Rep. Larry Tidemann (R-Brookings), Sen. Bob Gray (R-Pierre), and the rest of the Legislative Research Council's Executive Board offer the following justifications for the bonus:
- South Dakota's losses still outperformed market indices.
- Clark is still managing solid long-term growth.
- Clark and other investment gurus in the State Investment Office could make much bigger salaries in the private sector.
As for salary, corporate pension managers can earn high six figures, maybe even break a million (I welcome all the investment managers who read the Madville Times to submit their salary figures!). This International Herald Tribune article that pegs the salaries of investment officers at the nonprofit Carnegie and Ford Foundations earning $712K and $986K, respectively, in 2006. Comparing apples to apples, CalPERS director Russell Read's 2007 base was $534K, with the possibility of a performance bonus of up to 75%. CalSTRS CIO Christopher Ailman's 2007 base was $300K, with possible 100% performance bonus. Massachusetts state pension exec Michael Travaglini earns $322K a year, plus a bonus this year of "just" $64K.
But on outperforming other indices, I'm not convinced. In the last fiscal year...
- The Charlotte Business Journal reports that the median public-pension loss was 4.51%. North Carolina's state pension fund beat that by losing only 2.07% of its value. NC's pension fund lost money on stocks but posted gains on bonds, real estate, and alternatives.
- Florida's pension fund managed to lose just 4.4%. (That same article notes that the domestic stock market lost 12.7%, while the foreign equity stock market lost 7.6%.)
- The California state employee retirement fund (CalPERS) lost 2.4%. The state teacher retirement fund (CalSTRS) lost 3.7%. San Francisco's city retirement fund lost 3.1%.
- In Pennsylvania, the Public School Employees Retirement System lost 2.8%, while the State Employees Retirement System lost 4.1%.
- The Massachusetts state pension fund only lost 1.8%.
- Wyoming's investment portfolio posted a 7.4% increase.
But bonuses for losing money don't appear to be justified, especially given the lower loss percentages posted by other states. Maybe Rep. Tidemann et al. should check their numbers again.
Is he the only one who didn't invest in oil futures and make a killing?
ReplyDeleteAgree. The bonus should have been zeroed out. The bonus is not for losing a little, it's for making a lot - especially in a tough market. It's foolish to reward losing investments - regardless of overall market conditions.
ReplyDeleteHeck of a message this sends to our young people, eh!
ReplyDeleteHere's a kid who wants to become an engineer who discovers an improved solar panel that revolutionizes the alternative energy industry.
The kid sees investment officers and corporate execs getting rich while presiding over failures.
The kid sees engineers, scientists and academics underpaid, frequently laid off, and routinely derided as "geeks" or "wonks."
She watches a lot of television commercials and sees a lot of beautiful stuff.
The kid decides that financial security and wealth are more important than the less tangible, less certain rewards that the career of her desires has to offer.
So she becomes an investment officer or corporate CEO.
The kid ages, evolving through the various stages of a phony life; but there are scores of antidepressant drugs to help her through it all. And with her salary, she can afford those drugs in unlimited amounts.
Then she dies.
That's Stan Gibilisco on vocals, covering David and David's "Welcome to the Boomtown"... ;-)
ReplyDelete