Should the CEO of a company posting billions in annual losses receive a 50 percent raise and a six-figure bonus?
And I’m not talking about the banks, or the crumbling auto companies. I’m talking about the U.S. Postal Service.
ABC News reported last night that the postmaster general, John Potter, received almost an $80,000 raise last year â€” his base salary is now $263,575Â â€” along with a $135,041 “incentive bonus.” This in a year when the Postal Service posted a $2.8 billion loss.Â Throw in retirement benefits and other perks, and his annual salary comes to more than $850,000.
I don’t have a position on Potter’s raise and “incentive bonus,” though I’d love to hear your opinions in the comments section.
Once again, though, we have an example of the Postal Service’s odd “hybrid” status â€” as something in between a private company and a government agency. Congress encourages the Postal Service to act more like a business; private CEOs tend to receive hefty bonuses. And Potter still earns much less than the CEOs of private shipping companies like FedEx and UPS.
But the ABC story has generated a lot of indignant comments about Potter’s salary. The public obviously doesn’t view the Postal Service like a private business.