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
Who cares what he or any CEO makes. In this country any of us have an opportunity to be that CEO and thats the real point. If you dont believe that then you are just making excuses for yourself and others. If you think that CEO doesnt deserve it, go ahead become one. Oh yeah, its not that easy is it. But just because it isnt easy doesnt mean it cant be done. Instead, the excuse makers and the blamers find it much easier to talk bad about fellow Americans and the President himself is more than happy to pit us against each other. Question for all the complainers : Do you hate athletes and movie stars just as much? They make tens of millions a year. Why is it just the big bad CEO you seem to have a problem with?
I don't see why anyone is complaining here, they needed to save money and they did. I mean cutting your workforces pay was a stroke of brillance, who else could have thought of this? After all so many other options in cost savings were put forth by him first, right??? I mean all other avenues of cost savings were surely explored and cutting your workforces pay or jobs is a last resort...... right?
This guy has clearly earned every penny and why shouldn't he collect his full pay.... Because letting profit drop by 0.5% would be out of the question, think of the board of directors, they may get paid based on profit and if it were to slip they and the CEO may not get their bonuses.... that is BS. Won't someone please think of the poor board????????? And if the CEO lost 8% he might have to downgrade his plane to the one without (gasp) a full surround sound stereo. I for one am not willing to ask him to make that kind of sacrifice, it's un-American!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The company died due to bad marketing and lousy product development along with high labor costs. While I agree the execs are overpaid, the unions are very much a big reason Hostess is closing. 40,000 employees @ $15/hr avg @ 8 hours a day @ 5 days a week @ 52 weeks = $1.2 billion. And that's not including benefit costs. That is more of a cause for the company closing than the $7 million (guessing) paid to the execs.
Copyright © 2013 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Quotes are real-time for NASDAQ, NYSE and AMEX. See delay times for other exchanges.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Thomson Reuters (click for restrictions). Real-time quotes provided by BATS Exchange. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Interactive Data Real-Time Services. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by SIX Financial Information.
While incompetent bosses like Michael Scott and Andy Bernard typically can’t survive in the workplace, office romances are a very real part of corporate culture.
- Southwest Airlines turns less legroom into $773M
- 'American Idol' gets sorry ratings for season finale
- Powerball's wacky sense of humor
- Millions of Facebook's users are actually pets
- Can crowd funding rescue the LA Times?
- Domino's debuts a DVD that smells like pizza
- Average US retirement age climbs to 61
- McDonald's aims to slim down its 145-item menu
- Bathroom reading goes digital with iPad TP stand
[BRIEFING.COM] The S&P 500 ended this week with a bang, roaring to a new all-time high on the back of stronger-than-expected economic data, influential leadership, and an ongoing appreciation for the Fed's monetary policy support.
The bullish bias was evident in premarket action as the S&P futures pointed to a higher start without the benefit of any definitive news catalyst. Stocks indeed benefited from a blast of buying interest at the opening bell on this ... More
More Market News
All hail the bull market, which ended the week with a big rally. But it also is starting to look a little like 1987, which suffered an epic blow-out.