The 10 highest-paid CEOs in the world

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    June 1, 2014 8:16 a.m.

    As the bulk of the commentary here proves, peons are grateful to their patrons and would never jeopardize their dependent relationship, no matter how poorly they may be treated.

    That is extremely unAmerican behavior.

    The founders were not peons, and they wrote the Constitution for people who don't want to be peons.

    But peons proliferate now in this nation, thanks to a barrage of Right Wing propaganda over the last 30 years.

    It's a pity.

  • AZ Blue & Red Gilbert, AZ
    May 29, 2014 10:53 p.m.

    Chris B you do not work for the U of U? With all your posts I was sure you were employed by the U. So your work is not a PAC 12 company?

    If a CEO can make the company worth more then why not. No thanks I do not what their job. I think they do get paid too much but so do others in areas that they should not. ie: Sports players. Teachers should get a lot more then the $30-40K that they start off with. Bottom line is we allow it. People will work for that kind of money so that is the job market.

    Until we stop supporting it then it will continue. Both High and Low.

  • A1994 Centerville, UT
    May 29, 2014 10:45 p.m.

    I work for super, crazy rich people. I mean REALLY rich. We're talking BILLIONS. You know what those greedy people do? (Besides having work for me to do and providing me with health insurance and giving me profit sharing and matching my 401k)? Each year, they match what I donate to charity. With very few restrictions, they give me money to give away to people I see fit to give to. Amazing. So we could tax them more and see to it that the money gets lost in the cracks of the Pentagon and the Department of Education, or we could not worry too much about how profitable they are and trust that they are doing good tings with their money.

  • high school fan Huntington, UT
    May 29, 2014 10:41 p.m.

    And the point of this story is what??? There will always be some people that make much more money than others, none of these people were born rich, they worked for it. I get tired of people being demonized because they were successful in accomplishing the American dream.
    Why is no one complaining about the money paid to actors for a movie or to an athlete for playing a sport. We could all go to the movies cheaper or the game cheaper if they weren't paid so much money.
    Why are we not complaining about politicians that are poor as mice until they are elected and then just like that they millionaires.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    May 29, 2014 10:28 p.m.


    You bring up some good points. However, janitors also can learn to negotiate along with other skills they develop. Negotiation is important at all levels.

    And I will add that if a top CEO only made half his current salary, it would be naive to assume that money saved would or even should be given to lower employees. Instead, it would and should stay with the owners.

    My point is that a lower level employee is not being treated unfairly simply from the fact the CEO make a high sum of money.

    If a lower level employee can't find a position anywhere that pays them more than they are making, it's because the value they add doesn't merit more money. It's not because the CEO makes a lot.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    May 29, 2014 10:12 p.m.

    "Currently, of the largest companies in America (those in the S&P 100), CEO pay has no correlation with either performance or market capitalisation." The Economist, Feb 7, 2012.

  • Fred44 Salt Lake City, Utah
    May 29, 2014 9:24 p.m.

    Because CEO's have a right to extract whatever financial package they can get from their boss and view anything they pay in wages to those below them as a liability to be minimized at all costs does not make it the right thing to do. To pretend that the current differential between salaries of upper management and the average worker is anything other than greed is living in denial.

    The value a company and its leadership places on its employees can be measured directly by the compensation package they provide. Costco values its employees WalMart does not. Neither company is required to treat their employees in the way that they do. Both companies are in business to make a profit,Costco simply places more value on their employees than they do the bottom line.

  • a bit of reality Shawnee Mission, KS
    May 29, 2014 3:28 p.m.

    Chris B.,

    The specific mechanics of how the bonuses of most CEOs is calculated and the pockets out of whom it comes is a lot more complicated than your analysis suggests. In the real world, do you really think individual “greedy stockholders” are going to go to war about an executive bonus that is less than a penny a share?

    On a fundamental level, employees at every level take home what they negotiate. It turns out CEOs are extremely good at negotiating salaries and stock options with their friends on the Board of Directors. In the real world, individual stockholders have very little ability and even less incentive to hold the Board accountable.

    To clarify where I'm coming from, I'm writing from the perspective of a powerless stockholder who is the one actually paying the CEOs. I am here to beg fellow stockholders and the Boards that allegedly represent me to bring some sanity to the system.

    The assertion that salaries and bonuses are derived by wise, fair, efficient, and unrigged market forces is naive.

  • Liberal Ted Salt Lake City, UT
    May 29, 2014 3:26 p.m.

    It is much more upsetting to me, that welfare people get higher increases and better benefits than I do, working full time.

    Explain the fairness in that?

    I've talked with many people who were or are on welfare. They have it much better than I do. Why can't I at least be given food stamps and eat steak like those that don't work?

    The people that are getting screwed, are the people that are working.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    May 29, 2014 12:56 p.m.

    What has changed over the last 30 years has been the understanding of what reasonable pay is for workers and executives. Note that in many European and Asian nations, the gap is not nearly that wide and they have world class products and corporations (so somebody is adding value somewhere other than at the CEO level).

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    May 29, 2014 11:19 a.m.


    Keep in mind that the ONLY reason the owners and board of directors of a company will pay a CEO 10 times more than they were paying them 30 years ago is if that board of directors thinks that such an investment will pay off the best for the company.

    Those owners aren't going to pay the CEO more than they need to for the same expected output, because remember what they don't pay the CEO ends up back in the pockets of the owners.

    Yes, I do think its very possible the gap between the value of top CEO's and the value of janitors has increased over the last 30 years, and if it has it makes sense that the gap between their wages has grown.

