Outlook: Fat cat pay
Tuesday 13 July 1999
A way will be found of linking pay directly to standards of service, Mr Byers is quoted as saying. One such method might be more onerous price caps for companies that are seen both to be paying their executives too much and delivering poor quality of service.
Presumably Mr Byers' remarks are largely political rhetoric, for it is hard to know how in practice such a link might be made. Some form of definition of "excessive pay" would have to be advanced, as would a defining set of circumstances for poor quality of service.
Regulators would be very reluctant indeed to adjudicate in an area they at present regard as beyond their brief. It is questionable, in any case, that regulators and ministers would have any legal right to interfere as proposed. As things stand, directors of PLCs are answerable for how much they pay themselves not to parliament or government, but to shareholders, the owners of the business.
The problem Mr Byers implicitly identifies is that in the case of monopoly utilities, shareholders have no direct interest in quality of service, as they obviously do in companies that operate in fully competitive areas of the market - rather the reverse. The more a company exploits its captive customers, the more profit there is for shareholders, subject only to the nuclear sanction that the licence might be revoked if things really begin to slide. Ergo, if pay is linked to financial, rather than to service performance, as it invariably is, then executives have a positive incentive to crunch the customer.
No right-thinking person would quarrel too much with this analysis. Executive pay in the utilities has risen since privatisation by far more than can reasonably be justified either by the improvement in service customers have received, which in many instances is marginal, or by the admittedly rather greater gains that have been made in efficiency.
In a fully competitive industry, many of these managements would by now have failed. Their share prices would have collapsed and they would be out of a job. Instead they continue to enjoy handsome salaries and fringe benefits, further inflated by share option and long term incentive plans. In some respects, then, Mr Byers is right to believe the demands of the left can be reconciled with the rigours of free market thinking. Finding a legitimate way of doing it is another thing entirely.
- 1 Man who held up 'hire me' sign at Waterloo station returns a year later with 'I'm hiring' sign
- 4 Tennis fan suing Australian Open organisers for 'failing to shade spectators' during Murray match
- 5 This crazy skiing video will leave you feeling queasy
Man who held up 'hire me' sign at Waterloo station returns a year later with 'I'm hiring' sign
Mother of newborn Baby No 59 trapped in sewer pipe told Chinese police she 'heard crying' when she raised alarm
Saudi preacher who 'raped and tortured' his five -year-old daughter to death is released after paying 'blood money'
AirAsia QZ8501: Black box reveals warning alarms 'screamed' before crash, as more bodies recovered from near fuselage of jet
Rob Lowe hits out at White House decision not to meet Israeli leader
British Muslim leaders outraged after Eric Pickles says followers of Islam should 'prove their identity'
UK terror fears: My jihadist son returned from Syria mentally scarred – now he is being ignored
Nigel Farage: NHS might have to be replaced by private health insurance
Billy Crystal: 'Stop shoving gay sex scenes in my face'
French court convicts three over homophobic tweets, in case hailed as a 'significant victory' by LGBT rights campaigners
British Muslim school children suffering a backlash of abuse following Paris attacks
iJobs Money & Business
Negotiable: Recruitment Genius: A Tax Assistant is required to join a leading ...
£16000 - £25000 per annum: Recruitment Genius: This is an exciting opportunity...
£45000 - £47000 per annum + bonus + benefits: Ashdown Group: Java Developer / ...
£35000 - £38000 per annum + Benefits: Ashdown Group: Marketing Manager - Marke...