Government Grants for All

Cal/OSHA and State Compenstion Insurance Fund co-host Heat Illness Prevention Workshop for Employers

Cal/OSHA staff will provide employers with up to date information on heat illness prevention for outdoor workers. Employers will learn about their responsibilities under California law (Labor Code §3395, Heat Illness Prevention) regarding heat illness regulations passed in 2005 by the Governor to prevent employee injuries and deaths from heat illness exposure working outdoors.
U.S. Government News

Tags: Cal/OSHA, cohost, Compenstion, Employers, Fund, Heat, Illness, Insurance, Prevention, State, Workshop

Radiant Floor Heat And Your Home

Throughout the ages, humankind has sought to transform a wide variety of structures into warm, inviting environments where family and friends may comfortably gather. Presently, home owners strive to please the human senses through enticing aromas, coordinating colors, velvety textures, and even relaxing music or sounds of nature. In recent years, a revolutionary appeal to touch has been developed creating a new level of luxury within the home. This radiant floor heat system is safe and durable, versatile in application, remarkably efficient, and perhaps, most important, soothing and luxurious to all beneficiaries.

Low-voltage radiant floor heat ensures not only comfort, but also a sense of security knowing that even wet bathroom floors are safe to the touch. Through computer technology, radiant floor heat systems are monitored continuously for proper temperatures, run automatic self-checks, and are programmed to shut off under abnormal conditions. In addition to safety, many of these heating products are marked by unmatched durability and a 25 year limited warranty that is unavailable anywhere else in the heated floors market. Radiant floor heat is solid state, meaning there are no moving parts requiring conscientious maintenance. For nearly 30 years, these products have been thoroughly tested and improved to provide the highest quality, longest lasting results in the industry. Eliminate upkeep concerns and enjoy the benefits of soothing, heated floors, resting assured of the reliability of the source.

In addition to withstanding the test of endurance, radiant heated floors are also noted for their versatility in meeting a variety of customer needs. Heated floors may be installed by trained professionals for those who appreciate the finished product more than the process. Other products offered target “do-it-yourself” enthusiasts who desire labor savings or find fulfillment in being heavily involved in home improvement projects. Furthermore, radiant floor heat is versatile in its coverage abilities. It may be effectively installed in small bathroom areas or throughout an entire house depending on the desired outcome. For some home owners, heated floors provide a pleasant, supplemental heating source whereas for others, it serves as an efficient alternative to forced-air heating units. Finally, versatility lies in its capacity to be installed in connection with new construction projects, remodeling plans, or simply under existing floors. Without creating unnecessary build-up, radiant floor heat products are successfully placed under any assortment of floor coverings including carpet, tile, hardwood, vinyl, marble and other stone varieties. A relaxing layer of heat is then efficiently transmitted through the surface and into the air above.

The efficiency of radiant floor heat comes from its ability to transform 100 percent of the energy consumed to run the system into heat output rising directly into the rooms in which it is installed. Because the heating element is evenly distributed throughout the surface area, the heat is emitted consistently and effectively warms floors, furniture, and people—all located in the lower portion of the room. This avoids the energy that is lost with air- vent, heating systems in which the warmest air escapes to the ceiling areas causing a need for thermostats to be raised to compensate for the loss. Homes employing radiant floor heat as either a supplemental or main heat source are more environmentally friendly and efficient as a result of their increased use of energy consumption.

Radiant floor heat serves many practical purposes including a lack of maintenance through durability, versatility in application, and energy efficiency, but perhaps its greatest appeal is that of comfort and well-being. Imagine the enchantment of watching a blizzard outside while stepping onto cozy, kitchen tile to make a soothing cup of hot cocoa. Envision warm, inviting hardwood floors where babbles of delight emanate from children contentedly discovering life. In a stressful and fast-paced world, indulge the senses with the luxuries they deserve. Allow high-quality, radiant floor heat products to enhance that calming sense of warmth and security that radiates at home.

Tags: Floor, Heat, Home, Radiant

International Baccalurette Programs Heat Up Charlotte

Davidson IB Middle Wins Schools of Distinction Award

The science program at Davidson IB Middle, one of the schools in the Charlotte – Mecklenburg area, has been recognized as a School of Distinction by Intel and Scholastic. Intel, the world renowned computer chip maker, and Scholastic, a leader in textbooks and educational materials, chose Davidson for honors in the field of science achievement, bringing both pride and bragging rights to Charlotte schools. As the principal of Davidson states, “This award is a testament to the dedication of my students, teachers, parents and the community. My entire staff works together to make sure our students get an excellent education.”

How Davidson was Chosen

Intel and Scholastic seem to agree. They awarded Davidson the Schools of Distinction Award after evaluating the school on a number of criteria. Among other things, Davidson showed its strengths in strategies for incorporating critical thinking skills; hands – on investigative experiences, and project – based learning. Davidson, like other Charlotte schools, is challenging the next generation of scientists and engineers with its comprehensive science program. The Intel and Scholastic award will help the school to further its science education goals and set a positive example for other Charlotte schools in the areas of science education.

The winning schools were chosen in each of the following eight categories: academic achievement, literacy achievement, mathematics achievement, science achievement, technology excellence, leadership excellence, professional development, and collaboration and teamwork. Davidson, as an exceptional Charlotte school, looks forward to using this award to help continue to build a competitive science program and lead the nation in science education innovation.

What Does Winning Mean for Davidson and Charlotte Schools?

