized against them.

Notebaert did his executive best, throughout the meeting's contentious exchanges, to smooth over shareholder critiques and then end the proceedings on an upbeat note.

"This is a great country," he would marvel in his concluding remarks, "where we can gather to agree and disagree."

Agree and disagree, Notebaert might well have added, and walk off with a few dozen million a year.

Editor's note: a correction was made to this article after posting.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: inequality, ceo pay, qwest

Sam Pizzigati, an associate fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, D.C., edits Too Much, an online weekly on excess and inequality.


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The 1600 Times Man
Posted by: edith on Jun 2, 2007 3:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These top execs can't live anymore on one or two million bucks per year. Tens of millions, tied in part to stock, tied in part to corporate "performance" that clearl y is the result of the effort of all employees is dumped in one pocket alone.

I loved the example of how this scoundrel could have saved the full life insurance benefit for retirees by contributing a part, yes just a part, of his gains back to the people who made him rich in the first place. No, he said, I don't think so.

I do believe that people with special talent and with the willingness to take risks should be paid more than less talented or more cautious individuals who would rather receive a steadier compensation than someone willing to invest in a venture that might wipe them out, or might succeed and make them rich.

At least in the case of public corporations(and many companies, I know, are going private) there should be limits on stock options as compensation and on "benefits" that are really dodges to recieve a higher salary than what is reported to shareholders. Also there should be consideration of banning preferential stock voting rights that allow managements to perpetuate themselves.

The Qwest situation really is disgusting. And it's all too common.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The 1600 Times Man Posted by: bouyant
» RE: The 1600 Times Man Posted by: edith
» RE: The 1600 Times Man Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: The 1600 Times Man Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
REGULATION
Posted by: Tom Degan on Jun 2, 2007 4:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What we need is Regulation! The financial drunk the the CEOs of this country have been on since the Reagan de-regulatuon of the 1980's was a dreadful, hideous mistake.

What we need - and what we're going to get, make no mistake about it - is a New New deal. The next (Democratic) president and (Democratic) congress has got a hell of a workload ahead of them. When Franklin D. Roosevelt came to power on March 4, 1933, he had only twelve years of Republican stupidity to deal with and correct. The next president will have fouteen years of their craziness to contend with.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY.
"The Rant" by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: GULATION Posted by: dlf
» RE: REGULATION Posted by: Lincoln fan
REGULATION
Posted by: Tom Degan on Jun 2, 2007 4:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What we need is Regulation! The financial drunk the the CEOs of this country have been on since the Reagan de-regulatuon of the 1980's was a dreadful, hideous mistake.

What we need - and what we're going to get, make no mistake about it - is a New New deal. The next (Democratic) president and (Democratic) congress has got a hell of a workload ahead of them. When Franklin D. Roosevelt came to power on March 4, 1933, he had only twelve years of Republican stupidity to deal with and correct. The next president will have fouteen years of their craziness to contend with.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY.
"The Rant" by Tom Degan

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: REGULATION Posted by: Ely Whitney
» RE: GULATION, OR GLEANING? Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
I Second the Call for Establishing Regulations on CEO Salaries.
Posted by: yellow on Jun 2, 2007 5:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The exchange at the stockholders meeting is a good indication (and not the first or only example) that stockholders can't reign in CEO salaries. According to the financial press, the average fortune 500 CEO receives an annual average of about $15 million including perks, stock options, salary, bonuses, and the like. The Qwest CEO is more than double the average and is getting close to 5% of company profits.

The Qwest story is typical. Corporate America is all about a transfer of wealth from the middle class employees to the rich CEO. All the while employees' jobs, pay, and benefits are being cut. With unions on the ropes little can be done. The ball is now in the federal government's court. Only a Democratic victory in '08 can ensure even an investigation by the house or senate. If the time comes let them do the right thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Deregulation is an ongoing swindle
Posted by: hagwind on Jun 2, 2007 5:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I heartily commend to everyone's attention Robert Kuttner's forthcoming book, The Squandering of America: How the Failure of Our Politics Undermines Our Prosperity. Official pub date is November 6; it'll probably be out in mid or late October. It explores the myriad consequences of deregulation and the run-amok financial markets, with a focus on how these have increased the gap not only between rich and poor but between the top 10 percent and everybody else. It also points out that laissez-faire ideology only applies till the speculators and leveragers screw things up so badly that the government has to bail them out.

