The Washington Times
  • Subscribe
  • Times News Services
  • RSS
  • Mobile Headlines
  • e-edition
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • REGISTER
  • LOG IN
  • E-MAIL ALERTS
  • WELCOME
  • Your Profile
  • Log Out


  • Front Page Image
  • Classifieds
  • Autos
  • Real Estate
  • Jobs
  • Special Sections
  • Customer Service
  • Home
  • News
    • World
    • National
    • Politics
    • National Security
    • DC Area
    • Business
    • Entertainment
    • Technology
    • Investigations
    • Faith
    • Energy
    • Environment
    • Headlines
    • Citizen Journalism
  • Opinion
  • Sports
    • NFL
    • NBA/WNBA
    • MLB
    • NHL
    • Tennis
    • Golf
    • Motorsports
    • Soccer
    • NCAA
    • Olympics
    • Outdoors
    • Other
  • Culture
    • Home & Living
    • Family & Kids
    • Fashion
    • Food
    • Travel
    • Health
    • Washington Visitors
    • Books
    • Military History
    • Life
    • Auto
    • TV Listings
    • Movie Listings
    • Death Notices
    • Entertainment
  • Themes
  • Communities
  • Marketplace
    • Autos
    • Jobs
    • Real Estate
    • Classifieds
    • Shopping
    • Dining Out
    • Education
    • TWT Store
  • Videos
    • Two Guys
    • Birnbaum on Washington
    • Liz Glover
    • Amanda Carpenter
    • Morning Briefing
    • Documentaries
    • Joe Giganti
    • Video Game Minute
  • Podcasts
    • About Headlines
    • Audio and Radio
    • America's Morning News
  • TWT BLOGS: Latest
  • Staff blogs
  • Create a blog

Business groups dare Obama to limit pay for union bosses

By Amanda Carpenter on June 11, 2009 into The Back Story

  • Subscribe

Business groups are daring President Barack Obama to impose pay caps on labor union bosses in light of indications the White House will limit how much corporate executives can be paid.

President Obama has argued “corporate greed” has contributed to the economic crisis and appointed a “compensation czar” to review executive pay for several companies receiving taxpayer bailout money Wednesday. Now White House officials have told the press legislation should be enacted to limit executive pay in private companies through nonbinding shareholders votes.

RELATED STORIES:
• Geithner: Link executive pay to performance
• Pay-go's promise routinely broken by Washington
• Right-wing extremists face extra scrutiny

The Workforce Fairness Institute, which has lobbied heavily for the defeat of the Employee Free Choice Act to ease organization rules for labor unions, points to a 2008 Hudson Institute study that suggests unions have short-changed benefits for their rank and file in favor or generous executive compensation packages and to pad the coffers of their political allies, who are mostly Democrats.



“On average, the 21 largest unions pension plans had less than 70 percent of the funds that they would need to cover their total obligations, and none were fully funded,” the study said. “Seven were less than 65 percent funded. Yet 23 officer and staff funds from the same unions had 88.2 percent of the funding they would need to pay promise pensions, including seven full funded plans and another 13 with at least 80 percent of the required funds.”

Business leaders who oppose plans to limit executive pay say if it is to be passed, labor unions should be included as well.

“Given that union bosses’ job performances have yet to be scrutinized despite numerous, credible reports that they have engaged in ‘creative accounting’ and have mismanaged and underfunded worker pension plans, while wholly funding their own, is deplorable,” said Katie Packer, executive director of the Workforce Fairness Institute

  • Bookmark and Share
  • Comment

There are 99 Comments

skinnerAK

Although I agree that trying to limit private sector pay is ridiculous, the so called "Workforce Fairness Institute" is dishonest in its assertions. Union leaders (who are rank & file members-elected to position of leadership) aren't earning 500 and 1000 times the workers the represent, as many CEO's do. Pension funds, by federal law, cannot be fully funded, and are therefore ALWAYS underfunded. Way to distort the facts, however. Interesting how they always purport to be concerned for the welfare of working people, when nothing could be further from the truth.
Mark as offensive

great2b1

I want Hollywood actors to be limited to about $100K per year. Also, NBA players should be limited to $50K per year. Journalist covering the president should be limited to $15K per year.
Mark as offensive

fujimoh

OK ... if Execs in the private sector have to pay for their company losses, Senators, House Reps, the VP, POTUS and all others in decision making roles that have voted for a failed project (i.e. the Bail-Out) have to pay back their salaries to cover the losses they voted in. No credit line ... if they can’t pay, prison! This would be fair. Detain government officials under the patriot act and hold them indefinitely.
Mark as offensive

bobbyq

how much DO union leaders make total
Mark as offensive

dcmeck

LOL-LOL-LOL- maybe all you people should make $5,000.00 Executive pay and Union Bosses pay- 25 million or so - to less than $500,000 a year, in most cases much less- why are you people so scared of unions or why are you so jealous
Mark as offensive