As recipients of this prestigious award, Davidson IB Middle will receive a $10,000 grant from the Intel Foundation and several other prizes ranging from curriculum materials and professional development resources to computer hardware and software. All of these things will help Davidson stay on the cutting edge of science education and fulfill the goal of constant improvement and innovation in educating future scientists. In addition to these monetary prizes, the school also puts Charlotte schools in the map as a place of science and math strength among national secondary schools.

What’s Special About Davidson

Davidson is one of many Charlotte schools that is taking the forefront in science education and it shows. While Davidson has won national recognition for its programs, the real work is the daily learning that takes places at Davidson and other Charlotte schools. As part of the International Baccalareute Program, Davidson focuses on providing real world connections between textbook learning and applications. Some of the projects done at Davidson serve as a model for other Charlotte schools. These projects included using a special backyard stream to learn about biology as well as real world chemistry applications, such as water quality tests.

Davidson is lucky to have many local community partners to help in its quest for high level science education. As a Charlotte school, Davidson works alongside Davidson College on environmental studies projects with university professors and resources. Because of its unique position, Davidson has won both state and national competitions, leading to its rank of 15 overall in the United States.

For more information on Charlotte schools visit http://www.schoolsk-12.com/north-carolina/charlotte/index.html

Tags: Baccalurette, Charlotte, Heat, International, Programs

America’s $40m Men Feel the Heat

Eight chief executives of US corporations were invited to appear before a senate hearing last week to discuss the scabrous issue of excessive executive pay. None of them showed up, perhaps wisely. How do you defend a $40m (£25m) or $50m pay packet unless with the same kind of lame excuse voiced by football managers, that it is the market rate?

Those who did turn up, including representatives of some of the biggest pension funds in the US, were less afraid to put their opinions forward. Sean Harrigan, president of the administrative board of California’s public employee pension fund, the largest in America and increasingly aggressive on the issue of spiralling executive salaries, testified that chief executives now average 400 times what a production worker earns.

The yawning gap and the continuing escalation of chief executive salaries “continues to have an impact on investor confidence” he said.

The refusal of the eight chief executives to appear at the senate hearing caused barely a ruffle in the American media – despite the sense of outrage that many investors and ordinary workers are beginning to feel.

But the issue is beginning to gain traction in a country where the average chief executive salary makes those in Britain look like pocket change. According to a recent survey published in USA Today, the average compensation package for chief executives in the top 100 American companies was $33.4m in 2002 – nearly one-third of them banked more than $50m in salaries, bonuses and shares.

Over the year, executives took a 15% pay hike, compared with the average worker’s rise of just 3.2%. As for the eight who failed to show, let them be named and shamed here: Larry Ellison of Oracle, Michael Eisner of Walt Disney, Leo Mullin of Delta Air Lines, Edward Breen of Tyco, David Cote of Honeywell International, Scott McNealy of Sun Microsystems, Jeff Barbakow of Tenet healthcare and the former General Electric chief executive Jack Welch.

In the aftermath of the financial scandals that knocked corporate America sideways last year, the greed engendered by massive compensation packages was widely identified as vital, blinding good judgment and tempting executives to cross the line.

Alan Greenspan, the venerable head of the Federal Reserve, spoke of the culture of “infectious greed” during the 1990s. Disgust has been routinely expressed at the massive awards to the likes of Kenneth Lay of Enron and Bernie Ebbers of WorldCom even as their companies crashed.

Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor, has called the issue of executive compensation “the acid test of reform”. At his annual meeting he told shareholders to “rise up” against greedy chief executives. And they seem to be taking note.

A little over a week ago at Hollinger International, owner of the Daily Telegraph, shareholders forced a series of concessions on to Lord Black, regularly accused of running the company like a private fiefdom. They included a cap on the “management fees” he takes from the firm and an independent review of a $73m payment he shared with his lieutenants after the sale of the company’s Canadian newspaper assets.

The shareholding company that brought the bonus payment into the public view, Tweedy Browne, is not otherwise known for its aggressive nature, suggesting that the new activism is catching on.

Richard Grasso, who runs the New York stock exchange, is coming under fire for the size of his $10m salary and the fact that he sits on the board of the retailer Home Depot, one of the companies listed on the market.

At American Airlines, the chairman and chief executive, Don Carty, was forced to stand down earlier this month after an astonishingly crass move. Just a day after wringing $1.8bn in pay cuts and job losses from the company’s workforce to keep the airline in business, Mr Carty quietly put in place some lucrative retention bonuses for himself and a handful of senior executives. It cost him his job.

His replacements have listened to the critics. Gerlad Arprey, the new chief executive, will not take a pay rise on the salary he had previously earned as chief operating officer. Edward Brennan, taking over as chairman, will continue to receive his existing director’s fee but take nothing extra for his promotion.

They are not the only ones to bend to the demands of investors. Mr Mullin at struggling Delta Air Lines pledged not to take some of the compensation his contract allows in 2003. He is giving up a $1m bonus and long-term awards that would have been worth a further $8m after his 2002 package stirred anger in congress.

Sanford Weill of Citigroup and a number of other banking chiefs are foregoing bonuses.

The highest paid executive last year, Mr Barbakow of the Tenet Healthcare hospital chain, made an eye-popping $189m, of which $111m came from exercising share options. Mr Barbakow was forced out of the company last week amid investor concerns about the its slumping share regulators investigated the business. Concerns about its quality of care also arose after the FBI raided a Tenet hospital for information about allegations of unnecessary procedures by two doctors.