I like Sam Pizzigati's article. Day in, day out, I hear about these ludicrous CEO compensation packages, which in many cases are absolutely unrelated to the corporation's real productivity (as opposed to its manipulated share price), but it's often hard to understand the mentality of the guys (and the overwhelming majority of them do seem to be guys) who play that game. Pizzigati's story helps a lot. I've been thinking that the willingness to manipulate stocks, companies, and people in order to increase one's compensation from, say, $5 million to $25 million is a symptom of serious pathology. Hiring one of these people to run a company is sort of like hiring a raving drunk to fly an airplane.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

How the Qwest CEO grabs his bloated salary
Posted by: DrGeneNelson on Jun 2, 2007 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One of Qwest's "dirty little secrets" is that they can hire "fresh (inexpensive) young blood" from third world nations in perfect compliance with the loophole - laden law and permanently displace experienced American citizens. Qwest customers get lousy customer service from agents they cannot understand. Qwest's CEO gets outrageous pay and perks.

Use this link to view a public disclosure website:
http://beta.h1b.info/lca_search.php

Employer name: Qwest All years selected (2000-2006)

Your search for Qwest found 43 companies, 758 approved H-1B applications and 1,484 jobs.

Here's a low end example, showing wages substantially below the starting salary for an American citizen just out of college (who has the right of employment free agency.) Special visa holders work under conditions of virtual indentured servitude, with a visa conditioned on being continuously employed.
Qwest Information Technologies, Inc.
System Software Support Engineer $38,100/year Start date: 01/01/2003 Location: Denver, CO & Littleton, CO

High end example Title: Senior Director of Customer Care Start date: 06/24/2002 for $120,000/year
This imported Senior Director likely hired contractors from India via Tata, Satyam, etc. whose wages and numbers aren't disclosed to work in customer care.
To illustrate the gaping loopholes in the law, the claimed prevailing wage for a director of Customer Service, per "Watson Wyatt Data Services" was $74,000/year! (Hint: Watson Wyatt can just make up a unique job title and assign pretty much any wage it wants to that job title by putting some numbers or letters in the job title e.g "Senior Director Customer Service 12A.")

Learn more at http://www.JobDestruction.com and Debunking the Myth of a Desperate Software Labor Shortage by Professor Norm Matloff'. H-1B and Offshoring Web Page: heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/itaa.html

Currently, greedy corporate leaders are pushing S. 1348 (Comprehensive Immigration Reform) in the U.S. Senate. It includes an unwarranted increase of H-1B visas from 65,000 per year to 115,000 per year (with an escalator clause to 180,000 per year) and a "guestworker" program that can also be used for 200,000 more of these workers per year. This further boosts corporate profits at the expense of middle - class Americans who lose their careers forever. Use the free U.S. citizen activism tools at http://www.NumbersUSA.com to demand reforms.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I have to agree with Jello Biafra...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Jun 2, 2007 6:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just as there is a minimum wage, there should be a maximum wage.

To believe that such overinflated salaries has no effect on others is naive... and in fact nearly psychotic. Companies only make so much money... so when execs get huge paychecks, that is more money that can't go towards anything else... such as pay for workers... and all those benefits that are universally disappearing of late because the companies "can't afford them" and stay competitive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Situation normal?
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Jun 2, 2007 8:03 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"How is the service that you render," she asked CEO Notebaert, "so much more valuable than the service I render?"

Econ x99 (remedial):

"Pay differentials are established between individuals based on what other individuals are willing to pay for their respective services."

