F* off. With all due respect.

Time to dust off the guillotines apparently.

Bahaaa, typical gm arrogance. Don’t buy those pos products.
Should have never given them the taxpayers money. I want my money back.
Don’t support gm. Buy an import.

Let’s blame Obama for YOUR shortcomings
You’d be dead without his kindness

You had decades with no salary cap
Look where it got you

You have hundreds of thousands of employees
Promote someone from within
You don’t have one beancounter there you can trust?

You guys make Ford look sharp as a tack!
DrFill

If they had managed the company better for the past 30 years they wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place. Deal with it. These people still make more money than most people anyways.

stop whining fackin guy

buy ford, simply better

tell all these geezers to take their pay demotions like real men…

they dont want their salaries back… no its just because they cannot find well qualified or suitable management replacements… right…

There are only two auto manufacturers, GM and everybody else…

Lemme see,
How much is the f’n PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES’s salary? Then you tell him that while he’s able to run a whole country, You need four or five times that much to get a qualified person to run some of your lower divisions???

No, Mr Tweedy, that would be too quick and painless.

I agree with DrFill, and Ketzer!

You guys are spot on! And, they better not pull the, “We’re not motivated enough with our capped salaries” card!

This hearkens back to the old question… “How many millions are enough?”

I mean seriously… how much money is required for someone to live a life of luxury and extravagance? $10 mil a year, 20… 100… 365?

Though personally, I don’t think any executives should be paid until the company can turn a profit. It is their job to make the company profitable… and if the company is in the red they aren’t doing the job.

As much as I hate those fat overpaid pigs at the top… Will GM actually be able to hire talent with these caps in place? I think it’s a legitimate question, WE might think these guys are overpaid. But apparently they don’t, and I’m betting the smart ones will go where the money is.

you drink the Gov’t cool-aid you pay the price… can’t hire good people then go the fu$k out of business.
Buy Ford (F)

I hated the bailouts but Í understood the necessity, without the bailouts it would have been a second great depression instead of a major recession,but after all the arrogance coming from wall st. and now GM I’m starting to wonder if we missed an opportunity, maybe a great depression isn’t a bad thing, maybe the lessons learned at that time are needed again, because the next time it will happen ( sooner than later) I can’t see any administration R or D acting differently.

I am usually the FIRST person to blast these over-paid Executives, and would be quick to say that their unlimited salaried didn’t help them get “qualified” candidates before (thus the need for a bail-out), and I would also point out that at a time with 10% unemployment I find it hard to believe that there wouldn’t be people jumping at the opportunity…

… BUT I also see that in the real world, many of these high-level employees demand large salaries and sometimes (just sometimes) they actually deserve them. Now I am NOT saying that we should go back to the ridiculous pay rates that was acceptable before, but take a look at Japan’s or Germany’s playbook – how much does a comparable position in those countries pay… hell, all low-level workers are worried about their jobs being outsourced to China, let’s flip it around on these US executives – hire foreigners to fill in these executive positions. Get the CFO of Honda – who I am SURE is making less than the CFO of GM used to make – and get him to come to Detroit. Or someone similar to that.

I read an article on the CEO of Japan Airlines and while his company is struggling right now, he is taking it personally – he feels that he has disrespected his employees and has cut his own pay while trying to keep as many of his workers employed. If he was in the US, he would be quick to fire thousands of employees so not only he could keep his ridiculous salary, but actually give himself a bonus.

America has some whacked-out values when it comes to Executive pay – on average a top executive gets paid 500 time the amount of the average of one of his workers. No other country is even close to that disparity – Japan, Germany, England? They are all under 50 times.

Whitacre is not asking for pay increases for the current GM employees.

He needs to replace the CFO (if not others) and cannot because no qualified, experienced CFO will work at a company the size of GM for 1/2 million. Sure there will be plenty of folks who would do it and I am sure many of you would sign up, but they need a qualified person.

And I do not get the arrogance part. GM is flushing itself of management and is trying to hire other Americans to replace them. They just cannot at the salary being offered.

Maybe there is some confusion on professional salaries today. An experienced Engineer with a masters and 25 years of experience gets over $100,000 (at least they did before jobs dried up). That is just an average salary. Asking someone to run a company the size of GM for only 5 times that is just not competitive.

