Yeah good question, I dont know, I was assuming it was some severence payment as she was paid out when she left. Maybe someone following the company like
@KrushingIt can help you out ?
Dont know how your saying its nowhere near Jennifers. 350k excluding super, 140k short term cash incentive (actually well over Jennifers amount of short term incentives.) As I said the only saving in concrete is the 388, and then when you start looking at it, its been made up in other ways like the short term incentives.
Just out of curiousity why do you say " I have no issue with Jason Litten's rem." but then say Jennifer was the big problem, the only difference with Jennifer was the one off 693k payment (which I believe is severnce pay) otherwise Jason Litten is actually pulling out more from the company accounts than Jennifer was. So how come in your words Jennfer salary "Was one of the main reasons why she had to go, company simply could not afford to pay her. Salary was out of step with a company of this size." Yet Jason Litten who is taking out a BIGGER salary you have no issue with? Kind of odd. So why the double standard?
And yes I agree with you on Jennifers salary, it was too high a salary for a company of this size, however Im not discriminating with just her, I stay consistent, im holding it across the board for all execs, thats what I said about executive pay, and it being a red flag, apparently its only a problem for you if the higher pay is to a women? or after they leave the company ? When does it become an issue for you?
