That's what a reader asked today. For those currently employed at Corporate, I think the answer is: yes, based on the annual proxy report to shareholders, filed earlier this month. I don't see anything about medical coverage in the footnotes for the executive compensation table.But I can tell you this: Retired CEO Doug McCorkindale doesn't pay a dime for his health insurance. I discovered that nugget of information while wandering through last year's proxy report to shareholders, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. It reveals a boatload of lovely post-retirement benefits for McCorkindale -- the guy who did such a bang-up job as CEO for five years, ending in July 2005, when Craig Dubow took over what turned out to be a sinking ship.
So, next time your health insurance premium jumps, take comfort in the fact that McCorky's been getting these well-deserved bennies, the document says, since he retired as chairman, in June 2006. The company is paying for all of this:
- Health insurance for him and his spouse at no cost. For McCorkindale, this includes a Medicare supplement, and reimbursement for the cost of Medicare Part B coverage.
- Travel accident insurance. Estimated annual cost: $81,390.
- Legal and financial counseling services. Estimated annual cost: $25,000. (This is one of my all-time favorite piggy executive perqs: Attorneys and financial advisers to help McCorky guard his wealth and minimize income taxes. Wouldn't TurboTax be a lot cheaper?)
- $150,000, in annual $50,000 installments, to buy life insurance "or other benefits of Mr. McCorkindale's choosing, whether otherwise offered by the company or not." ("Other benefits'' is conveniently vague enough to cover, say, a wine cellar.)
- Home security system allowance.
- Country club membership fees. (Of course!)
- Computer and other home office equipment. (McCorky knows how to type?)
- An automobile. (BTW: Did he ever turn over his reserved-for-the-CEO parking spot to Dubow?)
- Use of company aircraft "at times not inconveniencing the company," the cost of which will be reimbursed by McCorkindale at Gannett's then-incremental hourly rate. (Flying with the the great unwashed, even in First Class, is so unpleasant!)
- Access to company offices, facilities and services -- including the use of an office and executive assistant.
What's all this cost Gannett? An estimated $155,888 a year. That, of course, is on top of the $150,000 the company pays McCorky annually for five years under a consulting contract, "to enable the company to benefit from his many years of experience,'' the report says. Plus, it's on top of the $1.25 million going-away bonus the board awarded him for being such an all-around swell guy.
As Dubow told shareholders about last year's performance: "We maintained our usual fiscal discipline throughout the year.''
When I grow up, I want to be a former CEO.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteWho cares if the top executives pay for their own insurance or not.. They have different benefits and responsibilities compared to regular corporate employees. Again, they have 'different responsibilities.' They deserve to have better benefits than us.
ReplyDeleteI have a suggestion for you, Jim. Why don't you do investigative blogging on government sectors? That's where our money is REALLY being wasted. Some government employees pay their rent with our taxes, claiming that their main residence is far away from work. Many government employees go on vacation with our tax dollars, justifying them to be business travels. They purchase extra software, extra Treos that they don't even know how to use, so that they could get more money the following year. They go to work to kill time. Sleep all day at work, or watch TV. And spend extra money, again, our tax $$, to hire contractors to do their work. Your time spent on bringing out those issues will be more appreciated, I bet. It looks like Gannett is just struggling to do things better. They need an encouraging pat on the back right now, which your blog doesn't do very much.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 7:58 a.m., you said, "Who cares if the top executives pay for their own insurance or not.. They have different benefits and responsibilities compared to regular corporate employees. Again, they have 'different responsibilities.' They deserve to have better benefits than us."
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly are those "different responsibilities?" If you're going to say fiscal discipline, increases in revenues, gains for shareholders, then they have failed, and they don't even deserve to have jobs, much less, the enormous puffed up benefits they receive. Why are they so deserving, as you state? Why are they different from "regular corporate employees," or even the press workers, the writers, the ad reps? Please provide the facts.
Why are these Gannett execs different? What have they done to prove their worth?
I completely agree! Investigate government employees and all of our money being wasted there. That's the real problem! I don't really care if executives pay for their insurance or not. Like mentioned above - they have completely different responsibilities and benefits. Let's stop pretending we know what it's like to run the company.
ReplyDeleteHey 7:58, if you’d like to complain about Government, find a new blog. Better yet, start one since you appear to be so informed.
ReplyDeleteYour right, Gannett is struggling, but I think you miss the point. Employees have a hard time being repeatedly told to do more with less and less all the while watching the top behave much in the same way they always have. One of my favorites: a publisher who cut a department’s staff, yet still expected them to support her personal needs, including continuing to deliver groceries from Kroger to her home.
Sure, top execs deserve some perks, but they’d be respected more and send a better message to all if they “tightened” their acceptance of them too – especially since they can afford too. And, if they don’t have the character to do that, then they at least should be more discrete.
anon 7:58 post is an obvious troll post. I guess it's fun to get try to get the rabble roused. Not very hard for most of the people that post these days.
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering which one of the Gannett Elite 7:58 is. The only people who could defend such a club are the members themselves - they are the privileged aristocracy, oblivious to the problems at large so long as they are comfortable in their own worlds.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeletewhat's with all the deleted comments, Jim?
ReplyDeleteNow and then, some of the comments about management cross the line into unnecessarily personal attacks.
ReplyDeleteWhy let them through in the first place?
ReplyDeleteAnon@12:01 p.m.: I screwed up.
ReplyDeleteKeep it going, Jim. You give us hope that bringing this management fiasco to light may make a difference. Thanks again for your hard work.
ReplyDeleteAll hogwash...how about McCorky sending some money to Cherry Hill for toilet paper. And then get a consulting fee for his service.
ReplyDeleteWhat would his advice be anyway? How to cut expenses? Or what papers to sell first?
Gannett and the USA going down the drain...survey says
In regard to the comment "...cut a department’s staff, yet still expected them to support her personal needs, including continuing to deliver groceries from Kroger to her home" it's so wrong in the climate that this business is in that I can't find words to express myself. Are they (Gannett excutives)so far removed from the reality of work that they can't see this? Hope they're keeping track of the time spent on personal needs so they can apply the value of that time to that executive's non-cash compensation for tax purposes.
ReplyDeleteAnd let's not overlook the fiscal discipline of maintaining a fleet of aircraft with a value of about $50 million. That does not include the operation and maintenance costs. Outrageous behavior that we can no longer afford.
ReplyDelete