    Those rich greedy owners want the most money for themselves, and they'll only be paying in their minds what the CEO is worth. Sure, they are wrong sometimes. But they're also wrong about the quality of their janitors sometimes.

    You seem to be suggesting that the owners don't want money and are choosing to just give it to the CEO's instead of the janitor

  • CBAX Provo, UT
    May 29, 2014 11:13 a.m.

    Waiting for burger flippers to start chanting "We can't survive, on seven twenty five!".

  • a bit of reality Shawnee Mission, KS
    May 29, 2014 11:09 a.m.

    Chris B.,

    Of course there is a huge difference between the skills of a CEO vs. the skills of the janitor. I'm not suggesting everybody ought to make the exact same dollar amount regardless of their skills and actual performance. What I am saying is that the long-run prosperity of the nation requires a strong middle class.

    Over the last 30 years, the average salary of CEO's has increased by something on the order ten times, while the average salary of a worker hasn't increased at all. Why do you think that is? Is it because CEO's are now 10 times smarter than they were before? They are ten times better leaders? Are they working ten times as hard?

    In contrast, do you think average workers haven't increased their productivity at all over the last 30 years?

    I'm strongly in favor of a free-market, competition-based economy. But we should recognize that too much wealth being concentrated in too few hands is detrimental to the system.

  • Rob71 Santa Clara, UT
    May 29, 2014 10:56 a.m.

    The question here is how much compensation does one person require. Most of the compensation of the uber rich is taken out of the economy. This stifles economic growth and limits the availability of dollars that might otherwise be distributed to others within the company. To limit these obscene levels of compensation a tax of 90% over and above the one million dollar level should be enacted. This would benefit the companies in question and the overall economy.

  • Downtime Saint George, UT
    May 29, 2014 10:42 a.m.

    @GiuseppeG - "NOBODY needs that much pay." So says the person who doesn't make all that money.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    May 29, 2014 10:25 a.m.

    a bit of reality needed -

    A company could not *ever* make a lot of money for the owner shareholders if the only skills brought to the table were of the entry level type.

    There is a huge difference between the value an entry level janitor adds to a company vs. the value a top executive can make.

    Just because a janitor is needed and a CEO is needed doesn't suggest anything about their compensation being anywhere similar.

    If that janitor wants to make more money, he/she should develop more skills to merit a higher wage.

  • a bit of reality Shawnee Mission, KS
    May 29, 2014 9:12 a.m.

    The actual value of a corporation is the synergy of the contributions all employees make, from the bottom to the top. The actual value is derived from the team effort--a CEO could not *ever* make $x million without the work of a lot of other people in the company who are paid far less, and without being endowed with a strong economy that provides the market the company needs.

    Setting the relative salaries within a corporation is a question of taking the total gross profits that the team made, and dividing it up. CEO's make a ton of money because they are good at negotiating their piece of the pie--not necessarily because their isolated efforts magically make the pie bigger without the hard work of the rest of the team.

    Here is the question: is it good for the economy for so much of the nation's income going to the top 1%? Looking at the 20th century, the economy did the best when more money went to a strong middle class.

  • KDave Moab, UT
    May 29, 2014 8:46 a.m.

    Amazing. I'll bet not one of them can dunk a basketball.

  • GiuseppeG Murray, Utah
    May 29, 2014 8:30 a.m.

    They shouldn't be paid that obscene of an amount for 3 reasons:
    1) NOBODY needs that much pay. At some point, having too much wealth becomes a detriment to oneself.
    2) Aspiring to positions that generate so much wealth can lead people to believe (incorrectly) that sunshine flows out of their body in rainbows. Also detrimental to oneself as well as to the rest of us exposed to them.
    3) This kind of incentive drives short-range thinking, which in striving for short-range, quick compensation goals, can drive the misconception that short-cutting and "bullying" behavior is a desirable thing in execs. (See other DN article about criminalizing bullying behavior by kids).

  • TOO Sanpete, UT
    May 29, 2014 7:09 a.m.

    I AM LDS 2

    So should CEOs get paid the same as the employees?

    Why should CEOs not get paid much more? They've generally had more experience, more education, and more contribution than the "normal" workers.

    Drinking a quart of pickle juice every time someone gets something that you feel is unfair is not the way to live life. If you want what they have, do what they do/did. It's that simple. If you don't feel you are being treated or paid fairly, speak up. Have the courage to address the problem as you see it. Or just have the courage to say adios and leave completely for something else.

  • I M LDS 2 Provo, UT
    May 28, 2014 9:27 p.m.

    "21 The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!”

    22 On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable,

    23 and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty,

    24 while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it,

    25 so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. 26 If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it."

    No CEO increases the value of any "corporation" by their own, solitary actions. No CEO deserves a thousand times more compensation than others in the company. Feudalism was supposed to have been left on the scrap heap of history.

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    May 28, 2014 4:50 p.m.

    If a CEO increases the value of his company 1000 times more than I do, he should be paid 1000 times more than me.

    I have worked as a janitor and burger flipper in my early years. At times the companies I worked for were very very successful. And yes the CEO's work increased the value probably in the ballpark of 1000 times the value of my work.

    It would be lazy of me to cry about how much money he was making when he was making the company 1000 times more profitable than I was making it.

    Lets not be lazy and suggest the rich give us what they've earned, lets instead look in the mirror and make ourselves more valuable to MERIT a higher wage if that's what we're seeking