If a CEO doesn't deserve the salary he or she is receiving, it is encumbent upon the board to alter that salary. It sounds like at least one of the members was pretty agitated about the CEO's salary, and was exercising their authority as a stakeholder to issue an arguably justifiable challenge to said payline. That's exactly how reasonable folks who own stock in a company should approach fixing a pay/performance misalignment among the executives.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Situation normal? Posted by: fork
» RE: Situation normal? Posted by: yellow
Directly off the (right brain) wall . . .
Posted by: Knowmad on Jun 2, 2007 9:15 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey, how about about a salary cap for corporate ceo's, like in sports? All those in the same sector - telecom, automotive, banking, etc. - are required to share the same limited pot of money.

It's be great, watching one unconscionable oaf after another try to get more than their share of the pie, as the others gang up on them, virtually dragging them down by their pantlegs to prevent them climbing higher on their sad scale of 'money equals worthiness'.

Eventually all the infighting could become too much like real work for these miguided little 'leaders', and they just might grow up and decide to pay everyone from clerks to ceo's a fair wage . . . right?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Time for Shareholder Mobilization
Posted by: mgloraine on Jun 2, 2007 9:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A tale which is representative of American business as a whole since the disaster which was the Reagan Dark Age. It's still not trickling down.

Although the Qwest shareholder-initiated reforms were defeated in this instance, it may be that shareholder awareness and mobilization are the best "grass-roots" counter-measures against management profiteering. Change is possible from within most corporate structures, but stockholders typically ignore all of the voting proxies, etc. which are sent to them. Just as in the wider political arena, you need to exercise your vote to make things happen.

But this is ultimately the economic by-product of the authoritarian (i.e., fascist) "unitary executive" political model which replaced the US Constitution during the Reagan years. Profiteering and thievery were not previously considered admirable undertakings, yet they have been re-packaged by the neo-cons as "Yankee ingenuity" or "entrepreneurial spirit" in an effort to legitimize their unbridled greed and marginalize the victims. In the present 'administration' it has been enshrined as government policy.

So the "right" of CEOs to make outrageous and undeserved profits while eliminating jobs locally, outsourcing to the lowest bidder, abdicating responsibility for worker health care and retirement, etc. is reinforced by the agencies and tactics employed and endorsed by the federal government. We can't expect ordinary CEOs to see their profits as obscene when the Halliburton/Bechtel/Blackwater crowd are taking home Billions.

So along with shareholder mobilization, we still need voter mobilization to influence change at state and national levels. It will be unlikely for ethical behavior to spontaneously break out in the midst of a feeding-frenzy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Former Qwest CEO Busted! For Being a Jerk
Posted by: freethink7 on Jun 2, 2007 10:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What about this former Qwest CEO…Joe Nacchio?

Insider trading – inflating stock – enormous bonuses for unethical - illegal behavior. Finally, convicted of illegal insider trading.

For more info:
QwestNacchio
CEO

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Up the top tax rate......
Posted by: tap17x on Jun 2, 2007 10:52 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
....to say 91%, as it was during WW2. That would take care of excessive CEO salaries. And let's make it even higher for interest and dividend income over a certain amount. By the way, guess who these greedy mofos vote for? The party that's forgiving of corporate (and religious) excess, that's who.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another Aspect To This...
Posted by: bob t on Jun 2, 2007 11:01 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...that no one has mentioned is that just exactly how did the QWEST CEO cause the company to be so profitable. Yes of course he did it on the backs of employees salaries, benefits and pensions.

BUT just exactly what other methods did he use to manipulate stock prices. Yes as one poster pointed out this CEO did what many/most CEOs do and that is to illegally manipulate the stock prices via various stock market manipulations, I call thjat economic terrorism. Read the book by The Economic Hitman called, I think Confessions of an Economic Hitman whereby this CEO used economic strategies in other countries where QWEST or any of it's subsidiaries or partners do business.

AND, just exactly what else did this CEO do to illegally manipulate QWEST stock prices. He manipulated the Federal Government in ways which benefitted QWEST stock and thus himself. But he manipulated the Bush govt in ways which HARMED possibly many others, other companies, just as WalMart does by putting the little companies out of business. Also this piece committed an act of terrorism upon the very fabric of our society.