Mr Welch at GE agreed to give up some of his more extravagant retirement perks including fresh flowers for his apartment, New York Knicks and Wimbledon tickets and a laundry service.

A shareholder in the company John Hancock Financial Services last week filed a civil lawsuit asking a clutch of senior executives to return some of their pay. David D’Alessandro, the company’s chief executive, took a pay rise last year from $8.2m to $21.7m despite profits falling by 15% and a share price that wilted by 32%.

But the disparity between executive pay and the rewards for shareholders is still glaringly obvious in many companies. Michael Eisner, who runs Walt Disney, was awarded a $5m bonus last year despite the company’s share price falling by 34%.

How long the issue will stay uppermost in the minds of the US public is uncertain and the long term ability of either shareholders or workers to suppress pay is doubtful.

Americans are less righteous than the British about the mere principle of excessive pay. Once investors too are doing well again then the issue is likely to die down and inflation return. That could be sooner than many had thought. The Dow Jones index on Wall Street last week completed its first three-month rise in two years raising the prospect that chief executives might be let off the hook before any lasting damage is done to their bank accounts.

Tags: $40m, America's, Feel, Heat

America’s $40m Men Feel the Heat

Eight chief executives of US corporations were invited to appear before a senate hearing last week to discuss the scabrous issue of excessive executive pay. None of them showed up, perhaps wisely. How do you defend a $40m (£25m) or $50m pay packet unless with the same kind of lame excuse voiced by football managers, that it is the market rate?

Those who did turn up, including representatives of some of the biggest pension funds in the US, were less afraid to put their opinions forward. Sean Harrigan, president of the administrative board of California’s public employee pension fund, the largest in America and increasingly aggressive on the issue of spiralling executive salaries, testified that chief executives now average 400 times what a production worker earns.

The yawning gap and the continuing escalation of chief executive salaries “continues to have an impact on investor confidence” he said.

The refusal of the eight chief executives to appear at the senate hearing caused barely a ruffle in the American media – despite the sense of outrage that many investors and ordinary workers are beginning to feel.

But the issue is beginning to gain traction in a country where the average chief executive salary makes those in Britain look like pocket change. According to a recent survey published in USA Today, the average compensation package for chief executives in the top 100 American companies was $33.4m in 2002 – nearly one-third of them banked more than $50m in salaries, bonuses and shares.

Over the year, executives took a 15% pay hike, compared with the average worker’s rise of just 3.2%. As for the eight who failed to show, let them be named and shamed here: Larry Ellison of Oracle, Michael Eisner of Walt Disney, Leo Mullin of Delta Air Lines, Edward Breen of Tyco, David Cote of Honeywell International, Scott McNealy of Sun Microsystems, Jeff Barbakow of Tenet healthcare and the former General Electric chief executive Jack Welch.

In the aftermath of the financial scandals that knocked corporate America sideways last year, the greed engendered by massive compensation packages was widely identified as vital, blinding good judgment and tempting executives to cross the line.

Alan Greenspan, the venerable head of the Federal Reserve, spoke of the culture of “infectious greed” during the 1990s. Disgust has been routinely expressed at the massive awards to the likes of Kenneth Lay of Enron and Bernie Ebbers of WorldCom even as their companies crashed.

Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor, has called the issue of executive compensation “the acid test of reform”. At his annual meeting he told shareholders to “rise up” against greedy chief executives. And they seem to be taking note.

A little over a week ago at Hollinger International, owner of the Daily Telegraph, shareholders forced a series of concessions on to Lord Black, regularly accused of running the company like a private fiefdom. They included a cap on the “management fees” he takes from the firm and an independent review of a $73m payment he shared with his lieutenants after the sale of the company’s Canadian newspaper assets.

The shareholding company that brought the bonus payment into the public view, Tweedy Browne, is not otherwise known for its aggressive nature, suggesting that the new activism is catching on.

Richard Grasso, who runs the New York stock exchange, is coming under fire for the size of his $10m salary and the fact that he sits on the board of the retailer Home Depot, one of the companies listed on the market.

At American Airlines, the chairman and chief executive, Don Carty, was forced to stand down earlier this month after an astonishingly crass move. Just a day after wringing $1.8bn in pay cuts and job losses from the company’s workforce to keep the airline in business, Mr Carty quietly put in place some lucrative retention bonuses for himself and a handful of senior executives. It cost him his job.

His replacements have listened to the critics. Gerlad Arprey, the new chief executive, will not take a pay rise on the salary he had previously earned as chief operating officer. Edward Brennan, taking over as chairman, will continue to receive his existing director’s fee but take nothing extra for his promotion.

They are not the only ones to bend to the demands of investors. Mr Mullin at struggling Delta Air Lines pledged not to take some of the compensation his contract allows in 2003. He is giving up a $1m bonus and long-term awards that would have been worth a further $8m after his 2002 package stirred anger in congress.

Sanford Weill of Citigroup and a number of other banking chiefs are foregoing bonuses.

The highest paid executive last year, Mr Barbakow of the Tenet Healthcare hospital chain, made an eye-popping $189m, of which $111m came from exercising share options. Mr Barbakow was forced out of the company last week amid investor concerns about the its slumping share regulators investigated the business. Concerns about its quality of care also arose after the FBI raided a Tenet hospital for information about allegations of unnecessary procedures by two doctors.

Mr Welch at GE agreed to give up some of his more extravagant retirement perks including fresh flowers for his apartment, New York Knicks and Wimbledon tickets and a laundry service.

