I support the PM’s general thrust, in that excessive pay is morally unjustifiable. But it’s a matter for shareholders and remuneration committees – they should be encouraged to be more strident.
Nick Schulkins, Winchester
Executive pay at many multiples of the rank-and-file pay levels places an imbalance in the overall wage bill, and unjustly impoverishes those in the ranks.
John Downes, Wirral
The crazy numbers now being paid are completely unjustified. In the charities sector, chief executive salaries are generally capped at five times the median salary in the charity concerned. This principle should apply across industry.
William Richardson, Haddenham, Bucks
The ‘brain drain’ argument doesn’t hold up for me. If others want to move abroad for 600 times the salary, then let them – other capable people will fill their shoes.
Paul Bennell, Dorset
However unpopular it might be, the best person for the job will be expensive. The interests of employees and the company must come first.
Mike Ward, Foxton, Leicestershire
It would be nice to have a model like John Lewis, where the managing director can get only 60 times the lowest-paid worker. However, when you are competing internationally, this may not be enough.
Martin Roberts-Jones, Eastleigh, Hants
If the board or shareholders consider the person to be worth it then there should be no limit. If a chief executive can increase profits by £1 billion, why not give them a £30 million share?
John Ovenden, Barton under Needwood
Executive pay in all listed companies should be limited to a factor of the
average remuneration of all employees. Shareholder votes on remuneration should be binding.
AW, Surrey
There should be a maximum set at a multiplying factor of the hourly-paid rate. All salaries should be published.
Ray Sisson, Doncaster
It depends on the performance of the individual. Rewards should not be just given, but earned.
Tony Bielowiecki, Essex
Trying to limit executives’ pay is a dead end – it won’t work. Just look at footballers (pampered pooches with no managerial responsibilities). However, giving shareholders more power would be good, especially investors such as pension funds that could wield big sticks.
David Odling, Altrincham, Cheshire
No, there should be no limits and, as at present, directors must justify decisions to their shareholders. Excessive awards have already been voted down. The government should stay out of meddling and encourage shareholders to exercise their voting rights.
John Thorogood, Aberdeenshire
The firm should pay what it thinks the executive is worth, balanced against what it can afford.
Robert Newton, Whitley Bay, Tyne & Wear
Can any company chief executive or executive be worth a salary greater than that awarded to the Prime Minister?
Steve Hodgkinson, Egham, Surrey
Executive pay is justifiable when it is performance-based. However, the metrics that are applied are often short-termist, which doesn’t encourage executives to plan for long-term success of the business.
Rob English, Camberley, Surrey
I think there needs to be a sensible approach. Too great a difference can be demoralising; too small and nobody wants to take on additional responsibility.
James Turner, Surrey
How much people are paid seems to bear little relationship to their ‘worth’ to society. Nurses and carers are among the most poorly paid. Whether executives’ pay is defensible I am not sure; the pay differences between people at the top and bottom of organisations definitely is not.
Jeff Bulled, Lidlington, Bedfordshire
There has to be a way that shareholders can stop executives awarding themselves pay and bonuses that don’t match company performance.
Terry Kelly, Bolton
It would be better if they sort their own house out first and have public input into what MPs get paid and can claim for. That applies to the devolved governments, too.
Ian Hughes, Aberfeldy, Perth & Kinross