The many threads and ramifications of this CEOs corrupt crimes need to be teased out and followed by serious economists. This and all ohter CEOs like him, which is most of them are wholly guilty of weakening America financially but it's very security by using the concepts of globalization to fund Americas adversaries, like China et.al.

What exactly is China. It is quite simply the way America will be under the Bush crime family and the Republican party which is dedicated to nothing more than short term profits at any cost. Corporations are really selling out America, all of America, at every location and at every level under the guise of rampant privatisation.

The Republican party has committed all their efforts to selling out America.

They may call themselves pro-family and pro-life but they truly are not, not, not. That is why they conflate prosperity, profits, pro-family, pro-life and religion. When in reality there is and should be little connection between those elements. Republican Profit Whores are not only not pro-family but the very core values of the Republican party are completely antithetical/anathema to families and life not only in the U.S. but every where else in the world.

And yet, right wing religion totally supports the Republican party of war-kill-death for profit and world domination. Right wing religion is either stupid or knowingly complicit.

When corporations manipulate the laws of America to make greater profits, obscene preofits just exactly how is that any manifestation of skillful corporate management. Much less skillful corporate management that even remotely deserves obscene wages.

The CEO of America, George Bush, is and has been doing that every day of his presidency. Moreover this began with Reagan who was put into power by the conflation of Jerry Falwell and Pope John Paul II and is being continued to this very day by those two religions.

I am a catholic. I have written about this series of tragic events many times and I intend to continue. Jesus clearly spoke against the merging of church and state but neither the catholic church, catholic fundies nor the evangelical fundies and their churchs seem to adhere and/or even give any kind of lip service to that unequivocal admonission of Jesus or our now badly shredded US Constitution.

The inalienable human rights that God has bestowed on all of us are rapidly being eroded by the greed for money and political power embodied in the Republican party, and there are complicit Democrats as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Right on, bob t Posted by: hagwind
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH TIME FOR THE MAXIMUM WAGE
Posted by: ubertext on Jun 2, 2007 11:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let us get this straight- The money supply is FIXED, no one makes money you get it off of someone else. Yes the +$10 Mill the CEO gets comes right out of workers health & life benefits.
the CEO making an "extra" $10 is how many people not making 50,000. As this country further spreads the gap between rich & poor and the middle class disappears, we must realize the money is coioming out of our mouths.
MAXIMUM WAGE- no one needs to make over $10 million a year- I mean NO ONE on this green earth needs that much money to live- the no limit on top pay - capitalist doctrine is proven wrong & faoulty- If there is no limit on top pay the logic goes then we have lots of people who will CREATE JOBS with their new companies- Stock prices, which are tied to top pay, increase when firms cut jobs elimating "costs" and then getting workers cheaper overseas. If the stock price goes up do to a cut in the workforce of the US company the CEO pay goes up, so the theory of job creation tied to no upward limit on pay is completely WRONG.
Time for the Maximum Wage- This is not unconstitutional, there exists salry caps in the NBA & NHL. We must get behind this- No one needs or deserves more than $10 mill a year- Enough is Enough time for the maximum wage!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CEO"S bloated salaries
Posted by: koolwoman on Jun 2, 2007 3:42 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These CEO'S seem to forget that the employees are also responsible for the huge profits and the successes of the company. The citizens in the lower echelons are being squeezed constantly with greater expenses but no upward adjustment on salaries. Then we wonder why some people have a meltdown that often affects others. The board is all filled by cronies who grant the big salaries, and the stockholders have no vote on the salary of the CEO and other top execs. I would like to see the stockholders demand that some of them be seated on the board, and that they include minor stockholders. This selfish (I got mine) attitude comes down from the top. Just as a CEO can set an example of fairness, sharing, and compassion, so also can the president set a compassionate and caring climate for the country and for the world. I see no evidence of that,from this president or this administration. The country will be so much better off when he is out of office, that is unless we elect a clone.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

