SAA vs. EAA

Scott wrote in message ...
All who complain about Tom's wages, it sounds like jealousy. What does
the CEO of Halliburton or Enron make? I BET it's more than $188K.

It is pure foolishness to reason that Tom should get highly reimbursed
because he maintains the title "CEO." If you're such a fan of giving
Tom ~$400k a year, please donate ~$300k a year to the EAA.

What would happen to the EAA and its interests if the organization
decided to cap the total annual package at say $200,000, or $100,000?
Would EAA interests be less-well served? What is your evidence to
suggest that these interests would suffer?

Scott wrote...

Dave, I'm not trying to pick a fight, but what kind of informed decision
are you having to make?

Whether to send my money to the EAA or elsewhere.
Whether I think they use the money I've sent wisely.

Are you deciding what organizations to belong to based on
CEO salary rather than what the organization itself stands
for and the services they provide to the members?

Who said anything about the "rather than" part? Don't
read more into my question than I put there.

Dave 'strawman' Hyde

I'm not saying the interests would suffer. The Board of Directors set
the pay for Tom. If you are unhappy with what they offer him, show up
at the annual member's meeting and cast your vote. If you send in your
proxy, you are allowing someone else to vote on your behalf. Would you
head EAA for $100K per year? Would you head it for $300K? Can you say
yes? I thought you could.

Scott


Mike wrote:
Scott wrote in message ...

All who complain about Tom's wages, it sounds like jealousy. What does
the CEO of Halliburton or Enron make? I BET it's more than $188K.


It is pure foolishness to reason that Tom should get highly reimbursed
because he maintains the title "CEO." If you're such a fan of giving
Tom ~$400k a year, please donate ~$300k a year to the EAA.

What would happen to the EAA and its interests if the organization
decided to cap the total annual package at say $200,000, or $100,000?
Would EAA interests be less-well served? What is your evidence to
suggest that these interests would suffer?

Dave,
All you offered was "making an informed decision" based on salary. I
took it that you were implying that you would decide on EAA or some
other organization, presumably SAA, based on salary of the CEO since
that was all that has been mentioned in this thread. Job duties of said
CEO has yet to be mentioned in this thread. I defy anyone to say they
would turn down Tom's job based solely on its associated salary +
benefits if offered to them...

Scott


Dave Hyde wrote:

Scott wrote...


Dave, I'm not trying to pick a fight, but what kind of informed decision
are you having to make?


Whether to send my money to the EAA or elsewhere.
Whether I think they use the money I've sent wisely.


Are you deciding what organizations to belong to based on
CEO salary rather than what the organization itself stands
for and the services they provide to the members?


Who said anything about the "rather than" part? Don't
read more into my question than I put there.

Dave 'strawman' Hyde

I wouldn't even consider it. Too damn cold, way too much cheese. I mean, who
in their right mind would call a salad piled high with cheddar "health
food"?

"Scott" wrote in message
...
Dave,
All you offered was "making an informed decision" based on salary. I took
it that you were implying that you would decide on EAA or some other
organization, presumably SAA, based on salary of the CEO since that was
all that has been mentioned in this thread. Job duties of said CEO has
yet to be mentioned in this thread. I defy anyone to say they would turn
down Tom's job based solely on its associated salary + benefits if offered
to them...

Scott


Dave Hyde wrote:

Scott wrote...


Dave, I'm not trying to pick a fight, but what kind of informed decision
are you having to make?


Whether to send my money to the EAA or elsewhere.
Whether I think they use the money I've sent wisely.


Are you deciding what organizations to belong to based on
CEO salary rather than what the organization itself stands
for and the services they provide to the members?


Who said anything about the "rather than" part? Don't
read more into my question than I put there.

Dave 'strawman' Hyde

Scott...

I took it that you were implying that you would decide on EAA or some
other organization, presumably SAA, based on salary of the CEO since
that was all that has been mentioned in this thread.

You read *way* too much into my question.

Dave 'one-liner' Hyde

Scott...

If you are unhappy with what they offer him, show up
at the annual member's meeting and cast your vote.

Or look for another alternative. There's nothing
that requires continued support of an organization if
you disagree with the direction they've taken.

Dave 'break right' Hyde

"Scott" wrote in message

If you are unhappy with what they offer him, show up at the annual
member's meeting and cast your vote.

This has little effect when the Board of Directors has set up the voting
procedure to reap all the apathetic votes. We all know it. Don't try a snow
job.

Rich "I don't care, wins again" S.

Scott wrote:

I'm not saying the interests would suffer. The Board of Directors set
the pay for Tom. If you are unhappy with what they offer him, show up
at the annual member's meeting and cast your vote. If you send in your
proxy, you are allowing someone else to vote on your behalf. Would you
head EAA for $100K per year? Would you head it for $300K? Can you say
yes? I thought you could.

BOD elections are heavily stacked in favor of the incumbents. It is
very hard to get your name on the ballot as the nominating committee is
comprised of, you guessed it, existing board members typically.


Matt

Dave Hyde wrote:

Scott...


If you are unhappy with what they offer him, show up
at the annual member's meeting and cast your vote.


Or look for another alternative. There's nothing
that requires continued support of an organization if
you disagree with the direction they've taken.

Yep, that's what I did. I dropped my EAA membership years ago...
Haven't missed it.


Matt