GM has seen plenty of tough times over the past few years, and even the company's top executives have felt the pinch. Executive pay was among the items cut as the General waded through multi-billion-dollar losses and immense market pressure, but after two years of cuts, the members of GM's top brass are getting their old salaries back. Top boss Rick Wagoner's base pay went as "low" as $1.1M but is now back to its 2003 level of $2.2M. Product czar Bob Lutz and money man Fritz Henderson also had their pay restored, and Fritz even got a raise to reflect his promotion to COO. Many of the pay cuts were voluntary in recognition of GM's market struggles, but even with the cuts in base pay, overall executive pay packages are worth a lot more than just the salaries alone. Wagoner, for example, was paid $14.4M in 2007, while Maximum Bob came in at $6.9M.
[Source: Auto News (subs. req'd)]
James Garner recovering from mild stroke
VIDEO: God's ringtone is a V10-powered Audi R8
IIHS releases official results on the smart fortwo
Tragedy at LeMons: Send love and a little bit more
Officially Official: New Ferrari California exposed!
In the Autoblog Garage: 2008 Ford Shelby GT500 Mustang
Future Classic: 1984 Chrysler Minivans
Autoline on Autoblog with John McElroy
First Drive: 2009 Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen
Project Track Slut, Part One: Pick a weapon on the cheap
_thumbnail.jpg "Lamborghini Reventon unboxed in Las Vegas")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Blake @ Apr 26th 2008 5:41PM
Cool, does that mean they can afford to rehire all those people they laid off?
Reality_check @ Apr 26th 2008 6:39PM
How bad is it to make 14mill a year and still be obligated to drive a crappy Malibu.
I'd still be making $30 an hour in 2008, but i least i can drive whatever the hell i want.
Priceless.
dea911 @ Apr 26th 2008 5:44PM
looks like GM is counting their eggs before they hatch.
so because GM came out with one decent car (the new Malibu) they think they are all of a sudden headed in the right direction and can afford to do this?
Esprit bird @ Apr 26th 2008 5:59PM
1 decent car...*cough*CTS, G8, hybird Suv's *cough*
But seriously it may be too early but its nice to see GM actually doing well (or getting there) Gotta love the hometown boys.
dea911 @ Apr 26th 2008 6:21PM
yeah, to be honest you are right. the G8 seems like a sweet ride (I can admit that even though I wont ever have one), and the new CTS is leaps and bounds ahead of the previous one.
but the hybrid SUV's? I dont think so. The Tahoe and Yukon do acheive better fuel economy and are even quicker and can tow more (if I remember correctly) but the fact that the price of admission to get into those hybrid SUV's (at least 50k) is rediculous. totally negates the fuel savings. not to mention the ugly 'HYBRID' decal along the sides of the doors. yuck
Rocketboy @ Apr 28th 2008 10:27AM
Well, the G8 was sweet when it was a Holden.
iQuack @ Apr 26th 2008 6:13PM
Now let's watch the UAW go nuts and call a strike.
iQuack @ Apr 26th 2008 6:13PM
Now let's watch the UAW go nuts and call a strike.
Yar @ Apr 26th 2008 6:16PM
Good for them, they deserve every penny.
Mallory @ Apr 26th 2008 8:00PM
Amen Yar. It's funny how people think it's easy to find a business leader with that kind of foresight. He's done so much for GM. For example:
- Greenlighted cars like the Aztek, the Cobalt, the Colorado, the SSR, the GMs minivans, etc.
- Formulated a product portfolio heavy on trucks and SUVs when gas costs $3.50/gal.
- Didn't get caught up in that wacky hybrid sedan fad.
- Oversaw the 2 billion dollar Fiat buyout fiasco. Investment screw-ups like that don't just fall out of the sky you know.
- Decided to back e85, something Time reporter Michael Grunwald called a “clean energy scam” that is “dramatically accelerating global warming” and “imperiling the planet in the name of saving it.”
On top of that, since GM only lost 39 billion dollars last year I don't see why they're not getting more.
If you want to retain this type of talent then you gotta pay the big bucks. That's how the market works.
Yar @ Apr 26th 2008 8:51PM
Who the heck down-ranked me? Do people out there seriously believe that these men will work for FREE? CEO's don't control the whole world you know, if their skills weren't in demand then they wouldn't be earning such wages (keyword: EARNING). They took these pay cuts voluntarily because the fate of a company they loved was in the balance, and when they succeed in dodging the executioners ax people seem more fixated on how they're increasing their wages rather than how these men have secured thousands of jobs worldwide.
sw @ Apr 26th 2008 10:24PM
Hahaha, they more than likely took those pay cuts because if they didn't, the board of directors would've found other people.
matt @ Apr 27th 2008 11:37AM
@mallory
oh wow a time reporter!!! that's exactly where I get all my science news.
kballs @ Apr 28th 2008 5:58PM
Yeah, they deserve to make more money in 1 year as someone making $100k makes in their whole life. Their job is definitely worth 1+ lifetime of work per year, as they get 1+ lifetime worth of work done each year, and make 1+ lifetime of contributions each year. Their work makes the engineers look like a bunch of lazy freeloading bums that live with you and eat all your food but won't get a job and pay rent. In fact, the engineers and machinists should pay THEM just for the privilege of working at such a desirable company.
Stéphane Dumas @ Apr 26th 2008 6:41PM
that's nothing to compare to what Wandelin Wiedeking receive from Porsche according to these French articles
http://www.levif.be/belga/economie/78-2-45819/le-pdg-de-porsche--le-mieux-paye-des-patrons-du-secteur-automobile.html and at http://lapresseaffaires.cyberpresse.ca/article/20080421/LAINFORMER/80421018/5891/LAINFORMER01
Wideking received 60M of Euros (it's around $95M CDN)
John Smith @ Apr 26th 2008 6:44PM
You do the math and see once and for all how stupid this "point" has always been:
14.4+6.9=21.3 (million)
At $70,000 per year per worker, that is 21.3 million/70,000= 304 workers
GM just laid off TENS of thousands of workers, yet at zero pay for Lutz and Wagoner, they still could only afford to hire 304 line workers.
(Worse yet, divide 21.3 million by 10,000 workers and pay the workers $2130 per YEAR! Feel dumber now? Surely Economics--or even Math--must be a capitalist pig invention!)
The next time you are tempted to talk nonsense like that, just do the math.
BowserUSC @ Apr 26th 2008 6:52PM
I have no problem with you presenting the real statistics, thank god someone said it, but when you act like an asshole no one will listen to you and likely they'll start bashing you.
Blake @ Apr 28th 2008 1:34PM
fair point
DKB_SATX @ Apr 26th 2008 8:28PM
The real question is whether or not "stars" like Wagoner produce nearly 300x the value for the company that line workers do. The old-boy's-club scam that board members and corporate officers pull off at the expense of shareholders and employees is a bit sickening.
Mallory @ Apr 26th 2008 8:28PM
I'm not so good with math but here's some interesting trivia for you:
Those 2 people earned the equivalent of 13% of the entire Oklahoma City manufacturing plant (at last count). Yep, 2 guys = 13% of an entire auto plant.
These two guys earned the equivalent of 435 median US households combined. Not people, households.
$21million would pay the entire cost of college for about 1750 people, every year.
If you tried to stack the one dollar bills, their $21,000,000 would reach almost a mile and a half high, or somewhere around the height of a 4 and a half Sears towers. Hope they have thick wallets.