U.S. Regulators Mull Executive Pay Accounting Change
Posted by: cognitorex on Jun 2, 2007 3:54 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America's accounting chiefs are close to deciding that salary and perks exceeding two million dollars annually can not rationally be deemed pay for work expended. Payouts of five million to hundreds of millions would quite boggle the minds of both Adam Smith and Karl Marx, said one insider, "off, off, off the record."
Going forward, the recommendation will be that executive remuneration exceeding two mil annually will be construed as a disbursement of corporate capital in amounts agreed to by boards, directors, trustees and not so trust-ees as the case may be.
The new accounting Pronouncement will reflect that mega salaries in excess of the maximum two mil will be considered as an allocation of corporate capital which will no longer qualify for accounting treatment as a corporate expense.
A number of CEO's have formed a study committee particularly in response to the IRS position of "You can call it capital or you can call it Swiss cheese, we're still taxing exec' pay at the highest personal rate possible."
"There's a fundamental lack of fairness here," whinged the corporate CEO's. They also pointed out, "even embezzlement is treated as a deductible expense."
Sharehoders, mostly wearing Abu Ghraib style hooding to protect their identities, were cautiously pessimistic.
.
cognitorex blogspot craig johnson

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

chrysler sued by daimler stock holders
Posted by: wleming on Jun 2, 2007 4:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
german stockholders sued chrysler for "what we in germany call exploitation"--the golden hand shakes and outrageous perks given greed head ceos.... germans consider it corruption, in the us its said to be good business.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Unemployment and New IRS taxes
Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive on Jun 2, 2007 9:02 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Right now, unemployment stands at 6.2% nationally. Long-term unemployment has become a persistent problem. Nearly 2 million Americans have been looking for work unsuccessfully for over 6 months, while over 9 million Americans are unemployed. According to the Economic Policy Institute, there are three unemployed candidates for every job opening.

Ironically, at the same time so many Americans can't find work, there is so much work to do. The crisis of our decaying infrastructure is something we see every day when we sit in traffic bound by orange barrels that line our highways. It is something that school children experience at their desks, crowded together under leaking roofs. In cities, municipal sewer systems overflow into rivers, streams, and estuaries.
In Southern California, a single 2 inch rain pollutes 30 miles of our coast line. These events occur with increasing regularity as our systems age. Infrastructure problems threaten our productivity, our economy, our environment, and our health.

We, the middle class have paid for the largess of this government. I am really in favor of going to 92% tax rate for the highest paid people with the excess being applied to re-building our infrastructure. But first, NO MORE WARS!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Is there a good reason why we don't know the income the CEO reported to the IRS?
Posted by: Sojourner on Jun 3, 2007 1:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My suspicion is that with all the tax gimmicks available, CEOs and corporate officials in general pay a pittance in taxes compared to the worth of their remuneration.

So far as I am aware, not only do elected officials report taxes paid, a competent investigative journalist might have supplied such data for this report.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Tell Qwest CEO what you think of him
Posted by: drcyflowers on Jun 3, 2007 1:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's the address for Qwest CEO Richard Notebaert, in case you want to tell him what you think of his salary, his job performance, or his value as a human being in general:

Richard C. Notebaert
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Qwest Communications International Inc.
1801 California St.
Denver, CO 80202

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

By the way
Posted by: drcyflowers on Jun 3, 2007 1:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By the way, is Notebaert the genius in their management who decided to spell "Qwest" with a w instead of a u? I'd love to know who the idiot was who chose that spelling.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another antisemitic slam -- what else is new?
Posted by: hagwind on Jun 4, 2007 4:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just jumped to the conclusion that the last line of this post was a (blessedly short) antisemitic diatribe. Maybe I was too hasty. Would you care to explain what difference it makes whether Dick Notebaert is Ashkenazi, Sephardic, or any other kind of Jewish? (I haven't done the research you have; I know nothing about the man's background.) As far as I can tell, the one thing that nearly all (perhaps all?) these "bloodsucking vagrants" have in common is that they're men. Charopos, if you're a man yourself (I don't know for sure, but I have this hunch), maybe you could offer some more constructive insight into the behavior of these CEOs?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]