Hazdaz, well that is the problem but GM is not going to fix it. They need someone now.

Lets go with your example and offer the CFO 2.5 million (50x $50,000) instead of the .5 million they can offer.

Hazdaz you are absolutely correct, high executive pay and exorbitant bonuses is really turning me off from investing in an American company.

If they couldn’t find competent leadership with no salary caps… what is really going to chance with a cap?

Then again I’m sure I could run GM better than the numbnuts up there now.

Well the President gets room and board free, security and 100% travel expenses paid for. Not to mention that once out of office President’s make millions of dollars a year speaking. I believe Clinton made about $15 million his first year out of office.

Anyways, I don’t agree with the paycaps because I dont think the government should have that level of control (especially a single person within the government (Kenneth Feinberg) but on the other side I also don’t think that GM or anyone should have been bailed out using my tax dollars, the free market should have ran its course.

But what bugs me is the ignorance of so many Americans to think that running a major corporation is a cake walk, Joe Blow factory worker considers himself to work hard with his union mandated 35 hour work week and considers sitting at a desk a cushy job that must be so easy. But it’s not, these guys are responsible for tens of thousands of employees, they have to look 5-10 years into the future and plan a business strategy accordingly, their job is a 24×7 job. If something comes up on the weekend they have to deal with it, they can’t just stop their job at 5 and pick it up tomorrow like their factory workers. Mr. Obama could not run a major corporation and I would bet that most of you could not either (although I’m sure you think it would be easy). They have to be knowledgable in management, business strategy, finance, accounting, technology, they have to analyze financial markets, plan for fluctuations in commodities prices, etc. They have a lot of responsibility and should be paid as such. AGAIN, that being said the management at GM had poor vision, poor planning and no long term strategy and really just ran the company into the ground and probably all should have been fired or removed.

Everyone should have VOLUNTARILY made sacrifices in pay, especially management but included as well the factory workers. This should have been in pay cuts and compensation cuts and not in exchange for 40% ownership for the UAW. The UAW didnt sacrifice either, they just exchanged cash for the promise of stock. While the average hourly pay went down, the overall value of the compensation didnt change one bit because they were too greedy to make sacrifices.

Carstuff, you are incorrect please read:
But executives can still receive additional salary in stock, the source said. The portion of salary given in stock would vest immediately, although executives will have to wait two years before redeeming the shares. Even then, they will be able to cash in on only a third of that stock. The executives will be able to cash in another third after three years and the rest after four years. Because the shares are considered salary, executives get to keep the stock even if they leave their employers before they are allowed to cash in their shares.

Thiis from washington post article, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/21/AR2009102102719.html

This articles makes it clear that even though cash salary is decreased, executives can still be paid in stock options which they can exercise after two years. For GM, the reason they are probably until to fill some of those slots is that people don’t see a viable/profitable future for GM due to years of mismanagement!

@thezaj It might be very difficult to run a large corporation, but all these guys have done is FAIL at running a large corporation. I’m sure any “Joe Blow factory worker” could do just as badly as they have. But, odds are ol’ Joe would probably do better… because he has been at the bottom of the ladder and seen how things really work.

I will put up UPS as an example… a very successful multi-national corporation. Their CEO started out on the dock unloading trucks. He worked his way up to the top. He knows what is going on, and what needs to be done to keep the company going in these times.

@ thezaj; Obama’s wife headed a major company and Obama was head of the Harvard Law Review. I’m not sure what basis you have to say running the freaking USA does not give you transferable skills to run a company. Even Bushy ran a company before he was President. The fact is that anyone can run a company but not everyone can run it effectively and profitably. You’re blurring the lines between these two disticn points!

RaineMan
I couldn’t have said it better myself!

There are people everywhere which would gladly take up the position at GM regardless of salary…the problem is that current gm heads are too greedy…which we can all spot

Zesty, I am wrong? Whitacre is talking about salary caps not stock caps.

Come on. These outside CFO guys are making $5-20 million a year. It is going to take quite a sales job to get a guy to take a 90-98% pay CUT for a promise of possible stock value in 2 years. Not saying that no one will take a challenge but it sure does cut down the pool of applicants.

