Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (583854)	9/1/2010 2:25:40 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572472

To the extent that you want pay for CEOs to reflect their performance, and to the extent that the profitability of a company is improved by the job cuts (sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't), you have an argument that in some cases CEOs should make more BECAUSE they cut jobs. As an overall rule, that wouldn't make sense because job cuts are not in every case a good idea, and also they can be a sign of previous poor performance, still there isn't any good reason to object to a CEO cutting jobs making a lot, unless your objecting to CEOs in general making a lot. If the objection is for CEOs in general than I'd say it could reasonably be an issue for shareholders, but in most cases isn't properly a political issue. The top 50 layoff firms reported a 44 percent average profit increase for 2009 In other words the layoff's probably improved profitability.