Sturm, Ruger & Co's Top-Tier Executives Average Annual Pay and Employee Benefits Increase was a blistering 30.8% per year during the past ten years, which is the second highest of the eight large New Hampshire-related Companies I have addressed so far.
- Planet Fitness +40.7% per year for the pastfour years
- Sturm, Ruger & Co +30.8% per year for the past ten years
- Bottomline Technologies +29.1% per year for the past five years
- Unitil Corp +23.4% per year for the past five years
- PC Connection +17.9% per year for the past ten years
- Standex International +8.3% per year for the past five years
- White Mountain Insurance +8.1% per year for the past ten years
- Albany International +7.9% per year for the past five years
As you can see in the above table, New Hampshire non-executive workers really had the deck stacked against them versus what is going on with the sky-high annual percentage pay raises of their Company's Top-Tier Executives.
So which 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate could best help close this massive annual percentage pay raise gap between New Hampshire Top-Tier executives and their non-executives employees?
More than anything needed to solve this thorny problem is to possess exceptionally strong financial and data science skills, coupled with a keen understanding of how businesses operate.
More than anything needed to solve this thorny problem is to possess exceptionally strong financial and data science skills, coupled with a keen understanding of how businesses operate.
Well, that should rule out any Presidential candidate who worked for the US Government in the past ten years when these comparative pay raise results were so horrendous, not just in New Hampshire but also in all other US States.
That would rule out Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar.
That would rule out Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar.
Of the Top Five Democratic Presidential candidates, that would leave only Pete Buttigieg.
I think there is only one Democratic Presidential candidate who has the requisite financial acumen, data science skills and economic fairness to turn the tide around on this massive, continuing US income inequality expansion caused mainly by the massive gap in annual percentage pay raises between executive and non-executive employees ..... Pete Buttigieg.
And on the key issue of which Democratic candidate could best beat Donald Trump, there were two recent polls of Iowa citizens.
And on the key issue of which Democratic candidate could best beat Donald Trump, there were two recent polls of Iowa citizens.
A very recent Jan 20-23, 2020 NY Times/Siena College poll of Iowa general election voters in the 2020 US Presidential general election showed that despite the fact that Trump beat Hillary Clinton in Iowa by 9% in 2016, Iowa is clearly in play in 2020 if Pete Buttigieg is the candidate against Trump, with Trump winning by only 1% ..... Trump 45% to Pete's 44%. On the other hand, if the candidate is Bernie Sanders, Trump wins by 6% ..... Trump 48% to Bernie's 42%. And Pete Buttigieg even fares better against Trump than Joe Biden does in this key Iowa poll. Also in this poll, Trump beats both Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar by 5% and Trump also beats Michael Bloomberg by 8%.
And this above poll saying that Pete Buttigieg is the best candidate to beat Donald Trump was reinforced later in the actual 2020 Iowa Democratic Presidential primary with the Edison Media entrance poll of Iowa voter preferences. On the question "Would you rather nominate a candidate who can beat Donald Trump", the Iowa caucus voters chose as follows: Pete 24%, Biden 23%, Warren 16%, Klobuchar 16%, Sanders 15% and Other 6%.
So far in my research of large US Corps I have shown that their Top-Tier Executives have been rewarded continually with just enormous annual percentage increases in pay and employee benefits, mostly stock equity compensation, to the extent that the key issue to US citizens should be the huge and continuing Income Inequality Expansion which is at the core of many critical problems the US faces.
While increasing the US federal minimum wage will help here, this would be just a mere drop in the bucket as compared to the fact that the annual percentage increase in the pay and employee benefits of Company non-executive employees are minuscule in relation to that of Company executive employees and this has been going on for decades. When Corporate CEOs and CFOs primarily view non-executive employees as Costs rather than as People, this is what happens. And neither political party has had the courage to take on US Corps here.