@carstuff; I agree it cuts down the pool of applicants to from people who want a high paying jobing at Gm to people who are dedicated to GM and want to see it succeed. The current CFO hasn’t quit so that tells me that at least one person is willing to do the job. And you can’t tell me that they don’t have someone in the finance department they can promote or train from within. I find that hard to believe.

raineman, who is this UPS CEO?

“A native of Vincennes, Ind., Eskew graduated from Purdue University with a bachelor’s degree in industrial engineering. He also completed the Advanced Management Program at the Wharton School of Business. Eskew began his UPS career in 1972 as an industrial engineering manager in Indiana. His advancement continued in various positions of increasing responsibility including time with UPS’s operations in Germany and with UPS Airlines.”

or maybe this guy?

Davis, 55, joined UPS in 1986 when it acquired the technology company II Morrow, where he was CEO. Davis served in positions of increasing responsibility in finance and accounting before assuming the role of CFO and joining the UPS Management Committee in 2001. He was named vice chairman in 2006 and was elected to the UPS Board of Directors that same year.

Maybe they should cap hockey scores so the beat down of the Canucks wouldn’t look so bad (Oh!)

Just kidding, Johnny – you did sweep us in the playoffs.

On this – this is kind of simple, he’s right – they need to be competitive to get the talent, it’s like signing baseball players and you’re team has a cap on the salary of each player – you can’t win. As much as many of you hate to admit it, or just are too niave to, executives work alot like major leaguers where they aren’t going to work for the league minimum.

Fair enough, how about performance based bonuses.

More utter b-u-l-l-s-h-i-t! Had the government sh!t canned the top executive tier of GM (not just the token Wagoner stunt) then we would not be reading about this b-u-l-l-s-h-i-t! Just one more reason my family will never consider another GM vehicle. Whitacre the wanker.

Need more oil for GM—change your name you idiot to need more money for GM or need better leadershp for GM or need better quality for GM or need more safety for GM.

You and Ed can cry a river together…..get the job done, get the taxpayers back their money—do the job or step aside. Simple

Oh, and now GM and Chrysler’s finance arm need more money yet…GMAC the bionic division of Government Motors and Fiat holdings.

Ford is the way.

so, uncapping their salaries would help GM sell how many more cars? Or help GM rebuild their antiquated organization structures in what way?
I perfectly understand you guys want more while government is still willing to put money into that “company” (more like a division of the IRS now than a company), but i doubt that will happen before GMs figures are going north, instead of plummeting south…

why not get rid of untalented vps, executives and directors first before u complaint about hiring new ones? obviously current vps, directors and execs. are the ones that put gm into where it is now. I heard gm has about 10x the # of executives and vps compare with toyota. you obviously don’t know how to run a company

In the 1960s, CEOs made 40x the salary of the avg. employee. Now…it’s more like 600x.

Japanese CEOs rarely make 25x that of the avg. employee.

Typical American greed.

Let’s shìtcan the government altogether.

I’m almost tired of reading the comments on here. Open a darn economics book or a business book before any of you criticize an obvious flaw in the salary cap of executives. Just because you think these guys are just sitting in their suits counting money doesn’t mean that is what is happening. I’m tired arguing, it’s not like anyone will change their mind.

e46, that is what they are trying to do. They fired the Chairman and brought in an outsider Whitaker. They fired the CEO and gave Fritz a chance. They are now trying to get rid of the CFO but for 3 months they have not been able to hire anyone from outside.

FYI, Monday GM puts out financials since bankruptcy. Any bets on losses/profits?

I am going to bet, and the payoff is that you guys can make fun of me, that GM will be profitable this year (2009) and will pay off part of the loan to the government. Not the 60% investment but the loans previous to bankruptcy.

JakeK66, take a good look at Peter Drucker’s studies (November ‘09 issue of Harvard Review’s main article is around Drucker). Also, you do not need the type of salaries that the execs say they do. Case in point: there are been brilliant men in government who have not only advanced military weaponry, but who are well schooled with the degrees to prove it. They have provided far more to this country than any of the supposed top execs at GM—even the whole lot of GM execs put together! The US’ definition of “competitive” should not be tied to executives’ pay. That’s propagandized b-u-l-l-s-h-i-t!