A shareholder in the company John Hancock Financial Services last week filed a civil lawsuit asking a clutch of senior executives to return some of their pay. David D’Alessandro, the company’s chief executive, took a pay rise last year from $8.2m to $21.7m despite profits falling by 15% and a share price that wilted by 32%.

But the disparity between executive pay and the rewards for shareholders is still glaringly obvious in many companies. Michael Eisner, who runs Walt Disney, was awarded a $5m bonus last year despite the company’s share price falling by 34%.

How long the issue will stay uppermost in the minds of the US public is uncertain and the long term ability of either shareholders or workers to suppress pay is doubtful.

Americans are less righteous than the British about the mere principle of excessive pay. Once investors too are doing well again then the issue is likely to die down and inflation return. That could be sooner than many had thought. The Dow Jones index on Wall Street last week completed its first three-month rise in two years raising the prospect that chief executives might be let off the hook before any lasting damage is done to their bank accounts.

Tags: $40m, America's, Feel, Heat

America’s $40m Men Feel the Heat

Eight chief executives of US corporations were invited to appear before a senate hearing last week to discuss the scabrous issue of excessive executive pay. None of them showed up, perhaps wisely. How do you defend a $40m (£25m) or $50m pay packet unless with the same kind of lame excuse voiced by football managers, that it is the market rate?

Those who did turn up, including representatives of some of the biggest pension funds in the US, were less afraid to put their opinions forward. Sean Harrigan, president of the administrative board of California’s public employee pension fund, the largest in America and increasingly aggressive on the issue of spiralling executive salaries, testified that chief executives now average 400 times what a production worker earns.

The yawning gap and the continuing escalation of chief executive salaries “continues to have an impact on investor confidence” he said.

The refusal of the eight chief executives to appear at the senate hearing caused barely a ruffle in the American media – despite the sense of outrage that many investors and ordinary workers are beginning to feel.

But the issue is beginning to gain traction in a country where the average chief executive salary makes those in Britain look like pocket change. According to a recent survey published in USA Today, the average compensation package for chief executives in the top 100 American companies was $33.4m in 2002 – nearly one-third of them banked more than $50m in salaries, bonuses and shares.

Over the year, executives took a 15% pay hike, compared with the average worker’s rise of just 3.2%. As for the eight who failed to show, let them be named and shamed here: Larry Ellison of Oracle, Michael Eisner of Walt Disney, Leo Mullin of Delta Air Lines, Edward Breen of Tyco, David Cote of Honeywell International, Scott McNealy of Sun Microsystems, Jeff Barbakow of Tenet healthcare and the former General Electric chief executive Jack Welch.

In the aftermath of the financial scandals that knocked corporate America sideways last year, the greed engendered by massive compensation packages was widely identified as vital, blinding good judgment and tempting executives to cross the line.

Alan Greenspan, the venerable head of the Federal Reserve, spoke of the culture of “infectious greed” during the 1990s. Disgust has been routinely expressed at the massive awards to the likes of Kenneth Lay of Enron and Bernie Ebbers of WorldCom even as their companies crashed.

Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor, has called the issue of executive compensation “the acid test of reform”. At his annual meeting he told shareholders to “rise up” against greedy chief executives. And they seem to be taking note.

A little over a week ago at Hollinger International, owner of the Daily Telegraph, shareholders forced a series of concessions on to Lord Black, regularly accused of running the company like a private fiefdom. They included a cap on the “management fees” he takes from the firm and an independent review of a $73m payment he shared with his lieutenants after the sale of the company’s Canadian newspaper assets.

The shareholding company that brought the bonus payment into the public view, Tweedy Browne, is not otherwise known for its aggressive nature, suggesting that the new activism is catching on.

Richard Grasso, who runs the New York stock exchange, is coming under fire for the size of his $10m salary and the fact that he sits on the board of the retailer Home Depot, one of the companies listed on the market.

At American Airlines, the chairman and chief executive, Don Carty, was forced to stand down earlier this month after an astonishingly crass move. Just a day after wringing $1.8bn in pay cuts and job losses from the company’s workforce to keep the airline in business, Mr Carty quietly put in place some lucrative retention bonuses for himself and a handful of senior executives. It cost him his job.

His replacements have listened to the critics. Gerlad Arprey, the new chief executive, will not take a pay rise on the salary he had previously earned as chief operating officer. Edward Brennan, taking over as chairman, will continue to receive his existing director’s fee but take nothing extra for his promotion.

They are not the only ones to bend to the demands of investors. Mr Mullin at struggling Delta Air Lines pledged not to take some of the compensation his contract allows in 2003. He is giving up a $1m bonus and long-term awards that would have been worth a further $8m after his 2002 package stirred anger in congress.

Sanford Weill of Citigroup and a number of other banking chiefs are foregoing bonuses.

The highest paid executive last year, Mr Barbakow of the Tenet Healthcare hospital chain, made an eye-popping $189m, of which $111m came from exercising share options. Mr Barbakow was forced out of the company last week amid investor concerns about the its slumping share regulators investigated the business. Concerns about its quality of care also arose after the FBI raided a Tenet hospital for information about allegations of unnecessary procedures by two doctors.

Mr Welch at GE agreed to give up some of his more extravagant retirement perks including fresh flowers for his apartment, New York Knicks and Wimbledon tickets and a laundry service.

A shareholder in the company John Hancock Financial Services last week filed a civil lawsuit asking a clutch of senior executives to return some of their pay. David D’Alessandro, the company’s chief executive, took a pay rise last year from $8.2m to $21.7m despite profits falling by 15% and a share price that wilted by 32%.

