The Great CEO-Worker ‘Pay Gap’ Is Nothing But A Union-Built Myth

Investors Business Daily ^ | 6/10/2016 | MARK J. PERRY

[expat_panama]

In an annual ritual that takes place every May, the AFL-CIO releases its “Executive Paywatch” report to publicize what it considers to be the excessive compensation of the CEOs of America’s biggest multinational firms.

The nation’s largest labor federation reports this year that the typical CEO running an S & P 500 firm received total compensation of $12.4 million in 2015 while the average rank-and-file worker was paid just $36,875 — a pay gap of 335-to-1.

But the AFL-CIO can only get such an inflated pay ratio by applying a series of statistical sleights...

...the AFL-CIO only considers a very small sample of S&P 500 CEOs to get its 335-to-1 ratio. Using a larger, more representative sample of CEOs produces a much smaller pay gap.

For example, the AFL-CIO’s own website reveals that the average CEO compensation of Russell 3000 companies was $5.7 million last year, which would cut the 335-1 ratio by more than half to only 155-to-1.

Further, BLS data show that there are actually more than 20,000 chief executives employed nationally who “manage companies and enterprises” at an average annual salary of $220,700...

...If the AFL-CIO could confiscate that entire amount and redistribute it... ...rank-and-file worker would receive an annual increase in pay of only $63 before taxes, or about 3.6 cents more per hour...

...not that surprising that the AFL-CIO would engage in an apples-to-oranges comparison...

...mainstream media, politicians, and the general public never question the statistical legerdemain used by the AFL-CIO to produce the massively inflated pay ratio year after year...

...there’s no support for the AFL-CIO’s rhetorical claim that this slice of the “economic pie” is what’s driving stagnant pay for some American workers.

[wastoute]

As I recall the exorbitant salaries for CEOs was a response to the heavy tax burden (%90) the gummint inflicted on them. To get a million a year to take home one had to surrender the “gummint tithe”, hence a salary of twenty million. So comparing a CEO gross annual earnings to a $25,000 per year janitor really is being quite dishonest but then dishonest is what libtards do best.

[expat_panama]

Good morning and YIKES!   NASDAQ marks up yet another distribution day  and IBD has changed the official market outlook to 'market under pressure'.  On top of that our futures trader colleagues say we're looking to another -1.03%.  That's stark contrast to their +0.38%  for metals but understand that gold&silver are right now off from their recent highs down to $1,282.72&$17.33. 

Econ news:

8:30 AM Export Prices ex-ag.
8:30 AM Import Prices ex-oil
8:30 AM Retail Sales
8:30 AM Retail Sales ex-auto
10:00 AM Business Inventories

Other headlines:

Job Market Is Getting Stronger, Not Weaker - Barry Ritholtz, Bloomberg
Robots Will be Greatest Job Creators Ever - John Tamny, RealClearMarkets
Euro Is a Long Way From Challenging Dollar - Matthew Lynn, Telegraph
Eric Rauchway's Book Would Make Krugman Blush - Paul Moreno, L & L
Stumbles On the Way to 'Uberizing' Private Flight - Matt Krupnick, NYT
Does Rising Rig Count Signal End to Oil Rally? - Nick Cunningham,OilPrice

[Buckeye McFrog]

There’s some shaky math on both sides of this equation.

Everyone knows that CEO’s started taking most of their comp as deferred bonuses and stock options back when Clinton first started making a stink about this.

[BenLurkin]

Okay, say the CEO only made a million and the guy on the floor made fifty grand.

Still a gap.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Having exposed the statistically manipulation, most Fortune 500 CEOs are paid far too much.

I speak as a capitalist. I’ve heard the arguments for outsized compensation, weighed them, and found them wanting.

[expat_panama]

heavy tax burden

Something that usually happens w/ the income inequality scam is the left-wing thieves use 'before-tax' salary levels to justify their income redistribution taxes.  That's a method they can use over and over w/o ever having to say that the problem is 'solved'.

[babble-on]

Dumb article that fails to make its point.

CEO’s of large publicly traded corporations in the US are making 12 million a year average, some much more.

Expanding the pool to the Russell 3000 means including every single publicly traded company, including much smaller ones, and you still end up with 6 million a year.

And then further changing the definition to salary, when most of the compensation is in equity-based pay, further conceals the truth.

US Corporate CEOs make a ton of money compared to US rank and file workers. That’s just true.

[expat_panama]

Still a gap.

--and there always will be as long as we have a market place.  This is why the income equality thieves have to be identified as the Marxists they truly are because what they're seriously working for is 'from each his ability and to each his needs'.

[LostPassword]

This is one area where dems don’t want to divide people into small oppressed groups. In 30 years there’s been little change in compensation between

* the rich and middle class
* the rich and poor
* the rich and single mothers
* the rich and high school dropouts
* the rich and union workers
* ...

But, if you group everyone together there’s been a change. Some of the groups at the low end of wages have grown considerably and brought the average of all “non-rich” down. It wouldn’t be right to point out that certain life decisions are the cause of an increased wage gap and focus on solutions that may actually improve things for the poor. Better to just demonize the rich and get votes from the growing groups of poor and increasing dependency on the government.

[Don Hernando de Las Casas]

There’s a gap? That’s it? So what.

[expat_panama]

Expanding the pool to the Russell 3000 means including every single publicly traded company...

There's a lot going on that you may not know about.  There are about 10,000 publicly traded corporations in the U.S. and many tens of thousands more that are not publically listed.

CEOs make a ton of money compared to US rank and file workers.

--because they get a ton of a lot more done.  Wealth is something that we can either chose to create ourselves or imagine that we can steal from others.

[Don Hernando de Las Casas]

Private citizens decide voluntarily to transfer their property to CEO’s in return for a service. It not our money or our business. Period.

[Don Hernando de Las Casas]

CEOs make a ton compared to workers? So what? I make a ton compared to the guy in the mail room or the kid working at Taco Bell.

[Don Hernando de Las Casas]

Very true. Only a commie Marxist liberal says “There’s a gap,” and equates that simple statement with “There’s a problem.”

[Don Hernando de Las Casas]

Well said.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Seriously. If the GOPe thinks they can run on THIS they’re suicidal.

[wastoute]

What is worse is that the %1 actually have done better with Zero but not for the reason the Bernie Sandinistas claim. The %80 or so BELOW the %1 have actually DONE WORSE and Crony Capitalism. There has been no growth in the private sector under Zero, only punishment.

G Gordon Liddy used to explain it well. We get more of what gummint subsidizes and less of what it punishes. Libtards reward sloth and greed. Not surprisingly after eight years of this we are all but destroyed by sloth and greed. Add in the punishment of true virtues and here we are.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

Sorry. You are not correct.

Stockholders own the entire enterprise, down to paper clips and pens. Their interests as owners is supposed to be represented by the crony capitalists who appoint each other to boards and decide CEO compensation.

CEOs are employees of the corporation and do not receive any “transferred funds.” There are no transferred funds by stock holders. They purchase ownership in the company.

Your statement would be closer to true, if you were referring to bond holders.

[Starboard]

I speak as a capitalist. I’ve heard the arguments for outsized compensation, weighed them, and found them wanting.

************

Being a C level executive is a demanding, high profile job with a lot of responsibility. And of course high qualifications command high pay. That said, a lot of executives have ridiculously outsized compensation packages that are not always justified by corporate performance.

Shareholders get bombarded by proxy votes on executive incentive plans, always supported by management of course. When you receive an already generous compensation package why do you need more incentives? I generally vote against these proposals.