I’m all for easing of the salary cap here and adding in some type of performance metric-based bonus program. If you want to bring in a quality applicant that can develop a short-term AND long-term plan and actually stick around long enough to execute it and gain credibility and respect, then GM will have to pay for that level of talent. Otherwise you will just see a revolving door of executives who come in, make a few changes and suggestions to an existing hodgepodge of a plan and then leaves so the cycle can begin all over again. Just look at how well that is working at many of the corporations in the US today.

Yea lots of fluufly bull here.

Issue is that GM is trying to hire a CFO and cannot at the salary allowed.

bye

It does take more money to attract people to such a shamed company. Bankrupt and living on government life support, GM probably isn’t the first stop for rising talent in the US. Money talks loudest always. The glory of saving a massive company as this one is a long shot in most people’s eyes….ask Jim Press about that.

Current crop of directors at GM can try to utilize creative side of their brains and come up with method of paying competitive salary to new hired execs. There should be a list of Key Performance Indicators associated with time line to achieve those and stock options associated with those. Of course, there is no stock to speak about, but if GM is planning to become profitable corporation and not an offshoot of government then future options can be exercised. But if it is governmental department, then 300k salary is very generous for state employees. You can’t have it both ways.

@ jakeK66
It looks like you understand. If GM, Toyota,IBM, or any other major company was looking for someone that could only work the fry machine at McD’s then there wouldn’t be an issue of money, but this is big business and you need big money. If you don’t understand the logic in that you are lost.

Example:
My uncle is good friends with the President of Little Debbies ( THEY MAKE COOKIES AND DONUTS FOR HEAVEN SAKES) He makes 5 Million a year, and Little Debbies probably dosen’t even do 5% of the sales volume that GM does in a year.

0-60, your example is pretzel logic at its finest. Top talent today is looking for more than just money. Little Debbies…sheez!

Thanks for that Jake. I wasn’t even home by the time it was 4-0. Oh well… it was a good night to go to the ol’ Wal-Mart!

It’s obvious these guys have learned nothing… but in their defense it’s almost really beyond their comprehension. This is simply the way they have always done and will continue to recruit and do business in North America and they’re not about to let a little thing like almost ceasing to exist change that.

Oh… and pick on GM all you want but Ford doesn’t do it any differently.

Excuses excuses excuses. Thats all you here from this piece of sh*t for a company. You don’t like your pay cut?? Tough sh*t!! You should be lucky your @$$ still exists!! Start doing sh*t right the first place and maybe we won’t be having this issue!!

Ashes to Ashes_Dust to Dust -

Goto Derek Jeter and tell him he needs to hit .400 and 35 HR’s for his salary to kick in what will he do? Goto the Red Sox who offer him 15 Mil a year and NO PERFORMANCE BASED SALARY. You might be right in a perfect world where we could change the compensation for every company exec to performance based systems, like Johnny was saying too – but we’re not in the perfect world and to get the top talent – you need the money to show up front, especially with a company that deals with more economic and consumer swings than a swingset.

you can definetly see the difference between real CEO’s and arm-chair CEO’s right here in these comment sections on this site.

Hey! Don’t even joke about Yankee trash coming over to the Red Sox organisation! :>O

@ RaineMan; “Obama’s wife headed a major company and Obama was head of the Harvard Law Review. I’m not sure what basis you have to say running the freaking USA does not give you transferable skills to run a company. Even Bushy ran a company before he was President. The fact is that anyone can run a company but not everyone can run it effectively and profitably. You’re blurring the lines between these two disticn points!”

What company did she head, she was VP of public and consumer affairs for a hospital? So yes she has experience, but that is not true corporate governance with fiduciary responsibility to stockholders, workers and consumers, I dont see how an public affairs job would qualify her to run a company, more over I didnt mention her at all. And head of the Harvard Law Review, how does that qualify for anything. To be in charge of an entity that has a staff of three people does not qualify him to run a company of tens of thousands. I stand by my statement that Mr. Obama could not run a major corporation because he lacks the experience and knowledge to do so, he is a great orator but I doubt he can stand toe to toe with most of corporate America and their comprehension of markets. These guys have to look at every facet of the economy and be able to understand it and judge the affects on their business model. They weigh fiscal policy against interest rates against liquidity while looking at effects on commodities and consumer spending and consumer trends to try and steer a company in a viable, profitable and successful manor. Rather they are supposed to do that, but in the now economy they really screwed up.

