Hostess CEO cuts everyone's pay but his
Gregory Rayburn argues that because he isn't on the Hostess payroll, he should still get his full $125,000 a month.
Gregory Rayburn will still get his $125,000 a month, or $1.5 million a year, the company told The Huffington Post. His logic is that because he isn't on the Hostess payroll, he doesn't have to take part in the company-wide pay cut.
Rayburn looks at himself as temporary, telling The New York Post he's more like outside help and therefore entitled to his full salary. He said he will leave Hostess when he's no longer needed, the Post reports.
Rayburn joined Hostess in February as chief restructuring officer, and one month later was named president and CEO. He's also on the board of directors.
To be fair, Rayburn is taking some measures to rein in his pay. He was eligible to get a bonus of between $375,000 and $1.125 million, but decided to give up the money, The Huffington Post reports. And Rayburn and three other top executives are taking $1 for the rest of the year in pay, but their full salaries will be reinstated in January.
That's small comfort to the rank-and-file employees who watched a number of Hostess executives get sweet pay raises and bonuses as the company barreled into bankruptcy. The company wants 19 top managers to stay with Hostess as it moves into the liquidation phase, and got approval from a bankruptcy judge to award up to $1.75 million in retainment bonuses.
The execs only get those bonuses if they perform specific tasks related to easing the operational wind-down, a company spokesman told The Los Angeles Times. Rayburn won't be getting a bonus.
At least 15,000 Hostess employees are losing their jobs in bankruptcy, but Hostess wants to keep about 3,200 to help wind down operations.
Hostess cracked under nearly $1 billion in debt, and blame for its demise can be spread far and wide. Private-equity firms funding the company couldn't get it off the ground. When consumers lost interest in carbs and sugar, the biggest innovation Hostess could come up with was banana-filling Twinkies. Although union members agreed to steep concessions over the years, it still failed to adjust to new realities. The old CEO, Brian Driscoll, suddenly bailed in March without explanation, Fortune reports.
More from Money Now
And Fox news blames the union for everything.
I would not help them "wind down operations" I'd tell them to take their cupcakes and shove them.
correct! the CEO thing is out of hand. The CEO's and shareholders are doing more damage than good to companies. Draining profits by giving themselves raises and cutting cost by laying people off and raising health benefits so they pay less. I'm sure you have seen it. Companies laying people off and making others pick the slack. If the fiscal cliff hits, we will all be in trouble with these CEO's.
This does not help the economy. Too much is put on the stock market and how a company does day-to-day. I think this is another issue of how our investments are slowly being bleed by investment companies.
I just love seing how a company stock goes up 10% one day and then down 5% the next. Everybody is in a hurry to make money and willing to screw with the system to do it.
(he hates twinkies ), and women don't COME cheep either.
from the comments here I can see that Obamas push to divide this country is well underway. Where was the outrage when Obama had someone paid $$ to oversee the BP oil mess? or the pay out of TARP or the person who oversaw the money for 9/11? they all got millions. Why no outrage? You all point the finger at the CEO - well what about the Board of trustees who hire them and give them these pay packages? Many of them sit on multipule boards, they make millions ( Michelle Obama was a multipul at one time) If you don't work for them and you don't own apart in the company ( don't be embarressed like the Prez was, check and see where your money lands in those mutual funds...) - what is your complaint? If you do own a part, start writing to them , call them and ask what are they doing with your money. I wonder why, we tell our children that they can grow up and become anything they want, the world is your oyster - yet today we have to tell them, don't make alot of money, that's bad. Well unless your some kind of entertainer then you should be able to make alot of money and hide it in production companies....
Money grubbing twinkie, dont want to give up some of your pay but will let minimum wagers take cuts and losses in there paychecks. ou should be ashamed of your self. Can you sleep at night.
put your self on thesame wage the employee gets and see how you get by.
Of course he is. He has a huge job in dissolving what was a piece of American history. No one would be complaining if concessions were made but instead they chose to destroy their security.
Anybody who has a job right now especially with our current administration should be thankful that they can still take care of their families and do all they can to better the company they work for.
On the other hand 18000 out of work helps to increase they number of people dependent on the government. AND THAT IS JUST WHAT THE GOVERNMENT WANTS. It's time that America wakes up, make the changes and get this country back to being the greatest in the world.
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
[BRIEFING.COM] The stock market ended the Tuesday session on a lower note after generally upbeat earnings took the back seat to geopolitical concerns. The S&P 500 (-0.5%) and Nasdaq Composite (-0.1%) ended on their lows, while the Russell 2000 (+0.3%) displayed relative strength.
Once again, market participants were focused on quarterly reports in the early going, but geopolitical worries overshadowed the impact of mostly better than expected earnings. Specifically, equities ... More
More Market News
MUST-SEE ON MSN
A charcuterie master shares his process for cold-smoking meat at home.
- Jetpacks about to go mainstream
- Weird things covered by home insurance
- Bing: 70 percent of adults report 'digital eye strain'