But the disparity between executive pay and the rewards for shareholders is still glaringly obvious in many companies. Michael Eisner, who runs Walt Disney, was awarded a $5m bonus last year despite the company’s share price falling by 34%.

How long the issue will stay uppermost in the minds of the US public is uncertain and the long term ability of either shareholders or workers to suppress pay is doubtful.

Americans are less righteous than the British about the mere principle of excessive pay. Once investors too are doing well again then the issue is likely to die down and inflation return. That could be sooner than many had thought. The Dow Jones index on Wall Street last week completed its first three-month rise in two years raising the prospect that chief executives might be let off the hook before any lasting damage is done to their bank accounts.

Tags: $40m, America's, Feel, Heat

America’s $40m Men Feel the Heat

Eight chief executives of US corporations were invited to appear before a senate hearing last week to discuss the scabrous issue of excessive executive pay. None of them showed up, perhaps wisely. How do you defend a $40m (£25m) or $50m pay packet unless with the same kind of lame excuse voiced by football managers, that it is the market rate?

Those who did turn up, including representatives of some of the biggest pension funds in the US, were less afraid to put their opinions forward. Sean Harrigan, president of the administrative board of California’s public employee pension fund, the largest in America and increasingly aggressive on the issue of spiralling executive salaries, testified that chief executives now average 400 times what a production worker earns.

The yawning gap and the continuing escalation of chief executive salaries “continues to have an impact on investor confidence” he said.

The refusal of the eight chief executives to appear at the senate hearing caused barely a ruffle in the American media – despite the sense of outrage that many investors and ordinary workers are beginning to feel.

But the issue is beginning to gain traction in a country where the average chief executive salary makes those in Britain look like pocket change. According to a recent survey published in USA Today, the average compensation package for chief executives in the top 100 American companies was $33.4m in 2002 – nearly one-third of them banked more than $50m in salaries, bonuses and shares.

Over the year, executives took a 15% pay hike, compared with the average worker’s rise of just 3.2%. As for the eight who failed to show, let them be named and shamed here: Larry Ellison of Oracle, Michael Eisner of Walt Disney, Leo Mullin of Delta Air Lines, Edward Breen of Tyco, David Cote of Honeywell International, Scott McNealy of Sun Microsystems, Jeff Barbakow of Tenet healthcare and the former General Electric chief executive Jack Welch.

In the aftermath of the financial scandals that knocked corporate America sideways last year, the greed engendered by massive compensation packages was widely identified as vital, blinding good judgment and tempting executives to cross the line.

Alan Greenspan, the venerable head of the Federal Reserve, spoke of the culture of “infectious greed” during the 1990s. Disgust has been routinely expressed at the massive awards to the likes of Kenneth Lay of Enron and Bernie Ebbers of WorldCom even as their companies crashed.

Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor, has called the issue of executive compensation “the acid test of reform”. At his annual meeting he told shareholders to “rise up” against greedy chief executives. And they seem to be taking note.

A little over a week ago at Hollinger International, owner of the Daily Telegraph, shareholders forced a series of concessions on to Lord Black, regularly accused of running the company like a private fiefdom. They included a cap on the “management fees” he takes from the firm and an independent review of a $73m payment he shared with his lieutenants after the sale of the company’s Canadian newspaper assets.

The shareholding company that brought the bonus payment into the public view, Tweedy Browne, is not otherwise known for its aggressive nature, suggesting that the new activism is catching on.

Richard Grasso, who runs the New York stock exchange, is coming under fire for the size of his $10m salary and the fact that he sits on the board of the retailer Home Depot, one of the companies listed on the market.

At American Airlines, the chairman and chief executive, Don Carty, was forced to stand down earlier this month after an astonishingly crass move. Just a day after wringing $1.8bn in pay cuts and job losses from the company’s workforce to keep the airline in business, Mr Carty quietly put in place some lucrative retention bonuses for himself and a handful of senior executives. It cost him his job.

His replacements have listened to the critics. Gerlad Arprey, the new chief executive, will not take a pay rise on the salary he had previously earned as chief operating officer. Edward Brennan, taking over as chairman, will continue to receive his existing director’s fee but take nothing extra for his promotion.

They are not the only ones to bend to the demands of investors. Mr Mullin at struggling Delta Air Lines pledged not to take some of the compensation his contract allows in 2003. He is giving up a $1m bonus and long-term awards that would have been worth a further $8m after his 2002 package stirred anger in congress.

Sanford Weill of Citigroup and a number of other banking chiefs are foregoing bonuses.

The highest paid executive last year, Mr Barbakow of the Tenet Healthcare hospital chain, made an eye-popping $189m, of which $111m came from exercising share options. Mr Barbakow was forced out of the company last week amid investor concerns about the its slumping share regulators investigated the business. Concerns about its quality of care also arose after the FBI raided a Tenet hospital for information about allegations of unnecessary procedures by two doctors.

Mr Welch at GE agreed to give up some of his more extravagant retirement perks including fresh flowers for his apartment, New York Knicks and Wimbledon tickets and a laundry service.

A shareholder in the company John Hancock Financial Services last week filed a civil lawsuit asking a clutch of senior executives to return some of their pay. David D’Alessandro, the company’s chief executive, took a pay rise last year from $8.2m to $21.7m despite profits falling by 15% and a share price that wilted by 32%.

But the disparity between executive pay and the rewards for shareholders is still glaringly obvious in many companies. Michael Eisner, who runs Walt Disney, was awarded a $5m bonus last year despite the company’s share price falling by 34%.

