首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 领导力 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

美国处于新的镀金时代:工人被解雇,CEO和股东们却能获得数以亿计的利润

Chloe Berger
2024-11-03

CEO和股东们获取的利润份额,可能超出了任何人的想象。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

1938年7月14日,百万富翁、飞行员霍华德·休斯(中间)在完成环球旅行后,从纽约的炮台公园前往市政厅。图片来源:Getty Images

用现代的方式来看,“让他们吃蛋糕”这句话的意思就是,股东们不仅拥有整个蛋糕,还在吃掉它。董事会总是能超然物外,这并不意外,因为富有的董事会成员更有能力应对经济衰退的冲击。但事实证明,CEO和股东们获取的利润份额,可能超出了任何人的想象。

英国致力于消除贫困的非营利组织乐施会(Oxfam)的最新报告发现了这一结果。该报告分析了200多家美国公司,评估了它们的“不平等状况”。大多数财富都进入了高层的口袋,在报告分析的公司共计1.25万亿美元的利润中,有90%(1.1万亿美元)支付给了富有的股东。

高管们同样收入丰厚。自疫情爆发以来,CEO薪酬大幅增长,从2018年至2022年增长了31%。报告显示,“在疫情危机爆发以后,股东和CEO的薪酬屡创纪录。”

在谈到由于强大的公司游说力量而下降的公司税负时,乐施会美国的私营部门高级总监艾里特·塔米尔表示:“规则正在被操纵,而公司正在帮助操纵规则。”

科技界为什么会如此大规模裁员?

过去一年,随着许多CEO声称由于经济困境需要精简规模,金融、科技和传媒行业进行了裁员。但公司的业绩似乎比以往更出色。从2014年至2022年,《财富》美国500强公司的收入和利润大幅增长,而在疫情爆发之后的几年间增长幅度甚至更大。在马克·扎克伯格以“效率之年”的名义宣布裁员10,000多名员工的同时,Meta公司公布了400亿美元股份回购计划。不到一年后,Meta宣布计划再次回购500亿美元的股份。

虽然有些人似乎手头拮据,但对于身居高位的人而言,股份回购就像圣诞节一样:据乐施会统计,2022年股份回购金额达到创纪录的6,810亿美元。

权力在高层的集中持续了数十年。塔米尔表示,股东至上理念在上世纪70年代开始盛行。她还表示,当公司开始优先考虑股东群体的利益时,对工人的保障却随着工会会员减少而逐渐消失。上世纪80年代,曾经作为股票操纵的一种形式而被禁止的股份回购开始变得合法;塔米尔称,这种变化使公司能够抬高股价。与此同时,经过里根时期以及特朗普执政时期的一系列减税,公司税率大幅下降,而公司直接影响政治的能力越来越强,这一切在2010年“联合公民诉讼”的判决中达到顶峰。在这起案件中,美国最高法院允许公司和富人无限制地花钱用于选举。

塔米尔说道:“在这些事件的共同作用下形成的完美风暴,使公司的规模不断扩大,公司的权力增加,公司积累的利润却流向了少数人。”塔米尔还表示,作为利益相关者的员工“却在失去利益”。

哪些因素正在加剧财富和收入的不平等?

目前已经出现了一些变化的迹象。经过一个夏天的罢工和一些高调的工人胜利——比如美国汽车工人联合会(UAW)和最近的星巴克(Starbucks)工会,工会化正变得日益流行。

塔米尔表示:“有一些令人鼓舞的迹象,但如果我们不继续沿着这条路走下去,我们实际上已经进入了一个新的镀金时代。”这与美国总统乔·拜登关于加强公司监管的言论相呼应。

尽管员工的工资仍然相对停滞,或者只能勉强跟上通货膨胀的步伐,但CEO们却在给自己大幅加薪。根据乐施会对186家有具体数据的公司的分析,2022年的CEO总薪酬达到了41亿美元。在乐施会分析的公司中,只有5%的公司公开表示支持生活工资。大公司的工资差距继续扩大:例如,麦当劳(McDonald’s)的CEO与普通员工的薪酬差距为1,745比1。另一个典型的美国品牌可口可乐公司(Coca-Cola Company)的薪酬差距为1,594比1。

这种差距在零售业最为明显。根据乐施会的数据,零售工人通常是有色人种和女性,而这些公司的高层领导往往是白人男性。尽管许多公司表示他们正在努力实现多元、公平和包容(DEI)目标,但在具体数据方面,许多公司却交了白卷。

塔米尔表示:“他们说得天花乱坠,但在实际行动上,大多数公司并没有做任何至少对公众透明的事情。严格说来,所有这些事情都是合法的,但不幸的是,对我们其他人不利。”