But this huge pay inequality problem also exists widely in the non-profit sector including in non-profit hospitals. And it also exists widely in state and local governments, especially in public education.
So who is causing these extremely high Top-Tier Executives annual pay percentage increases, which tend to be much higher than the Companies' actual annual financial performance?
Then the CEO establishes the pay standards for the Top-Tier Executives, which is reviewed by the Company's Board of Directors.
And the CEO also usually approves the overall pay and employee benefits annual percentage increases for each of the other levels of the Company's employees.
So who is this huge, continuing Company pay and employee benefit income inequality "on"?
Clearly it's "on" the Company's CEO and the Company's Board of Directors.
It's simple math. The lower the annual percentage raise for the Company's non-executive employees, the higher the Company's annual profits and thus also the higher the annual percentage raise for the Company's executives since their annual pay raise is usually tied by formula to Company profits.
So far in my research of large US Corps I have shown that their Top-Tier Executives have been rewarded continually with just enormous annual percentage increases in pay and employee benefits, mostly stock equity compensation, to the extent that the key issue to US citizens should be the huge and continuing Income Inequality Expansion which is at the core of many critical problems the US faces.
While increasing the US federal minimum wage will help here, this would be just a mere drop in the bucket as compared to the fact that the annual percentage increase in the pay and employee benefits of Company non-executive employees are minuscule in relation to that of Company executive employees and this has been going on for decades. When Corporate CEOs and CFOs primarily view non-executive employees as Costs rather than as People, this is what happens. And neither political party has had the courage to take on US Corps here.
But this huge pay inequality problem also exists widely in the non-profit sector including in non-profit hospitals. And it also exists widely in state and local governments, especially in public education.
So who is causing these extremely high Top-Tier Executives annual pay percentage increases, which tend to be much higher than the Companies' actual annual financial performance?
And who is causing the annual minuscule raises for the company non-executive employees?
Generally it works like this.
The Company's Board of Directors set the pay standards for the total compensation of the CEO for each year.
The Company's Board of Directors set the pay standards for the total compensation of the CEO for each year.
And the CEO also usually approves the overall pay and employee benefits annual percentage increases for each of the other levels of the Company's employees.
So who is this huge, continuing Company pay and employee benefit income inequality "on"?
Clearly it's "on" the Company's CEO and the Company's Board of Directors.
It's simple math. The lower the annual percentage raise for the Company's non-executive employees, the higher the Company's annual profits and thus also the higher the annual percentage raise for the Company's executives since their annual pay raise is usually tied by formula to Company profits.
The end result is massive, continuing income inequality expansion.
And the only way it will be fixed is by using Pete-Buttigieg-type data science skills to wisely design US Government tax legislation which gives companies very nice tax incentives for paying non-executive employees very well in a given year and which also requires companies to pay a luxury tax when executives are paid clearly too much in a given year or when non-executive employees are clearly paid too little in a given year.
And the only way it will be fixed is by using Pete-Buttigieg-type data science skills to wisely design US Government tax legislation which gives companies very nice tax incentives for paying non-executive employees very well in a given year and which also requires companies to pay a luxury tax when executives are paid clearly too much in a given year or when non-executive employees are clearly paid too little in a given year.
Also, the US Government should require every Board of Directors of all US Companies and US Non-Profit Organizations to contain at least one worker representative.
In addition, it would be very helpful to dramatically increase the US Earned Income Tax Credit.
So, why hasn't it been fixed?
Because more than half of the US Congress, including surprisingly more than a few Democrats, are effectively controlled by the US Corps or because the US President is controlled by the US Corps who are vigorously fighting to be at the top of the list of US Corps continuing to expand income inequality.
So how do you solve that problem?
Vote for US Senators, US House members and a US President who aren't controlled by the US Corps which view their non-executive employees and contract workers as Costs rather than as People ..... they all don't, but a clear majority of them do.