Again I’m not sitting here saying I think they need crazy pay, I’m just saying it’s a competitive environment out there and if the government really wants a viable GM they need to give them the tools to make themselves competitive, including competitive pay for management. I don’t think GM would have failed if the freemarket could have run its course, I think there were too many debt holders out there to allow it. It might have been broken up into many independent units, but there was too much debt to just let it fail completely in a freemarket. I think the government seized on opportunities to influence the direction of the American auto-industry in the direction it saw fit.

ebleyes

I hated the bailouts but Í understood the necessity, without the bailouts it would have been a second great depression instead of a major recession,but after all the arrogance coming from wall st. and now GM I’m starting to wonder if we missed an opportunity, maybe a great depression isn’t a bad thing, maybe the lessons learned at that time are needed again, because the next time it will happen ( sooner than later) I can’t see any administration R or D acting differently.

I think all Americans need to tighten their belts and realize they need to make sacrifices to get this country back on track. The something for nothing attitude that we have led to all of this, the need for immediate satisfaction without a need to earn or work for things is why we are where we are. Yes Wall St and large institution CEOs are to blame, but its because of us that they were able to do what they did. Complex lending mechanisms and derivatives came about because everyone wanted a house, the car, the boat without working hard to earn the money to pay for it, they wanted it now and ran up the debt tab to get it.

It was wrong for GM and Chrysler to be bailed out in the first place. If they didn’t have union workers it wouldn’t have happened anyway. And it was also wrong for Obama to cap salaries in the private sector as well. He’s a m-a-r-x-i-s-t turd who will get his due by 2012.

However, what is more scary than the previously mentioned is how many intellectual midgets on here who think capping salaries is a great idea. How many millions does it take? How about, what do you care? Its so great to call for the head of someone else, except when that someone else becomes you. What goes around comes around folks. If you feel so justified in capping salaries for executives, why don’t we have bums decide how much YOU should be paid? This is simple economics in the works here. A perfect example why communism does not work. If you take away the incentive, nobody will bother. That goes for executives and doctors.

The decision was made to bail out GM because it was deemed necessary to keep them in business and workers working. Who in the right mind thinks it would actually help a company to cap salaries in a time they need every bit of help available? Is it wise to keep current executives or hire new?? It’s one thing to head a group that is functional and profitable. How much would someone need to pay any of you to go captian a ship that is not just sinking, but actually submerged a 100ft below the surface?? Would you hop on board?

GM needs to cease whining. For years they lured in top talent (through their many guises of perks), but they never developed succession planning—that right now would have been implemented; hence, top talent would have now moved into the upper ranks that GM says they now cannot fill. This highlights how GM cannot run a corporation. What the hell was GM doing all these past years? Seriously. Whitacre has nary a leg to stand on. Again, this is utter b-u-l-l-s-h-i-t! (The same foul stench emanates from GE too.) Whitcare the Whiner.

everyone was calling for GM to clean house from top down, which they some what did, who would be left in such a succession plan?

As much as I don’t like Apple’s corporate culture of ****ieness (although I own a Macbook, currently listening to an iPod at work and using an iPhone to text my friend) if you want a CEO to get something moving you need to hire Steve Jobs type who costs $$$

0-60
But your uncle’s friend runs a profitable company, right?

I don’t know how many of you are in the position to hire and fire, judging by the comments, probably not too many, but if you had to fill a position and couldn’t pay the going market rate, your competiitors would get all the best talent.

@ thezaj, You obviously don’t work closely with top managers or have experience with executives. I work in the finance department at my company and have constant contact with top managers and VPs. We had a top executive that just went back and got his college diploma (this is a multinational company with over $17 billion in annual revenue with a exec who only graduated from high school). He got the job because he knew someone but he was still a good exec. Being a good executive is like being a president; it’s about your ability to make effective decisions not how much you know on a certain subject. Your obviously not a business person and do not have an MBA, if you do you should give it back because you’re not making use of it!

@ Long Dong Auto; Your logic is flawed because you’re saying if only GM could get the best talent they would be in a better position. What happened for the last 20 something years without a salary cap? How will this change anything, please explain! Actually, the current government plan allows GM to pay more than the going rate; the only stipulation is that the cash compensation is less and stock compensation is more. All we’re doing is shifting compensation from one bucket to another; don’t buy this smoke and mirrors.

