Dan Garton

Bob Owens

Veteran
Sep 9, 2002
14,274
6,112
Well I guess times are hard on our executives as well. Dan Garton who is forced to try and make ends meet on the paltry $2.8 million he gets from AMR apparantly does pretty well with his part time gig.

Director Compensation (Liberty Property Trust) for 2009
Fees earned or paid in cash $39,000.00
Stock awards $34,500.00
Option awards (in $) $13,800.00
Total Compensation $87,300.00


Not baad!

He has a hell of a commute though , they own the tallest building in Philadelphia, and are based in PA.

Note his job title at his part time gig. Director Compensation. Why would an executive of AMR determine the pay of an executive at Liberty Property Trust? Isnt it a bit of a conflict of interest to have executives on both sides of the table determining what executives get paid? Is it any surpise how executive compensation has skyrocketed despite the fact that the supply of MBAs is higher than ever before?

"The number of MBA degrees conferred annually has seen explosive growth over the last few decades, going from under 5,000 MBAs in 1960 to more than 100,000 MBAs in 2000 -- and now averaging more than 150,000 annually, according to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). Enrollment is also influenced by the economy, and as the economy turns toward a downturn, both recent grads and displaced workers head back to earn their MBAs. "

www.quintcareers.com/MBA_degree.html

"Now averaging 150,000 annually", up 50% since 2000, that compares to around 6000 Mechanics certificates isued in 2009.

This years graduating class of MBAs could easily replace our entire management staff, but the same could not be said for new A&Ps.
 

eolesen

Veteran
Jul 23, 2003
15,746
9,350
Don't worry, Bob. The equilibrium is about to start shifting....

First, in 2009, average salary for MBA's dropped below 2006 levels, and will probably continue to drop this year.

Second, I suspect MBA enrollment may have peaked. If not, it's probably due in 2011.

New Obama Administration guidelines are set to deny student loans to private universities (and trade schools) where the default rate for former students and graduates exceeds some magic number determined by the Feds. See http://chronicle.com/blogPost/Is-Obama-at-War-With-the/26538/.

(And no, that same rule won't apply to public universities, who ironically seem to have higher dropout rates and more defaults...)

So, assuming those rules go thru, you can expect the number of MBA's to start falling (along with undergraduate enrollment) because people who want to go to a private school won't be able to get the loans, and state universities have been getting more and more selective with their enrollment standards. Some public universities hammered by state budget shortfalls have wound up reducing their enrollment, which makes it even that much tougher to get a higher education.

That's been manifesting in the military for the past couple years. My son just got accepted for delayed entry into the USMC -- fortunately, he tested very well on the AFVAB, and didn't get put on the waitlist. The recruiter says they have three and four applicants for every slot... Those who can't get in are going to start looking at trade schools again.
 
OP
B

Bob Owens

Veteran
Sep 9, 2002
14,274
6,112
Dont know what any of that has to do with the fact that the Executive class and their wannabe pundits dont seem to want to allow the law of supply and demand apply to them yet they will complain about how unions balance the scales.

Even if you closed all the schools today there would be more then enough MBAs to meet the supply for many, many years into the future. That should have driven the price down, but it hasnt. The fact is there are more MBAs than ever before yet corporate America is paying their executives more than in the past, even after inflation is put in. It defys the order which they claim to support, which they try to enforce on everyone else.

The only reason why Executives are paid so much is because they sit on both sides of the table. They will take huge, totally unjustified sums of money for themselves then turn around with a straight face say "I cant give this group of workers a raise because the other groups would want a raise as well". The arrogance is astounding, then they complain about the attitude of the American worker!
 

eolesen

Veteran
Jul 23, 2003
15,746
9,350
So who do you propose sit on the various compensation committees, Bob? The local elementary school principal or PTA president?

I don't disagree that executive compensation is grossly out of line, but the only people who seem concerned with it are workers who think they deserve more and perhaps some activist shareholders.