Ford CEO Mulally gets 37% pay cut; Gephardt, Earley appointed to board
Ford's CEO Alan Mulally took hope a tidy $13.57 million compensation package for his work in 2008, While that's a handsome sum, it represents a 37 percent cut of the $21.67 million he took home in 2007 – and that's before the ex-Boeing exec takes an additional 30 percent haircut for 2009. By comparison, General Motors' CEO Rick Wagoner and Chrysler's Bob Nardelli are slated to have salaries of $1 each, although both automakers have already received $17.4 billion in federal loans.
In addition, Automotive News reports that the company will abolish merit raises for salaried workers in the U.S. (and in most of its global ops), kill off a worldwide incentive compensation program for 2008 and newer employees, and give no compensation to board members for 2009.
In related news that's causing a bit of consternation, AN is reporting that Mulally and executive chairman Bill Ford will continue to use corporate jets for business and private travel. The flights will be chartered planes, as Ford put its own fleet of private aircraft up for sale some time ago after being chided by politicians during the bailout hearings on Capitol Hill.
Speaking of which, Ford also has some news on that front, as well. The Wall Street Journal reports that House Majority Leader Richard "Dick" Gephardt has now found a seat on the Blue Oval's board, as has Anthony Earley, chairman and CEO of DTE Energy Co. The two bigwigs replace seats vacated by members who reportedly no longer have the necessary time to serve.
[Sources: Automotive News - subs. req.; Wall Street Journal | Image: AFP/Getty]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
I am Rich 4:02PM (3/25/2009)
Work for $1? I would too if I got the bonuses and stock options these jokers do.
Reply
superman211 6:52PM (3/25/2009)
CEO of Ford does not get paid. He puts ALL of his money back into the company.
So a "PAY CUT" means nothing.
Auto Blog makes up the stupidest things.
Bill 4:29PM (3/25/2009)
I still don't understand why the use of private planes is such a big deal? I feel like the only reason it's always in the headlines is because it's something that the average, wage-earning, American can see as a frivolity and be upset about.
Any rational person can see that these jets are tools and actually *save* these companies money. Regardless, I'm sure this comment section will be flooded with posts about how "wasteful" and "extravagant" the use of private planes is.
Reply
Yaroukh 4:32PM (3/25/2009)
+1
notYou 5:02PM (3/25/2009)
Exactly. Everyone demands that the Big 3:
Be efficient in design.
Be efficient in production.
Produce products that are efficient in resource consumption.
blah blah blah blah...
But yet expects their employees to, what, hitch-hike for company related travel?
Company cars? That's too cushy!
Company jets? Over the top!
Company travel? Wasteful!
Kudos for Ford not having taking any fed money directly. Now they can go tell those with "consternation" about their travel to stick it you-know-where. (GM and Chrysler - having gobbled at the federal trough - will have to bend over and take it or risk Barney Fwank's name-subpeona'ing-wrath. I'm not sure which is worse.)
david 5:00PM (3/25/2009)
I'll tell you why, it's to distract the average american from how much the federal government is screwing up this nation.
geo.stewart 5:25PM (3/25/2009)
excellent comments by all. I think we put to death the notion that corporate flights were a waste of money as long as it is for CORPORATE work.
on the flip side to David's point, we have the esteemed Dame Pelosi using military birds to flit here family and entourage hither and dither. Fine if CA wants to pay for it (ya think that will fit in their budget right now?) but dont foist that bill on me. those blowhards are overpaid as is. give her business class or coach and let her use the time to chat with her constituency.
jsjs 6:35PM (3/25/2009)
I don't really have a problem w/ the use for corporate jets for legitimate corporate business (I, however, don't consider Mulally using Ford's corporate jet to fly home to Seattle on the weekends "company business").
But when the "Big 3" CEOs went to testify before Congress - they could have very well shared a ride on one jet instead of each taking his own plane.
e46mike 10:01PM (3/25/2009)
+2
Matt 2:57AM (3/26/2009)
Isn't there something with the "Big 3" that bosses can't travel using public transport (eg normal commercial flights) due to security risks? I seem to remember reading that somewhere...
Joe 4:07PM (3/25/2009)
Seriously? Gephardt? I think I'd almost rather have Pelosi.
Why the hell would Ford put a corrupt politician on their board? That's a worse idea than a $3.6 trillion federal budget.
Reply
Mr.Oak 4:16PM (3/25/2009)
I guess a $0.6 Trillion budget with $2.4 trillion of emergency funding sounds better to you.
jimmy glick 6:01PM (3/25/2009)
It would actually be more accurate to say Gephardt is a "former" corrupt politician.
Nowadays he just spends his time as a Washington lobbyist as president and CEO of Gephardt Group which in turn "helps clients improve Labor Relations, develop Political and Public Policy Strategies and enhance Business Results by gaining access to new markets or partners."
In other words, his clients pay him to lobby congress for political favors and maybe a kickback or two. The system definitely sucks, but it might be a good thing for Ford to have somebody with his connections on the board.
beowulf 10:54AM (3/26/2009)
Corrupt politician? Citation required, please.
Rep. Gephardt has a record for keeping his politics clean; a practice that cost him the presidential nomination in 88, 92, and 04. He is also supports American workers and is anti-NAFTA. This is a good fit for Ford.
Samurai Jack 4:14PM (3/25/2009)
I hope the good people of Missouri castigate that bloviating gasbag Gephardt for having the time to sit on Ford's board instead of doing the people's business they sent him to Congress to do. He now needs to recuse himself from any and all discussions related to supporting the auto industry when they come before the House. If he doesn't he deserves to be slapped down hard.
Reply
jimmy glick 5:37PM (3/25/2009)
Gephardt hasn't been in congress since 2005 so I guess he's free to sit on any company board he wants.
I hate to say it, but this was probably a good move for Ford considering his political pull and affiliations.
Samurai Jack 6:24PM (3/25/2009)
Thank you for the correction. Autoblog needs to correct the story to say "Former House Majority Leader".
The result of this correction is that Ford has effectively added a lobbyist to its board. Which is great for Ford but not necessarily great for the taxpayer. . .
I really wish we could limit the access to government of former legislators and rein in the lobbyist wagon train. But I understand how that would be problematic constitutionally.
smj276os 5:15PM (3/25/2009)
Gilligan's running FORD now????
Reply
Jrejre 4:34PM (3/25/2009)
I am confident Mr. Rogers can turn things around.
Reply
Edmond Dantes 4:39PM (3/25/2009)
Jeez. He looks ridiculous. Mr. Rogers, Mulally edition?!
Reply