塔米尔表示,从长远来看,即使是最富有的人也会受到影响。根据塔米尔的说法,从性别和种族的角度来看,Dollar Tree可能是最不公平的公司之一,该公司最近关闭了1,000家门店。

塔米尔解释称:“归根结底,这对商业不利,财富越集中,对经济越不利。”(财富中文网)

译者:刘进龙

审校:汪皓

用现代的方式来看,“让他们吃蛋糕”这句话的意思就是,股东们不仅拥有整个蛋糕,还在吃掉它。董事会总是能超然物外,这并不意外,因为富有的董事会成员更有能力应对经济衰退的冲击。但事实证明,CEO和股东们获取的利润份额,可能超出了任何人的想象。

英国致力于消除贫困的非营利组织乐施会(Oxfam)的最新报告发现了这一结果。该报告分析了200多家美国公司,评估了它们的“不平等状况”。大多数财富都进入了高层的口袋,在报告分析的公司共计1.25万亿美元的利润中,有90%(1.1万亿美元)支付给了富有的股东。

高管们同样收入丰厚。自疫情爆发以来,CEO薪酬大幅增长,从2018年至2022年增长了31%。报告显示,“在疫情危机爆发以后,股东和CEO的薪酬屡创纪录。”

在谈到由于强大的公司游说力量而下降的公司税负时,乐施会美国的私营部门高级总监艾里特·塔米尔表示:“规则正在被操纵,而公司正在帮助操纵规则。”

科技界为什么会如此大规模裁员?

过去一年,随着许多CEO声称由于经济困境需要精简规模,金融、科技和传媒行业进行了裁员。但公司的业绩似乎比以往更出色。从2014年至2022年,《财富》美国500强公司的收入和利润大幅增长,而在疫情爆发之后的几年间增长幅度甚至更大。在马克·扎克伯格以“效率之年”的名义宣布裁员10,000多名员工的同时,Meta公司公布了400亿美元股份回购计划。不到一年后,Meta宣布计划再次回购500亿美元的股份。

虽然有些人似乎手头拮据,但对于身居高位的人而言,股份回购就像圣诞节一样:据乐施会统计,2022年股份回购金额达到创纪录的6,810亿美元。

权力在高层的集中持续了数十年。塔米尔表示,股东至上理念在上世纪70年代开始盛行。她还表示,当公司开始优先考虑股东群体的利益时,对工人的保障却随着工会会员减少而逐渐消失。上世纪80年代,曾经作为股票操纵的一种形式而被禁止的股份回购开始变得合法;塔米尔称,这种变化使公司能够抬高股价。与此同时,经过里根时期以及特朗普执政时期的一系列减税,公司税率大幅下降,而公司直接影响政治的能力越来越强,这一切在2010年“联合公民诉讼”的判决中达到顶峰。在这起案件中,美国最高法院允许公司和富人无限制地花钱用于选举。

塔米尔说道:“在这些事件的共同作用下形成的完美风暴,使公司的规模不断扩大,公司的权力增加,公司积累的利润却流向了少数人。”塔米尔还表示,作为利益相关者的员工“却在失去利益”。

哪些因素正在加剧财富和收入的不平等?

目前已经出现了一些变化的迹象。经过一个夏天的罢工和一些高调的工人胜利——比如美国汽车工人联合会(UAW)和最近的星巴克(Starbucks)工会,工会化正变得日益流行。

塔米尔表示:“有一些令人鼓舞的迹象,但如果我们不继续沿着这条路走下去,我们实际上已经进入了一个新的镀金时代。”这与美国总统乔·拜登关于加强公司监管的言论相呼应。

尽管员工的工资仍然相对停滞,或者只能勉强跟上通货膨胀的步伐,但CEO们却在给自己大幅加薪。根据乐施会对186家有具体数据的公司的分析,2022年的CEO总薪酬达到了41亿美元。在乐施会分析的公司中,只有5%的公司公开表示支持生活工资。大公司的工资差距继续扩大:例如,麦当劳(McDonald’s)的CEO与普通员工的薪酬差距为1,745比1。另一个典型的美国品牌可口可乐公司(Coca-Cola Company)的薪酬差距为1,594比1。

这种差距在零售业最为明显。根据乐施会的数据,零售工人通常是有色人种和女性,而这些公司的高层领导往往是白人男性。尽管许多公司表示他们正在努力实现多元、公平和包容(DEI)目标,但在具体数据方面,许多公司却交了白卷。

塔米尔表示:“他们说得天花乱坠,但在实际行动上,大多数公司并没有做任何至少对公众透明的事情。严格说来,所有这些事情都是合法的,但不幸的是,对我们其他人不利。”

塔米尔表示,从长远来看,即使是最富有的人也会受到影响。根据塔米尔的说法,从性别和种族的角度来看,Dollar Tree可能是最不公平的公司之一,该公司最近关闭了1,000家门店。

塔米尔解释称:“归根结底,这对商业不利,财富越集中,对经济越不利。”(财富中文网)

译者:刘进龙

审校:汪皓

Taking a modern-century spin on “Let them eat cake,” shareholders are having the whole cake, and eating it too. It’s no shock the boardroom is able to stay above the fray as wealthy members are more equipped to weather economic downturns. But it turns out CEOs and shareholders are walking away with an even greater slice of profits than one might think.

