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?

  • Jalop1991 does the odometer represent itself in an analog fashion? Will the numbers roll slowly and stop wherever, or do they just blink to the next number like any old boring modern car?
  • MaintenanceCosts E34 535i may be, for my money, the most desirable BMW ever built. (It's either it or the E34 M5.) Skeptical of these mods but they might be worth undoing.
  • Arthur Dailey What a load of cow patties from fat cat politicians, swilling at the trough of their rich backers. Business is all for `free markets` when it benefits them. But are very quick to hold their hands out for government tax credits, tax breaks or government contracts. And business executives are unwilling to limit their power over their workers. Business executives are trained to `divide and conquer` by pitting workers against each other for raises or promotions. As for the fat cat politicians what about legislating a living wage, so workers don't have to worry about holding down multiple jobs or begging for raises? And what about actually criminally charging those who hire people who are not legally illegible to work? Remember that it is business interests who regularly lobby for greater immigration. If you are a good and fair employer, your workers will never feel the need to speak to a union. And if you are not a good employer, then hopefully 'you get the union that you deserve'.
  • 28-Cars-Later Finally, something possibly maybe worth buying.
  • EBFlex The simple fact is very small and cheap ICE vehicles have a range thats longer than all EVs. That is the bar that needs met. And EVs cannot meet that.Of course range matters. But that's one element of many that make EVs completely ineffective at replacing ICE vehicles.
Next