Obscene - How Many Cars Must Ford Sell to Pay Off 'The Jac' - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars

Aussie Pete · 04-10-2002, 16:51

Jac Nasser received US$17.75 million (A$33.6 million) in payouts from Ford when he left last year. This comprised US$1.75 million in salary, US$3.1 million in performance incentives, and US$12.9 million in stock options (at current values, neglecting growth). This was despite Ford making a US$5.45 billion (yes BILLION) loss.

AP shakes his head wondering how execs get US$3.1 million in performance incentives when the company loses such a staggering amount of money.

Jac is a nice guy, but this is criminal IMO.

laminge · 04-10-2002, 16:53

Havent you left for the States Yet????

Mr Sparkle · 04-10-2002, 16:57

Hefty payouts are the "flavour of the month" in large corporations, it seems. Ground floor employees get the shaft, while the upper crust laughs into their latte's enjoying a 6 or 7 figure payout.. just typical corporate greed IMO. Not much we can do about it, except perhaps for the occasional homocidal rampage through the "executive suite" :s6:

*Std. Disclaimer - the aforementioned rampage is not condoned by the author or the website. Kids - don't try this at home.

XR8chic · 04-10-2002, 17:56

Hey.... if I go and work for a company and help them make huge losses, will they give me a 7 figure income ??

ELXR8 · 04-10-2002, 18:24

Was he the one who got a V8 back in the Falcon?

Troutman · 04-10-2002, 18:52

Not sure about that, but Nasser was the one who insisted that a car for a conservative market called the Falcon had to have "New Edge" styling themes that ended up scaring away buyers and giving the arch rival its greatest domination in history.

It was great to have an Australian as CEO of Ford US, but his dedication (apparently he lived on 5 hours sleep) didn't translate to success for Australia either...

EA S · 04-10-2002, 18:52

Quote:

Originally posted by XR8chic
Hey.... if I go and work for a company and help them make huge losses, will they give me a 7 figure income ??

Not if you're just one of the grunts who is faithfully following the program designed by a couple of professional morons at the top. If the company goes backwards you get the sack and have to fight for you miserly redundancy.

To get a really fabulous payout, you have to get yourself to the top of a big corporation and really stuff it up beyond all belief. Say, like BHP spending about 3 times as much as originally budgeted on its WA hot briquetted plant.

If you can do this, you can end up with heaps of cash, like the good Mr Trumble who was imported from the US to fix up AMP, but did something else to it beginning with "f", and got $25m to piss off before he buggered it completely.

Do not try this approach in your own business or using your own money. It only works with other people's.

You must also be aware that these people know what is best for us, because they are the ones who always have a shitfit when any increase in the grunts' income is proposed, claiming that a couple bucks a week extra for everyone would ruin the economy. They do this because they are professionals and the only ones who should be allowed to ruin the economy.

Aussie Pete · 04-10-2002, 20:30

EA S:
Wisdom my son, wisdom. Like for example maintenance workers at one of our airlines. Some of them (fully qualified) are being paid as little as $400 per week GROSS before shifts etc. Tell me a pay rise is going to cost stuff all of nothing. But no, let's scr3w the workers over, make them unhappy, and if they don't like it they can p!ss off and we'll get new grunts to replace them. New ones that take a good five years to come up to basic speed (planes are complex things), and we have to train up in the bargain.

AP shakes head..........

Execs claim to deserve their huge pay based on company success, but as a shareholder in a few companies I want them accountable for their stuff ups too - not get the money anyhow!

XWJG34 · 04-10-2002, 20:41

Quote:

Originally posted by ELXR8
Was he the one who got a V8 back in the Falcon?

He was head of Ford Oz when the V8 was re introduced in the EB.

EA S · 04-10-2002, 21:33

Quote:

Originally posted by Aussie Pete
EA S:
Wisdom my son, wisdom. Like for example maintenance workers at one of our airlines. Some of them (fully qualified) are being paid as little as $400 per week GROSS before shifts etc. Tell me a pay rise is going to cost stuff all of nothing. But no, let's scr3w the workers over, make them unhappy, and if they don't like it they can p!ss off and we'll get new grunts to replace them. New ones that take a good five years to come up to basic speed (planes are complex things), and we have to train up in the bargain.

AP shakes head..........

Execs claim to deserve their huge pay based on company success, but as a shareholder in a few companies I want them accountable for their stuff ups too - not get the money anyhow!

AP

Sorry to have to disagree, old sport, but you're missing the point.

The airline, and all other, senior execs are entitled to lots and lots of money.

For example, planes don't just fall out the sky, you know. Lots of things can contribute to it. Cheap or extended service parts used to cut maintenance costs. Inadequately trained or supervised workers used to cut labour costs. Workers working under excessive pressure to reduce turnarounds and cut labour costs. Shortcuts. Oversights on maintenance bulletins because of labour shortages and excessive pressure. Also pilot error.

These things all happen as a result of management decisions. Except pilot error, which is the pilot's fault, as in when the stabiliser falls off the plane because of failure caused by one of the above, it's the pilot's fault for purposely landing it on houses rather than calmly returning an otherwise perfectly serviceable plane to the airport.

When the accusations and inquiries start after these sorts of events, do you have any idea just how stressful it is, and how much skill is required, for the big bananas to conceal the real causes; shift the blame; demonstate that it was really pilot error (or maybe the manufacturer's or regulator's fault for not making sure that the airline informed its own pilots of the manufacturer's bulletin 18 months earlier entitled "How not to lose your stabiliser"); try to convice the plaintiff survivors of the deceased passengers that they'd all died of food poisoning before the plane hit the ground so they should be suing the contract caterers anyway; and then convince the board that all that stress and demonstrated skill means at least another 30% salary increase next year, plus heaps more share options and even tighter golden handcuffs?

The principle applies in all industries. These people are priceless.