How long the issue will stay uppermost in the minds of the US public is uncertain and the long term ability of either shareholders or workers to suppress pay is doubtful.

Americans are less righteous than the British about the mere principle of excessive pay. Once investors too are doing well again then the issue is likely to die down and inflation return. That could be sooner than many had thought. The Dow Jones index on Wall Street last week completed its first three-month rise in two years raising the prospect that chief executives might be let off the hook before any lasting damage is done to their bank accounts.

Tags: $40m, America's, Feel, Heat

America’s $40m Men Feel the Heat

Eight chief executives of US corporations were invited to appear before a senate hearing last week to discuss the scabrous issue of excessive executive pay. None of them showed up, perhaps wisely. How do you defend a $40m (£25m) or $50m pay packet unless with the same kind of lame excuse voiced by football managers, that it is the market rate?

Those who did turn up, including representatives of some of the biggest pension funds in the US, were less afraid to put their opinions forward. Sean Harrigan, president of the administrative board of California’s public employee pension fund, the largest in America and increasingly aggressive on the issue of spiralling executive salaries, testified that chief executives now average 400 times what a production worker earns.

The yawning gap and the continuing escalation of chief executive salaries “continues to have an impact on investor confidence” he said.

The refusal of the eight chief executives to appear at the senate hearing caused barely a ruffle in the American media – despite the sense of outrage that many investors and ordinary workers are beginning to feel.

But the issue is beginning to gain traction in a country where the average chief executive salary makes those in Britain look like pocket change. According to a recent survey published in USA Today, the average compensation package for chief executives in the top 100 American companies was $33.4m in 2002 – nearly one-third of them banked more than $50m in salaries, bonuses and shares.

Over the year, executives took a 15% pay hike, compared with the average worker’s rise of just 3.2%. As for the eight who failed to show, let them be named and shamed here: Larry Ellison of Oracle, Michael Eisner of Walt Disney, Leo Mullin of Delta Air Lines, Edward Breen of Tyco, David Cote of Honeywell International, Scott McNealy of Sun Microsystems, Jeff Barbakow of Tenet healthcare and the former General Electric chief executive Jack Welch.

In the aftermath of the financial scandals that knocked corporate America sideways last year, the greed engendered by massive compensation packages was widely identified as vital, blinding good judgment and tempting executives to cross the line.

Alan Greenspan, the venerable head of the Federal Reserve, spoke of the culture of “infectious greed” during the 1990s. Disgust has been routinely expressed at the massive awards to the likes of Kenneth Lay of Enron and Bernie Ebbers of WorldCom even as their companies crashed.

Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor, has called the issue of executive compensation “the acid test of reform”. At his annual meeting he told shareholders to “rise up” against greedy chief executives. And they seem to be taking note.

A little over a week ago at Hollinger International, owner of the Daily Telegraph, shareholders forced a series of concessions on to Lord Black, regularly accused of running the company like a private fiefdom. They included a cap on the “management fees” he takes from the firm and an independent review of a $73m payment he shared with his lieutenants after the sale of the company’s Canadian newspaper assets.

The shareholding company that brought the bonus payment into the public view, Tweedy Browne, is not otherwise known for its aggressive nature, suggesting that the new activism is catching on.

Richard Grasso, who runs the New York stock exchange, is coming under fire for the size of his $10m salary and the fact that he sits on the board of the retailer Home Depot, one of the companies listed on the market.

At American Airlines, the chairman and chief executive, Don Carty, was forced to stand down earlier this month after an astonishingly crass move. Just a day after wringing $1.8bn in pay cuts and job losses from the company’s workforce to keep the airline in business, Mr Carty quietly put in place some lucrative retention bonuses for himself and a handful of senior executives. It cost him his job.

His replacements have listened to the critics. Gerlad Arprey, the new chief executive, will not take a pay rise on the salary he had previously earned as chief operating officer. Edward Brennan, taking over as chairman, will continue to receive his existing director’s fee but take nothing extra for his promotion.

They are not the only ones to bend to the demands of investors. Mr Mullin at struggling Delta Air Lines pledged not to take some of the compensation his contract allows in 2003. He is giving up a $1m bonus and long-term awards that would have been worth a further $8m after his 2002 package stirred anger in congress.

Sanford Weill of Citigroup and a number of other banking chiefs are foregoing bonuses.

The highest paid executive last year, Mr Barbakow of the Tenet Healthcare hospital chain, made an eye-popping $189m, of which $111m came from exercising share options. Mr Barbakow was forced out of the company last week amid investor concerns about the its slumping share regulators investigated the business. Concerns about its quality of care also arose after the FBI raided a Tenet hospital for information about allegations of unnecessary procedures by two doctors.

Mr Welch at GE agreed to give up some of his more extravagant retirement perks including fresh flowers for his apartment, New York Knicks and Wimbledon tickets and a laundry service.

A shareholder in the company John Hancock Financial Services last week filed a civil lawsuit asking a clutch of senior executives to return some of their pay. David D’Alessandro, the company’s chief executive, took a pay rise last year from $8.2m to $21.7m despite profits falling by 15% and a share price that wilted by 32%.

But the disparity between executive pay and the rewards for shareholders is still glaringly obvious in many companies. Michael Eisner, who runs Walt Disney, was awarded a $5m bonus last year despite the company’s share price falling by 34%.

How long the issue will stay uppermost in the minds of the US public is uncertain and the long term ability of either shareholders or workers to suppress pay is doubtful.

