Pay Czar Removes Salary Cap for GM's New Hires; Who Is GM's $500k Man?

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago

Automotive News [sub] reports that President Obama’s Pay Czar has done an about face. Kenneth Feinberg pledged to remove the $500,000 salary cap for NEW executives hired for TARP-recipients—if he’s convinced that a rule-busting pay boost would help the bailout queens return U.S. taxpayer’s money. Feinberg’s climb-down comes just two days after New GM’s federally-appointed Chairman of the Board said that Uncle Sam’s pay caps could be, indeed should be, “modified.” Of course, Ed Whitacre didn’t make his suggestion directly. Nor did Feinberg reveal the locus of his “come to Jesus with cash” moment. “[Feinberg] said the automotive firms did not appeal his rulings. But he said he would be open to requests to hire in new executives at competitive pay. ‘If General Motors or any other company wants to bring someone in laterally — laterally — and competitive pay packages require that lateral hires get certain competitive pay, what have you, we’re perfectly willing to examine that.'” So the new rule: GM can hire someone for more than $500,000 in cash per year if that person was already making $500,000 per year doing the same job, only better (one would hope). Which would exclude, uh, no one. And create mucho resentment at that special place where RenCen’s express elevators ascend to glory. More Feinbergian 180 after the jump, and a mystery to be solved . . .

Feinberg said he would measure his success in determining appropriate pay levels for the bailed-out firms by their repayment of taxpayer money.

“There is nothing more important than the fact that these companies repay,” Feinberg said. “The secretary of the Treasury has made it very clear that we must keep these companies in business, thriving, so that the taxpayer can get repaid.”

So what was the point of the pay caps in the first place? Street theater, of course. But still, you’d expect the show to last more than four weeks. Never mind; I thought pay caps were a dangerously stupid idea, even for a nationalized multi-national. Performance requirements, that’s what the TARPIE-fed suits need. More importantly, transparency! After all, if we know what they’re doing for the money—OUR MONEY—-we can know if they deserve our support. Sort of like, I dunno, owners of any other publicly-held company.

So here’s what I want to know: who is the mystery man within GM ranks who gets paid more than $500,000? We now know GM CEO Fritz “I’m a Goofy Goofer” Henderson is getting $950,000 per year. BUT WHO IS THE OTHER GUY?

Cash salaries for the top GM executives were cut by 31 percent, and only one unnamed executive besides Henderson will be paid more than $500,000 for 2009.

As a taxpayer and GM owner, I demand to know which other GM suit is more equal than the others. Is it Lutz? Tell me it’s not Lutz. I know it’s Lutz. It’s Lutz, right? Gotta be. The Pay Czar exempts the failed Car Czar. It’s . . . kismet. Tell me I’m wrong. No? FOIA you, then.

Robert Farago
Robert Farago

More by Robert Farago

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 8 comments
  • Stuki Stuki on Nov 13, 2009

    Social workers do a perfectly acceptable job of handing out taxpayer money to predominantly Democratic contituencies, and for a whole lot less than half a million a year.

  • Dynamic88 Dynamic88 on Nov 13, 2009

    I remain unconvinced that more money attracts top talent. If that's true, why did GM go into BK? Why has GM lost so much market share the past 4 decades?

  • Zipper69 "At least Lincoln finally learned to do a better job of not appearing to have raided the Ford parts bin"But they differentiate by being bland and unadventurous and lacking a clear brand image.
  • Zipper69 "The worry is that vehicles could collect and share Americans' data with the Chinese government"Presumably, via your cellphone connection? Does the average Joe in the gig economy really have "data" that will change the balance of power?
  • Zipper69 Honda seem to have a comprehensive range of sedans that sell well.
  • Oberkanone How long do I have to stay in this job before I get a golden parachute?I'd lower the price of the V-Series models. Improve the quality of interiors across the entire line. I'd add a sedan larger then CT5. I'd require a financial review of Celestiq. If it's not a profit center it's gone. Styling updates in the vision of the XLR to existing models. 2+2 sports coupe woutd be added. Performance in the class of AMG GT and Porsche 911 at a price just under $100k. EV models would NOT be subsidized by ICE revenue.
  • NJRide Let Cadillac be Cadillac, but in the context of 2024. As a new XT5 owner (the Emerald Green got me to buy an old design) I would have happy preferred a Lyriq hybrid. Some who really like the Lyriq's package but don't want an EV will buy another model. Most will go elsewhere. I love the V6 and good but easy to use infotainment. But I know my next car will probably be more electrified w more tech.I don't think anyone is confusing my car for a Blazer but i agree the XT6 is too derivative. Frankly the Enclave looks more prestigious. The Escalade still has got it, though I would love to see the ESV make a comeback. I still think GM missed the boat by not making a Colorado based mini-Blazer and Escalade. I don't get the 2 sedans. I feel a slightly larger and more distinctly Cadillac sedan would sell better. They also need to advertise beyond the Lyriq. I don't feel other luxury players are exactly hitting it out of the park right now so a strengthened Cadillac could regain share.
Next