Because more than half of the US Congress, including surprisingly more than a few Democrats, are effectively controlled by the US Corps or because the US President is controlled by the US Corps who are vigorously fighting to be at the top of the list of US Corps continuing to expand income inequality.
So how do you solve that problem?
Vote for US Senators, US House members and a US President who aren't controlled by the US Corps which view their non-executive employees and contract workers as Costs rather than as People ..... they all don't, but a clear majority of them do.
| Sturm, Ruger & Co Corp Owner | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | |||||
| (of the Newport, New Hampshire | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | |||||
| Ruger Firearms Production Facility) | 2018 | 2017 | 2017 | 2016 | 2016 | 2015 | 2015 | 2014 | 2014 | 2013 | |||||
| Top-Tier | Total | Total | Total | Total | Total | Total | Total | Total | Total | Total | |||||
| Executive | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | |||||
| $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | ||||||
| Killoy CEO | 2,119 | 1,721 | 1,721 | 2,538 | 2,538 | 1,308 | 1,308 | 1,104 | 1,104 | 1,149 | |||||
| Dineen CFO | 1,135 | 863 | 863 | 1,456 | 1,456 | 992 | 992 | 874 | 874 | 962 | |||||
| Sullivan | 1,136 | 865 | 865 | 1,457 | 1,457 | 991 | 991 | 836 | 836 | 964 | |||||
| Reid GC | 869 | 742 | 742 | 1,339 | |||||||||||
| Leska | 776 | 798 | 798 | 833 | 833 | 370 | |||||||||
| Fifer Former CEO | N/A | N/A | 4,268 | 2,508 | 2,508 | 1,983 | 1,983 | 2,505 | |||||||
| Lang Former Group VP | 836 | 1,600 | 1,600 | 995 | 995 | 835 | 835 | 1,087 | |||||||
| Totals | 6,035 | 4,989 | 5,825 | 9,223 | 12,152 | 7,164 | 6,794 | 5,632 | 5,632 | 6,667 | |||||
| Annual % Change vs Prior Year | 21.0% | -36.8% | 69.6% | 20.6% | -15.5% | ||||||||||
| 5 Year Average Per Year % Change | 11.8% | ||||||||||||||
| Sturm, Ruger & Co Corp Owner | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | FYE | |||||
| (of the Newport, New Hampshire | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | Dec | |||||
| Ruger Firearms Production Facility) | 2013 | 2012 | 2012 | 2011 | 2011 | 2010 | 2010 | 2009 | 2009 | 2008 | |||||
| Top-Tier | Total | Total | Total | Total | Total | Total | Total | Total | Total | Total | |||||
| Executive | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | Comp | |||||
| $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | $ 000s | ||||||
| Killoy CEO | 1,149 | 1,092 | 761 | 2,548 | 2,548 | 525 | 600 | 686 | 686 | 427 | |||||
| Dineen CFO | 962 | 927 | 651 | 1,465 | 1,465 | 528 | 601 | 658 | 658 | 410 | |||||
| Sullivan | 964 | 914 | 638 | 1,456 | 1,456 | 522 | 597 | 682 | 682 | 432 | |||||
| Fifer Former CEO | 2,505 | 4,573 | 3,752 | 4,133 | 4,133 | 1,096 | 1,292 | 1,530 | 1,530 | 955 | |||||
| Lang Former Group VP | 1,087 | 1,083 | 694 | 1,571 | 1,571 | 520 | 595 | 678 | N/A | N/A | |||||
| Maynard | 866 | 282 | |||||||||||||
| Totals | 6,667 | 8,589 | 6,496 | 11,173 | 11,173 | 3,191 | 3,685 | 4,234 | 4,422 | 2,506 | |||||
| Annual % Change vs Prior Year | -22.4% | -41.9% | 250.1% | -13.0% | 76.5% | ||||||||||
| 5 Year Average Per Year % Change | 49.9% | ||||||||||||||
| 10 Year Average Per Year % Change | 30.8% |