Americans are less righteous than the British about the mere principle of excessive pay. Once investors too are doing well again then the issue is likely to die down and inflation return. That could be sooner than many had thought. The Dow Jones index on Wall Street last week completed its first three-month rise in two years raising the prospect that chief executives might be let off the hook before any lasting damage is done to their bank accounts.

Tags: $40m, America's, Feel, Heat

America’s $40m Men Feel the Heat

Eight chief executives of US corporations were invited to appear before a senate hearing last week to discuss the scabrous issue of excessive executive pay. None of them showed up, perhaps wisely. How do you defend a $40m (£25m) or $50m pay packet unless with the same kind of lame excuse voiced by football managers, that it is the market rate?

Those who did turn up, including representatives of some of the biggest pension funds in the US, were less afraid to put their opinions forward. Sean Harrigan, president of the administrative board of California’s public employee pension fund, the largest in America and increasingly aggressive on the issue of spiralling executive salaries, testified that chief executives now average 400 times what a production worker earns.

The yawning gap and the continuing escalation of chief executive salaries “continues to have an impact on investor confidence” he said.

The refusal of the eight chief executives to appear at the senate hearing caused barely a ruffle in the American media – despite the sense of outrage that many investors and ordinary workers are beginning to feel.

But the issue is beginning to gain traction in a country where the average chief executive salary makes those in Britain look like pocket change. According to a recent survey published in USA Today, the average compensation package for chief executives in the top 100 American companies was $33.4m in 2002 – nearly one-third of them banked more than $50m in salaries, bonuses and shares.

Over the year, executives took a 15% pay hike, compared with the average worker’s rise of just 3.2%. As for the eight who failed to show, let them be named and shamed here: Larry Ellison of Oracle, Michael Eisner of Walt Disney, Leo Mullin of Delta Air Lines, Edward Breen of Tyco, David Cote of Honeywell International, Scott McNealy of Sun Microsystems, Jeff Barbakow of Tenet healthcare and the former General Electric chief executive Jack Welch.

In the aftermath of the financial scandals that knocked corporate America sideways last year, the greed engendered by massive compensation packages was widely identified as vital, blinding good judgment and tempting executives to cross the line.

Alan Greenspan, the venerable head of the Federal Reserve, spoke of the culture of “infectious greed” during the 1990s. Disgust has been routinely expressed at the massive awards to the likes of Kenneth Lay of Enron and Bernie Ebbers of WorldCom even as their companies crashed.

Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor, has called the issue of executive compensation “the acid test of reform”. At his annual meeting he told shareholders to “rise up” against greedy chief executives. And they seem to be taking note.

A little over a week ago at Hollinger International, owner of the Daily Telegraph, shareholders forced a series of concessions on to Lord Black, regularly accused of running the company like a private fiefdom. They included a cap on the “management fees” he takes from the firm and an independent review of a $73m payment he shared with his lieutenants after the sale of the company’s Canadian newspaper assets.

The shareholding company that brought the bonus payment into the public view, Tweedy Browne, is not otherwise known for its aggressive nature, suggesting that the new activism is catching on.

Richard Grasso, who runs the New York stock exchange, is coming under fire for the size of his $10m salary and the fact that he sits on the board of the retailer Home Depot, one of the companies listed on the market.

At American Airlines, the chairman and chief executive, Don Carty, was forced to stand down earlier this month after an astonishingly crass move. Just a day after wringing $1.8bn in pay cuts and job losses from the company’s workforce to keep the airline in business, Mr Carty quietly put in place some lucrative retention bonuses for himself and a handful of senior executives. It cost him his job.

His replacements have listened to the critics. Gerlad Arprey, the new chief executive, will not take a pay rise on the salary he had previously earned as chief operating officer. Edward Brennan, taking over as chairman, will continue to receive his existing director’s fee but take nothing extra for his promotion.

They are not the only ones to bend to the demands of investors. Mr Mullin at struggling Delta Air Lines pledged not to take some of the compensation his contract allows in 2003. He is giving up a $1m bonus and long-term awards that would have been worth a further $8m after his 2002 package stirred anger in congress.

Sanford Weill of Citigroup and a number of other banking chiefs are foregoing bonuses.

The highest paid executive last year, Mr Barbakow of the Tenet Healthcare hospital chain, made an eye-popping $189m, of which $111m came from exercising share options. Mr Barbakow was forced out of the company last week amid investor concerns about the its slumping share regulators investigated the business. Concerns about its quality of care also arose after the FBI raided a Tenet hospital for information about allegations of unnecessary procedures by two doctors.

Mr Welch at GE agreed to give up some of his more extravagant retirement perks including fresh flowers for his apartment, New York Knicks and Wimbledon tickets and a laundry service.

A shareholder in the company John Hancock Financial Services last week filed a civil lawsuit asking a clutch of senior executives to return some of their pay. David D’Alessandro, the company’s chief executive, took a pay rise last year from $8.2m to $21.7m despite profits falling by 15% and a share price that wilted by 32%.

But the disparity between executive pay and the rewards for shareholders is still glaringly obvious in many companies. Michael Eisner, who runs Walt Disney, was awarded a $5m bonus last year despite the company’s share price falling by 34%.

How long the issue will stay uppermost in the minds of the US public is uncertain and the long term ability of either shareholders or workers to suppress pay is doubtful.

Americans are less righteous than the British about the mere principle of excessive pay. Once investors too are doing well again then the issue is likely to die down and inflation return. That could be sooner than many had thought. The Dow Jones index on Wall Street last week completed its first three-month rise in two years raising the prospect that chief executives might be let off the hook before any lasting damage is done to their bank accounts.