So finds a new report from Oxfam, a British nonprofit focused on eradicating poverty, which analyzed more than 200 U.S. corporations to assess their “inequality footprint.” Most money ends up funneling into the mouths of those at the top, as 90% (or $1.1 trillion) of the combined $1.25 trillion in net profits for those companies analyzed went to paying wealthy shareholders.

Executives are doing quite all right as well. CEO pay has ballooned since the pandemic hit, increasing by 31% from 2018 to 2022. “Shareholders and CEO pay have risen to record levels in the aftermath of the COVID-19 crisis,” according to the report.

“The rules are being rigged and the companies are helping to rig them,” Irit Tamir, senior director of Oxfam America’s private sector department, tells Fortune, speaking of company taxation that has gone down due to a strong corporate-lobbying presence.

Why have there been so many tech layoffs?

This past year has been marked by layoffs in the finance, tech, and media sectors as many CEOs claim to need to downsize in light of economic strain. But it seems as if corporations are doing better than ever. Revenue and profits at Fortune 500 companies grew significantly between 2014 and 2022, hiking even more in the years after the pandemic hit. In the same breath that Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg announced layoffs for more than 10,000 workers in the name of a “year of efficiency,” the company announced a fresh $40 billion stock-buyback option. Less than a year later, Meta announced plans to buy back another $50 billion.

While money was seemingly tight for some, it was an equivalent of Christmas for those at the top: Stock buybacks in 2022 hit a record of $681 billion, per Oxfam.

The consolidation of power at the top has been a decades-long process. The concept of shareholder primacy started to take hold in the 1970s, per Tamir, who added that while companies started to prioritize this group, safeguards for workers were fading as union membership ebbed. In the 1980s, stock buybacks, once banned as a form of stock manipulation, became legal; Tamir says this change, specifically, allowed companies to inflate their stock prices. At the same time, corporate tax rates fell dramatically thanks to a series of tax cuts, first in the Reagan era and again during the Trump administration, while corporations gained more and more ability to directly influence politics, capped off with the 2010 Citizens United decision, in which the Supreme Court gave companies and wealthy individuals carte blanche to spend unlimited amounts of money on elections.

“All of those things together have created sort of this perfect storm by which companies have gotten bigger, corporate power is on the rise, and the benefits that they’ve accrued in profit they are funneling to a smaller number of people,” Tamir says, adding that the other stakeholders—the workers—“are losing out.”

What is causing growing wealth and income inequality?

There are some signs of change. Unionization is growing in popularity after a summer of strikes and some high-profile wins on behalf of workers—like the UAW and, recently, the Starbucks union.

“There are some promising signs, but if we don’t continue down that path, we are already essentially in a new Gilded Age,” says Tamir, echoing President Joe Biden’s rhetoric on checking corporations more.

While wages remain fairly stagnant, or barely high enough to compete with the pace of inflation, CEOs have given themselves a hefty raise. CEOs were paid a combined $4.1 billion in 2022, per Oxfam’s analysis of the 186 companies that had hard data. Only 5% of the companies examined publicly said they support a living wage. The wage gap continues to widen among larger companies: McDonald’s, for instance, has a CEO-to-worker pay gap of 1,745 to one. Another prototypical American brand, the Coca-Cola Company, has a pay gap of 1,594 to one.

The divide is most apparent in the retail sector. Retail workers are often people of color and women, though the top leaders at these companies are often white men, according to Oxfam. While many companies said they were looking to make DEI targets, many came up empty-handed when it came to hard data.

“They are talking a good game, but when it comes to actually doing something about it, most are not doing anything that is at least transparent to the public,” Tamir says. “All of these things are technically legal and unfortunately to the detriment of the rest of us.”

Tamir says in the long term, even the most wealthy will suffer. Dollar Tree might be the least equitable of the companies from a gender and racial perspective, according to Tamir, and the company recently shut down 1,000 of its stores.

“At the end of the day, this is bad for business,” Tamir explains. “Having wealth in the hands of fewer and fewer people is not good for an economy.”

财富中文网所刊载内容之知识产权为财富媒体知识产权有限公司及/或相关权利人专属所有或持有。未经许可,禁止进行转载、摘编、复制及建立镜像等任何使用。
0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开