Top executives have advisors like Presidents who explain things to them. It doesn’t matter how smart you are if you don’t realize that if you build crappy cars people won’t buy them; it doesn’t matter if you went to Cornell!

Lastly, the US government owns 60% of GM and therefore the government can do whatever they d**n near please. That’s what happens when you put your hand our for government money, don’t be surprised if you get your hand back with a pinky missing! This should be a lesson learned!

Easilly comes the question:
Does the good money make a good Managent or a good Managment brings the good money? I’d say the second makes more sense. I’m not sure how money can be a motivation good enough for in Gm’s case. Doesn’t it take more than a good paycheck to save a bleeding company?

Zesty, my logic is hardly flawed. We are a market driven economy. If I were weighing job offers for simillar positions from competitors in the same industry, and with money being one of the more important factors in making my decision, I would decide accordingly, as would you or any other human looking out for their own best interests. Considering the risk involved with working for a firm in such a precarious state as GM, I would think any compensation in the form of stock would not be as much of a motivating factor as cash in hand.

@ Long Dong Auto; you are correct in reference to hiring someone who wants to make big bucks now. But that is not what GM needs, GM needs someone who is going to be in it for the long haul, let’s be honest here. You agree? What better way to make sure someone is in it for the long haul then tie compensation to the long term stock performance of the company as measured by the stock price.

GM needs somone who has the expertise and can handle the responsibility, and they need to do what is necessary to insure they get the best possible candidate.

Zesty, wow. Scary scary comments. So anyone who gets government money is now subject to the mighty hand of Obama? Do you happen to have any student loans? Perhaps Stafford loans? Should students and graduates have stipulations as well? Or maybe it’s only for a certain dollar amount, right? If you borrow more than -blank- you are subject to the mighty hand? How about those folks who took the $7500 tax incentive, before it became free money? Should those people be subject to the mighty hand?

Simple minded folks always think the end justifies the means. Scary.

I guess every one of the elderly on Medicaid, who apparently have their hand out for government money should be subject to whatever the government says. People on welfare, same thing.

@Long Dong Auto, competition got all top talent way before GM fail to exist as independent company. We are talking government employee now.

Borat, that’s a really scary scenario.

Soon perhaps we will all be driving Ladas and Volgas, while the more affullent will tool around in their Zils.

If the Govt is footing the bill… why shouldn’t they have a say?

Were people actually stupid enough to believe that the money didn’t come with strings attached?

The Govt bailed out all of these companies because they wanted to have a hand in them… and the execs are blind if they didn’t see that coming. Just like dealing with the mob… if they do you a favor, they want something in exchange.

@ Typical LLN, I love your literal interpretation of my joke as a form of “I got you”. Someone on Medicaid, welfare, or Student Loans has a written legal agreement with the government that has certain stipulations that are legally binding! For example, someone on govt. assistance, depending on the state, forfeits this assistance if they stop looking for work! Therefore, they already have contracts with the government…..re-writing those contracts is another story! GM entered into a contract with the Federal Government which stipulated that the government had the right to essentially own and manage the company! Hence, when you get government money with such stipulations that’s what you get! I hope this clarifies!

Typical_LLN_Poster makes a GREAT point. All these corporate armchair coaches on here should have their pay dictated by bums. I’m sure a bum would view your pay as exorbitent for what you do. And, you certainly don’t need a car as nice as you have, you just need transportation after all. You don’t need living accomodations as nice as you have, after all, bums do okay in their living conditions. It sounds to me like there are a bunch of low brow, envious people on here that cannot accept that they have not amounted to as much as these executives. So rather than accept it or aspire to more, they make monsters out of those they cannot be like. Pathetic. Don’t forget, it’s the taxes on those executives that provides the government with like 90% of ITS existence.

Zesty Honda, as usual your comments lack wisdom. The key point to your comment made on 11/11 at 1:11 is “He got the job because he knew someone.” Uh, hello. Neat story but it doesn’t really apply here. Then you tell thezaj, “Your [sic] obviously not a business person and do not have an MBA, if you do you should give it back because you’re not making use of it!” Then you follow up with a comment to Long Dong Auto at 1:15 that clearly shows your limited understanding on the subject: “Your logic is flawed because you’re saying if only GM could get the best talent they would be in a better position. What happened for the last 20 something years without a salary cap? How will this change anything, please explain!” Zesty, you act as if the lack of a salary cap was GM’s problem all along. It was lack of proper management but most of that has been replaced or flushed out at this point. A task that is now hindered by this pay cap. Because you associate executive pay with exuberance, does not make it so. Others have used the example of athletes. GM is now trying to replace those underperforming players with better performing ones at a team that has a damaged reputation. How do pay caps make that task more realizable? How was it you asked Long Dong Auto, “how will this change anything, please explain!” It’s your turn to explain. Better yet, explain how pay caps will not change things for the worse.

