According to
The Wall Street Journal, some corporate leaders believe 'tis better to give back than receive during tough times.
More chief executives are spurning bonuses earned for fiscal 2007. Their voluntary cutbacks, most common among financial companies affected by the mortgage meltdown, don't always assuage demoralized staffers and unhappy investors. And they can stoke anger about other executive-pay practices.
The heads of at least eight major U.S. companies -- ranging from Bear Stearns Cos. to Zions Bancorp -turned down last year's bonus, while a ninth requested a shrunken one, a study of recent regulatory disclosures shows. "Those numbers are likely to increase as more proxy statements appear," says Alexander Cwirko-Godycki, research manager at Equilar Inc., which did the study for The Wall Street Journal. By contrast, only four CEOs of the 1,000 biggest businesses curbed their fiscal 2006 bonuses, Equilar found.
It isn't unusual for bosses to slash their rewards when business sours. But a sacrifice by otherwise well-paid chiefs rarely impresses the rank and file, says Edward Lawler, director of the Center for Effective Organizations at the University of Southern California. In some cases, it "lowers the credibility of the CEO," he says. Corporate leaders are more likely to win favor when they insist their bonuses be shared with troops, as at least two did last year.
First American Corp. CEO Parker S. Kennedy requested that his bonus be made available for other workers, the Santa Ana, Calif., business-information provider said in a Feb. 29 filing. The foregone bonus, which was added to the bonus pool for eligible employees, exceeded $800,000, a spokeswoman estimates...
