Tuesday, April 7, 2009

social activism

It's ages since my last post on this site, but I'm prompted tonight by the intersection of Twitter, TV, and  the question of massive Executive payouts and my social left background. I've been watching an SBS Insight program which has raised the question of Executive pay levels. I find it hard to imagine the type of money these guys are earning/amassing. I mean most of us can only physically work a maximum of 20 hours a day - even the most brilliant need to sleep at some point.  While I agree that if an Executive drives their organisation to new levels of financial reward, they should be paid well, the question remains, What happens if the org doesn't perform? What happens if the decisions that Exec makes leaves the business in ruins 5 years later? What is `Paid Well'?
If we equate pay with performance, then we need a radical re-think of how we reward the majority of our workers. I see too many $45,000 p/a employees who put in as many hours as their boss or the CEO, and probably many more hours that the Board members. So if Exec pay isn't rated on hours, then what are the measures? Company performance - When and where? and what about long term effects (sustainability) Think about BHP's record in PNG.  Then there's the Boys Club effect. In my current position I'm learning it's not what you know it's who you know. That culture pervades all of Australian Business. It doesn't really matter how smart you are, it's how you leverage your networks,

No comments: