 |
| US: Executive Pay: A Special Report. More Pieces. Still a Puzzle.
by Eric Dash, New York Times
April 8th, 2007
In response to a barrage of criticism that regulators have not kept up with the complexities of swelling pay packages, the Securities and Exchange Commission now requires corporate America to disclose details of executive compensation more fully. As this year’s proxies pour in, they are packed with fresh information aimed at making pay more transparent. Of course, it also is a lot more confusing. |
| US: Lockheed Stock and Two Smoking Barrels
by Richard Cummings, Playboy.com
January 16th, 2007
If you think the Iraq war hasn't worked out very well for anyone, think again. Defense contractors such as Lockheed are thriving. And no wonder: Here's the story how Lockheed's interests- as opposed to those of the American citizenry- set the course of U.S. policy after 9/11. |
| US: Pentagon Spends Billions to Outsource Torture
by Joshua Holland, Alternet
September 14th, 2006
The thousands of mercenary security contractors employed in the Bush administration's "War on Terror" are billed to American taxpayers, but they've handed Osama Bin Laden his greatest victories -- public relations coups that have transformed him from just another face in a crowd of radical clerics to a hero of millions in the global South (posters of Bin Laden have been spotted in largely Catholic Latin America during protests against George W. Bush). |
| US: Who Signed Off on Those Options?
by Eric Dash, The New York Times
August 27th, 2006
As Silicon Valley companies competed for top talent during the heady days of the dot-com boom — luring stars with plump signing bonuses and the most highly prized manna of all, stock options — Mercury Interactive, a highflying software concern, joined the fray with gusto. |
| US: Belated Apologies in Proxy Land
by Gretchen Morgenson, The New York Times
August 20th, 2006
Let us now praise a mutual fund company that actually voted in its customers’ interests when casting annual proxy votes this spring. And let us now rebuke the corporate executives who didn’t bother responding to letters from the fund company’s chairman detailing its views. |
| US: Many Executives' Paychecks Swelled
by Terence O'Hara, The Washington Post
July 10th, 2006
An analysis of 282 local executives at 109 area companies who have had the same title from 2003 until the end of 2005 showed that merely sticking around gives an executive an excellent chance of getting a raise, sometimes a big one. In many cases, raises are dictated by employment contracts or other compensation practices that have nothing to do with an executive's job performance and are often divorced from the kind of market logic that dictates how most people are paid. |
| UK: Scottish Power Pays Former Executives 'Obscene' £11m
by Ashley Seager, The Guardian (UK)
June 19th, 2006
Four executives of energy company Scottish Power cost the company £11m in severance pay when they left their jobs over the past year, the group's annual report revealed yesterday. The payouts were immediately condemned as "obscene" by the Scottish National party's energy spokesman, Richard Lochhead. |
| US: Earning power
by Laura Smitherman, Baltimore Sun
June 18th, 2006
Although "pay for performance" has become the catchphrase in boardrooms, executive compensation continues to swell at companies thriving and not, large and small, through practices that have drawn scorn from investor groups and labor unions. |
| US: Big Bonuses Still Flow, Even if Bosses Miss Goals
by Gretchen Morgenson, The New York Times
May 31st, 2006
As executive pay packages have rocketed in recent years, their defenders have contended that because most are tied to company performance, they are both earned and deserved. But as the Las Vegas Sands example shows, investors who plow through company filings often find that executive compensation exceeds the amounts allowed under the performance targets set by the directors.
|
| US: Uh-oh, it's the shareholders
by Bruce Meyerson, Chicago Sun-Times
May 21st, 2006
It happens only once a year, and yet so many headstrong corporate CEO's can't seem to cope with being in a room with shareholders for a few hours at the annual meeting.
|
|
|
