Bloomberg:Costco CEO pay 15% of Walmart CEO, workers get 175% of

[papau]

Walmart workers wages. Walmart's CEO Scott became CEO of Wal-Mart on Jan. 14, 2000, and Walmart stock has performed poorly compared to Costco since then.

Conclusion: Walmart CEO's pay is about right - Costco CEO is "underpaid".

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000039&refer...

Costco-Wal-Mart Pay -- Don't Discount Difference: Graef Crystal
Aug. 24 (Bloomberg) -- Costco Wholesale Corp. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. both offer low-priced goods, yet when it comes to paying their employees, there is a difference in dollars and cents that starts with hourly workers and goes to the top.

Costco, the fourth-largest U.S. retailer, pays fulltime employees an average hourly wage of $17; Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, pays $9.68.

As for their CEOs, total 2004 pay for James Sinegal of the Issaquah, Washington-based Costco was $2.7 million; for H. Lee Scott of the Bentonville, Arkansas, Wal-Mart it was $17.9 million. <snip>

Three-Year Average Pay
Costco Wal-Mart
Form of Pay (000) (000)
Salary $350 $1,192
Bonus $67 $3,829
Other Pay ex Option PV* $25 $9,223
Option PV* $2,098 $8,485
Total Pay $2,540 $22,729
* Option Present Value
<snip>

So here's the scorecard during the overlapping tenure of the two CEOs. For Costco, the employees won. The shareholders also won in the sense that, during the period covered by Scott's tenure, Costco's total return, though negative, was better than that of the S&P 500 and much better than Wal-Mart's. But Sinegal lost. For Wal-Mart, the employees lost, the shareholders lost and Scott won.

If you're Scott, you like that outcome.

[tk2kewl]

1. But The Street still hates them

they go against the culture of greed so The Wall Street Journal tries to dissuade investors by running negative articles

[papau]

2. Costco is a cancer on capitalism if the WSJ is to be believed. :-(

[tk2kewl]

3. Capitalism isn't what it was ...

in the so-called glory days of the '50s that the freepers want back. It is rapidly becoming what it was at the turn of the 20th Century. In the 50s, there was definitely a whole lot more socialism mixed in. Every major corporation provided its employees pensions for one.

[papau]

4. very true :-(

[sandnsea]

5. Not socialism, just fairness

Today, even local business owners will screw their employees in order to boost their own personal income. Ever since the workers should be "grateful to the boss man" mentality took over. Used to be common decency would have prevented the disparity, no more. Greed rules.

[tk2kewl]

7. maybe it was common decency when it came to small businesses

but for corporate america i think it included a healthy fear of organized labor. now they have cheap labor outside our borders and can therefore get away with treating workers like crap. if the pattern continues there will be some real serious threats to the global economy and capitalism over the next 50 years, when workers start organizing globally.

[sandnsea]

8. organized labor is fairness

An honest days pay for an honest days work. Not socialism.

[rman]

9. Why is it not socialism?

It may not be full-blows socialism, but isn't it fair to say that it is 'socialistic' to support fair wages and worker's rights? Is that not why the RW hates socialism?

[sandnsea]

10. no

Socialism is when government owns or tightly regulates industry. Laws to protect workers are no different than copyright or trademark laws to protect business. We're stupid to let them label worker's rights laws as socialism.

[lostinacause]

11. Workers are not going to organize globally. There are just too many of

them for it to be feasible.

[Robert Oak]

6. website devoted to executive pay

http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch /

Thx Papau, yes we should be all shopping at Costco, they support their workers plus the deals are great.

[On the Road]

12. In the 1960s, Robert Townsend of Avis

insisted on getting paid the same as his division presidents, which at that time was $35,000. He resisted attempts by the board to raise his salary, on the grounds that his job was no more important, and that inflated pay was a cancer on business management.

In Jimmy Carter's time, Lee Iacocca took a salary of $1 per year until he returned Chrysler to profitability, which he eventually did.

Now we have James Sinegal, who is paid $2.7 million. It's not chicken feed, but in this plutocratic age, he's our champion of fair corporate practices.