HeightsMark

I think the next domino to fall will be government (Taxpayer) funded health care. How much are the unions sitting on to fund future healthcare..... can you say windfall “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.” — Thomas Jefferson
Mark as offensive

stevesdenver

Why is it that the reporter doesn't find out what these union leader goons get paid? The union leadership is a disaster as it has an expensive crappy product, ie. american union workers.
Mark as offensive

bdrg

As a pension consultant, I can state in no uncertain terms pensions ARE NOT always underfunded and there is no federal law (ie; ERISA) that states such. The fact that the "execs" or "rank & file" as you like to call them have a better funded pension should serve as a wake up call the real rank & file dues paying members of the unions. Those "unioin leaders" you hold in such high esteem are just as greedy as guy in the suit, they just make it look legitimate. I have several clients that are retired union and they are always concerned about the stability of their pensions because now that they are retired and actually dependent upon that pension they actually read the reports and question (yes question) the integrity of the "bosses". If everybody could just stop looking at the situation through their "filters" and just look at the numbers it would be very easy to understand, the numbers don't lie. Unless of course,there is some secret union formula to account for the disparity. Maybe some of those "rank & file" guys should look into it.
Mark as offensive

sane_american

The facts about pensions here clearly point out who got the priority. What Union Execs get in salaries and perks (legal and illegal) are considerable. Further, in their single minded effort to do the best for their membership, sometimes the slice of the corporate pie is to rich for that corporation to stay competitive. Such is the case with the auto industry; but instead of being punished like corporate executives, the UAW is being put ahead of legally senior debt holders. To put the government in the position to set executive pay just creates one more way for our politicians (all parties) to solicit illegal contributions; and I quite frankly do not trust one of them to stay honest enough to live up to the responsibilities required for this to work. On the other hand, were they to set limits within the tax code as to deductibility, now your stock holders truly have a reason to be more attentive to compensation packages.
Mark as offensive

THEFEDERAL1ST

If executives that actually produce something for the economy can have their pay limited, then movie stars, rock stars, basketball football and baseball players should all be limited as well...their contributions are strictly for entertainment...it's a straight up lie that Obama is perpetrating that Wall Street caused this mess... when D.C. forced them to loan to unqualified borrowers. Obama is definitely taking full advantage of this crisis and we will see our best and brightest go overseas to Ireland and other nations that actually are promoting a free economy....Unions destroyed the auto industry..they destroyed the airlines...they've destroyed our schools....why not limit them...instead they destroyed GM and Chrysler and Obama hands them 25% of the companies...But then again the UAW gace Obama 4 million dollars for his campaign so...time to pay them back...The UAW has given democrats 42 million dollars since '01..GOP? less than 200 thousand...Seems those pensions should be funded instead of buying politicians...but I guess if the President hands you the company after you destroyed it...it's money well spent.
Mark as offensive

electgregmerle

If the accepted liberal premise is that "government is good". Why is it that taxpayer funded jobs i.e. cops, teachers, postal workers etc are even allowed to unionize against the people? Unions cripple economic growth and are manifest job killers. Deny it at your own demise. Outlaw Unions and watch our economy turn around on a dime.
Mark as offensive

hunter73135

Limiting compensation to executives or anyone else is no business of the govt. That being said if Obama ans his loyal minions in the Socialist Democrat Party want to limit it in bussinesses that took tarp or any publicly traded company then it is fair to scrutinize unions. Back in the 80's I can remember a Ope Shopsteward recieving $1,000,000 in annual salary on a job in Brooklynn which made front page news at the time. If he was making that kind of money do you think the President or Business Agent were pulling down less? Not all unions are corrupt as not everyone in Congress is, but there sure as heck alot of coruption in both.
Mark as offensive

ranknfiler

You are bunch of idiots. No union leader makes more than $500,000 a year. Most make less than $150,000 per year - and they aren't taking government bailouts like your right-wing corporate buddies. It's too bad that Carpenter doesn't have the ability to do a little research to tell that there is no comparison. But I guess the whining is all that she's trying to accomplish here anyway.
Mark as offensive

mafster69

Just give me all the money. I will see that it is distributed fairly.
Mark as offensive

Awkins

Come on, people! Wake up and smell the government! It's so rancid you can't mistake it for anything else. All you liberals, democrats, moderates, independants, even some republicans - anyone who were FOOLED into voting for Obama can't all have a cold in your noses. WAKE UP!
Mark as offensive
‹‹ previous1234567next ››

Please login or register to post a comment

Advertising Links
TWT Store
  • e-edition
  • Print Edition
  • Weekly Washington Times
TWT Affiliates
  • Middle East Times
  • Golf
  • UPI
  • Arbor Ballroom
  • Washington Times Global
  • About TWT
  • Press Room
  • F.A.Q.
  • Work for TWT
  • Advertise
  • Sponsors
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map

All site contents © Copyright 2009 The Washington Times, LLC.