What would have to happen in order to make it so that

[gateley]

stockholders decided how much the chairperson should receive in salary/stock?

BTW, I heard the other day that pre-Reagan, the Big Boys couldn't own stocks. The reasoning behind the change was that up to a certain point, the company's leaders salaries were tax-exempt (or got a break or something). Stock could be given and not counted as salary, thereby saving on taxes. So, the line was that if those running the companies OWNED the companies, they would have more incentive to see it prosper. The problem was that unlike years ago when George worked his way up from the mailroom and achieved CEO status after 30 years, businessmen were being hired on to make a profit which they would do, reap the benefits in the form of stock, then move on. Like everything else, their brilliant solution sucked.

Anyway, I think stockholders should have more of a say in executive compensation -- that $$$ should be going into their stock prices, not the CEO's pocket.