This argument about pay has been discussed earlier this year.
It is a non-argument, irrefutable, if want to attack the board remuneration is the weakest argument of all.
Slater & Gordon Board and KMP remuneration is modest. To argue relative to performance is subjective. If consider pay should be equated to effort put in - which is how most of us would expect to be paid in our jobs - then there is a strong argument for the executive team to get a pay rise considering effort put in to right the ship. I'm not suggesting they should get a ride, just a hypothetical when subjectively equating remuneration to performance / effort.
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)