Tags: $40m, America's, Feel, Heat

America’s $40m Men Feel the Heat

Eight chief executives of US corporations were invited to appear before a senate hearing last week to discuss the scabrous issue of excessive executive pay. None of them showed up, perhaps wisely. How do you defend a $40m (£25m) or $50m pay packet unless with the same kind of lame excuse voiced by football managers, that it is the market rate?

Those who did turn up, including representatives of some of the biggest pension funds in the US, were less afraid to put their opinions forward. Sean Harrigan, president of the administrative board of California’s public employee pension fund, the largest in America and increasingly aggressive on the issue of spiralling executive salaries, testified that chief executives now average 400 times what a production worker earns.

The yawning gap and the continuing escalation of chief executive salaries “continues to have an impact on investor confidence” he said.

The refusal of the eight chief executives to appear at the senate hearing caused barely a ruffle in the American media – despite the sense of outrage that many investors and ordinary workers are beginning to feel.

But the issue is beginning to gain traction in a country where the average chief executive salary makes those in Britain look like pocket change. According to a recent survey published in USA Today, the average compensation package for chief executives in the top 100 American companies was $33.4m in 2002 – nearly one-third of them banked more than $50m in salaries, bonuses and shares.

Over the year, executives took a 15% pay hike, compared with the average worker’s rise of just 3.2%. As for the eight who failed to show, let them be named and shamed here: Larry Ellison of Oracle, Michael Eisner of Walt Disney, Leo Mullin of Delta Air Lines, Edward Breen of Tyco, David Cote of Honeywell International, Scott McNealy of Sun Microsystems, Jeff Barbakow of Tenet healthcare and the former General Electric chief executive Jack Welch.

In the aftermath of the financial scandals that knocked corporate America sideways last year, the greed engendered by massive compensation packages was widely identified as vital, blinding good judgment and tempting executives to cross the line.

Alan Greenspan, the venerable head of the Federal Reserve, spoke of the culture of “infectious greed” during the 1990s. Disgust has been routinely expressed at the massive awards to the likes of Kenneth Lay of Enron and Bernie Ebbers of WorldCom even as their companies crashed.

Warren Buffett, the billionaire investor, has called the issue of executive compensation “the acid test of reform”. At his annual meeting he told shareholders to “rise up” against greedy chief executives. And they seem to be taking note.

A little over a week ago at Hollinger International, owner of the Daily Telegraph, shareholders forced a series of concessions on to Lord Black, regularly accused of running the company like a private fiefdom. They included a cap on the “management fees” he takes from the firm and an independent review of a $73m payment he shared with his lieutenants after the sale of the company’s Canadian newspaper assets.

The shareholding company that brought the bonus payment into the public view, Tweedy Browne, is not otherwise known for its aggressive nature, suggesting that the new activism is catching on.

Richard Grasso, who runs the New York stock exchange, is coming under fire for the size of his $10m salary and the fact that he sits on the board of the retailer Home Depot, one of the companies listed on the market.

At American Airlines, the chairman and chief executive, Don Carty, was forced to stand down earlier this month after an astonishingly crass move. Just a day after wringing $1.8bn in pay cuts and job losses from the company’s workforce to keep the airline in business, Mr Carty quietly put in place some lucrative retention bonuses for himself and a handful of senior executives. It cost him his job.

His replacements have listened to the critics. Gerlad Arprey, the new chief executive, will not take a pay rise on the salary he had previously earned as chief operating officer. Edward Brennan, taking over as chairman, will continue to receive his existing director’s fee but take nothing extra for his promotion.

They are not the only ones to bend to the demands of investors. Mr Mullin at struggling Delta Air Lines pledged not to take some of the compensation his contract allows in 2003. He is giving up a $1m bonus and long-term awards that would have been worth a further $8m after his 2002 package stirred anger in congress.

Sanford Weill of Citigroup and a number of other banking chiefs are foregoing bonuses.

The highest paid executive last year, Mr Barbakow of the Tenet Healthcare hospital chain, made an eye-popping $189m, of which $111m came from exercising share options. Mr Barbakow was forced out of the company last week amid investor concerns about the its slumping share regulators investigated the business. Concerns about its quality of care also arose after the FBI raided a Tenet hospital for information about allegations of unnecessary procedures by two doctors.

Mr Welch at GE agreed to give up some of his more extravagant retirement perks including fresh flowers for his apartment, New York Knicks and Wimbledon tickets and a laundry service.

A shareholder in the company John Hancock Financial Services last week filed a civil lawsuit asking a clutch of senior executives to return some of their pay. David D’Alessandro, the company’s chief executive, took a pay rise last year from $8.2m to $21.7m despite profits falling by 15% and a share price that wilted by 32%.

But the disparity between executive pay and the rewards for shareholders is still glaringly obvious in many companies. Michael Eisner, who runs Walt Disney, was awarded a $5m bonus last year despite the company’s share price falling by 34%.

How long the issue will stay uppermost in the minds of the US public is uncertain and the long term ability of either shareholders or workers to suppress pay is doubtful.

Americans are less righteous than the British about the mere principle of excessive pay. Once investors too are doing well again then the issue is likely to die down and inflation return. That could be sooner than many had thought. The Dow Jones index on Wall Street last week completed its first three-month rise in two years raising the prospect that chief executives might be let off the hook before any lasting damage is done to their bank accounts.

Tags: $40m, America's, Feel, Heat