I do agree that GM has limited say here because they DID accept massive amounts of money from the government but, unless there is another motive behind the government’s move, they must understand pay caps will most likely hinder the debtor’s ability to repay the loan. Next, the all too appropriately named Zesty Honda states, “top executives have advisors like Presidents who explain things to them. It doesn’t matter how smart you are if you don’t realize that if you build crappy cars people won’t buy them; it doesn’t matter if you went to Cornell!” A complete disregard for the last 5 or 6 products to come from GM which happen to be rated at or above competitive levels. I bet Zesty Honda is mentally living in the early 1990s because he is more comfortable there. A time when imports went mostly unchallenged. Thankfully Zesty Honda says “lastly” and states, “the US government owns 60% of GM and therefore the government can do whatever they d**n near please. That’s what happens when you put your hand our [sic] for government money, don’t be surprised if you get your hand back with a pinky missing! This should be a lesson learned!” I agree ZH. But again, if the government’s (Obama’s government, that is) intentions are really to get out of American business and get repaid, they’d reconsider this restrictive measure. I think a reason there is so much resistance to the pay cap is because it seems that Obama would be pleased to see caps put on all executive pay (but not government positions). This is an outcropping of that philosophical belief that is diametrically opposed to the American way.

LOL @ DrFill, “Let’s blame Obama for YOUR shortcomings You’d be dead without his kindness.” Uh, wow. Wow. Okay, um, DrFill, I’m not sure if you’ve been told but Obama is not a king. He is a paid civil SERVANT, (supposedly) bound by the law. Kindness should have nothing to do with it. You can keep your very Old World think.

Don’t bite the hand that feeds your sorry a$$
They have a good quarter, and now they have a brain?
I think not!
DrFill

I’m back. Let’s get down to brass tacks shall we? GM went bankrupt. They have debt. They would not exist without the corporate welfare check they received. Currently the only way GM is going to be able to pay top salaries is from taxpayer dollars. If you want them to raise the pay caps, then get your wallet out.

I thought so.

I’m torn between two points of view:

On the one hand, Typical_LLN_Poster has made some excellent points and has written his points rather well. I’d like to think that the typical LLN poster is actually like this, and that we provide very good, viable, logical arguments.

But on the other hand, I think people like 1115, NMOFGM and BK09 are probably more common on these threads, making Typical_LLN_Poster very atypical.

i’d just like to point out that i didn’t stir this pot, thank you, now have a good troll…

Kell, that’s over simplifying it. There is no direct connection between GM employees’ salaries and potential American tax increases. GM was loaned money backed by majority ownership of the company. Key word there being “loaned.” GM still operates like a business… mostly. That’s where all the uproar and confusions starts, it’s not supposed to work like this in America. And, it typically doesn’t work (e.g., Amtrak). At this point, the better GM performs, the faster we’ll all get our money back. If this story were better reported, we would have learned that GM simply wants to hire competent employees at competitive pay rates. To think they could do otherwise would be operating the company on ‘hope’ for ‘change’. Not a bright strategy. And not sustainable.

With all that said and despite being a GM fan, I was not for the bailouts but rather bankruptcy early on — before the government loaned them money and took majority interest. That’s how business is supposed to work. You mismanage, you fail and somebody else picks up the pieces. Because of the bailouts and all the propping up and bandaging, I fear the industry in general didn’t learn enough from this potentially strength-inducing event that could have helped them reach their historic unencumbered potential (e.g., resulting partial UAW ownership, that’s probably not going away).

Sorry Tex, but until you pay the loan back …

I understand that the Gov’t helped GM and they should have a say. Having said that though, the chances of the Govt being repaid will be slim & null if the Government micro manages the business. This is motivation for GM to het it right if they want to get the Government out of the Board Room!