You are here: IE »   Story

Vulgar is as vulgar does

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Discount UK Shopping

    The recent debate regarding unacceptably high corporate salaries has been engaging as well as somewhat surprising. It is therefore important that the context be understood. The reactions in the media as well as amongst business circles were triggered by the phrase “vulgar salaries”. It is not a word of my choice or initiative. To be honest, it was used by a mediaperson to ask if I approved of vulgar salaries. How could I have said that I did? It would indeed have been my saying yes to the question if I had stopped beating my wife! In any case my answer was that we in India have not reached the level of liberalism to make vulgarity a fundamental right. How that sums up my entire view on corporate salaries is not for me to ask. But since I have views, as indeed should every thinking, responsible person, I shall state them explicitly.

    The immediate reaction also seems influenced by the memory of the prime minister’s appeal, way back in 2007, to abjure conspicuous expenditure in a country like ours, still struggling valiantly to ensure inclusive growth. But from that to surmise that the government is in a mood to control salaries and more is wide off the mark. As some observers have said, the law at present puts a cap of 11 per cent of profits beyond which proposals have to come to the government for prior approval. Very few have noticed that the draft legislation forwarded to Parliament and under consideration of the Standing Committee does not have a cap. But of course, Parliament will take the final view. I also need no reminder that many of the huge salaries are drawn well within the cap and by persons whose contribution to the economic landscape is very impressive and indeed applauded by us. Voluntary restraints by them indeed deserve a warm round of applause. Yet the bottom line remains that there is a need to talk about these things as part of the corporate governance debate. Besides, not everyone against government control also accepts that some form of regulation is unwarranted. The discussions at G-20 and the pronouncements of President Obama on corporate “greed” are certainly stronger statements than words like “vulgar” and “indecent”; furthermore no one has yet repudiated the view that the Wall Street remuneration fiasco had something to do with the global recession.

    ... contd.

    Next123
    There should be legally binding cap for executive compensationsBy: Jay | 12-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward I think that there should be legally binding cap (for salaries and executive benefits) for all the top executives of big industries. I AM SURE THAT THERE WILL BE NO SERIOUS ATTRITION OF TALENTS. Talented people will continue to enjoy their professions as before. But such cap will help distributing the money to other staff and will make their lives more at ease (to reduce job loss and salary erosion during recession time like this). Exceedingly high salary/benefits cause overcrowding of mediocre people who joined a job only for money is a major problem, globally. Real talents, the dedicated ones join a profession they love. Money is important but must not be the only parameter. Creative ego, professional success and institutional power (fame) are the most important driving forces for talented people.
    Vulgar is vulgarBy: Adhiraj | 12-Oct-2009 Reply | Forward Completely agree with Jay. @Mr. Khursheed, vulgar is vulgar. You may disguise it by any other moniker, but it will remain what it is. Nobody is against higher salary margins for top executives, the question is how much do they really deserve? When you say executive pay is endorsed by shareholders, you actually mean it's endorsed by board of directors. Very few, if any, organizations take shareholder votes to decide executive pay. And as Jay rightly pointed out, an equitable distribution of profits would go a long way in reducing employee disgruntlement, increase productivity and allow for buffers in times of economic downturn. Voluntary restraints have not come about, hence need for legal bindings.
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.