Evidently CEOs representating the top 17 U.S. and European banks felt they didn't justify pay increases due to the economic turmoil, according to Monday's edition of The Financial Times.
That is everyone except Kelly King, whose total compensation increased by $1 million or 25% as the company continues to lay off employees.BB&T is quickly losing the trust of its constituents.
Is anyone tired of hearing King say, "Our Best Days Are Ahead," when what he really means is, "MY BEST DAYS ARE AHEAD."
The only way to way to slow down the abuse at the top is to VOTE one's shares according to one's opinion of management. I know the average shareholder has little voice, but as a group they can make themselves be heard by larger investors and, sometimes, even by boards.
Where is the source for the 60% pay fall statistic?
What does it represent? All CEOs all industries? Banks only? The Peer Group BB&T uses in setting compensation?
Just tossing out a statistic with no definition is not helpful, especially a statistic that is so extreme as you have cited.
Any way you measure it, the boss is in charge and if the company does not make money, it is his fault. If the company is not making money the CEO should not be getting any rewards. In fact he should be on the carpet getting ready to accept his walking papers.
Any employee up to the CEO getting fired leaves in disgrace. Corporation CEO's get fired and they walk away with a fortune that actually belongs to common share holders.
I do believe there is collusion between upper echelon mgt and the B of D's.
I'm glad this is out in the open and being discussed. I was a SVP and a top performer at BB&T but recently left to work for a competitor. I got tired of being told by KK that we all needed to share in the load of helping the bank stay profitable by not receiving pay increases. I heard about his million $ pay increase this past spring and was so disgusted by it I decided to take a substantial pay increase for myself to work for a competitor.
BB&T is not the same bank now that most of you long term shareholders thought you were holding on to. Moral amongst the revenue producers is lower than low and I know most of my previous coworkers are actively looking for new employment.
My first concerns started when the heart and soul Henry Williamson left the bank, my second concerns started when the brain John Allison left the bank, and I jumped off the ship once Kelly King showed his true side.
It was a sad day to leave after more than a decade, but realizing it wasn't the same bank I had come to love and admire made the decision a whole lot easier.
Be very cautious with this stock...
Salary increased from $666,063 t0 $900,000 from 2008 Proxy to 2009 Proxy, most likely the principal reason promotion from COO to CEO effective 1/1/2009.
All Executive Officers were paid 0 (zero) bonus for 2007 and 2008. KK was paid $373,691 for 2009, roughly a third of the target bonus $1,125,000, a sixth of the max of $2,250,000.
After applying all criteria in the bonus plan, the "regular 2009 bonus plan payment" would have been $749,250; the $373,691 is roughly half of that amount.
Bonus plan details are on pages 36-38 in the 2009 Proxy. Compensation tables start on page 48.
The balance of the compensation package arises from other financial features such as stock option grants and benefit programs. They are discussed on pages 48 and following. They are not obscure or arcane (okay, helping design stuff like that was part of my professional activity before I retired) but I do not have the time to do the analysis and I doubt anyone here would appreciate the results reported.
Let me make it simple since I too have read the proxy. King's total compensation for 2009 is valued at more than $4 million, so making it appear less by focusing strictly on his base salary does nothing to endear himself to his constituents. Let's also remember that CEOs from other banks had the good sense to adjust their salaries to the current economic uncertainty. Believe me when I tell you that there have been many a VP and SVP promoted who were lucky to receive a two percent cost of living raise. Kelly's salary would certainly have been better perceived had he waited until the economy, earnings and the stock price were on the rise. His timing is atrocious and he has no sense of public perception. Perception is everything. And if your argument for raising his salary is based on his promotion to CEO, then perhaps the rest of executive management should have received no increase.
DHROSIER: Reading your post regarding the bonus and salary plan written up by you and I assume approved by the B of Ds goes only in one direction. Up. The plan does not include any clauses to restrict increases of salary and bonuses to ex. officers based on performance and the pps. I read that even if the stock goes to zero, ex. officers are entitled to increases of salary and bonus of up to $2,500,000.
I think your compensation package you helped write is filled with flaws. It leaves the common share holder holding an empty bag.
QUESTION; Were you part of the "executive officers"?
He EARNED it...its called tenure. He has been there forever and deserves that salary. Its only right. When Wall Street is making huge comp packages at the expense of all of us, then surely you cannot begrudge KK his tiny $1M salary increase. The stock is in great shape in the low $20s, the balance sheet is shrinking, he has controlled costs by cutting overhead, labor, and cell phones; what else do you want?!?!
Upper echelon mgt's salary should be tied to the price of common stock. There is no logic to provide upper mgt salary and benefit increases when the pps is beaten down to almost all time lows.
If mgt is losing the company $, it doesn't make sense that they get raises. Actually they should be replaced and without seperation bonus. Period.
King is winning one race! BB&T's stock is going down faster than most banks. I have never posted a sell for this stock. It looks like after holding this stock for more than thirty years I am going to move in that direction.