16.12.18, compensation 22, ghosn, CEO, company, japan, france, Renault, Nissan, Mitsubishi

 blog: madic50.blogspot.com / Book: The two forms, ed. Amazon
Paris, Wednesday, December 19th, 2018
For Mr Carlos GHOSN
Mr Ghosn,

I have the honor to join you in reflecting on some of the conclusions that could be drawn from your mishap that I hope you will leave as soon as possible.

I continue a reflection on the use of non-pecuniary compensation of the Public Treasury or the Corporate Treasury. cf. madic50.blogspot.com

Regarding the CEOs, I suggest that it would be worthwhile to consider the possibility of including a capital cost allowance, not costing the company's treasury, in the training of the executive income of your level.

You could thus devote yourself to your functions and meet the criteria of personal wealth that have become established in your circles for almost thirty years.

Such a brutal and indisputable defeat should be the occasion for reflection.

Thanking you for your attention, Please accept, Mr Ghosn, the assurance of my best regards,
Marc SALOMONE


blog: madic50.blogspot.com / Book: The two forms, ed. Amazon

Paris, Sunday, December 16, 2018 (Paris, Wednesday, December 19, 2018)

REFLECTION 1 ON THE COMPOSITION OF THE INCOME OF THE CEOS FOLLOWING THE INCARCERATION OF MR. GHOSN AND ON THE MOTIVATIONS THEREOF, AS THE MEDIA MAKES US UNDERSTOOD, AND ON THE LINKS OF THE REVENUES OF THE CEOS AND OF THE PUBLIC FRAMEWORK OFFICERS (Continuation of the reflection n ° 21 of December 5, 2018. cf: madic50)

As the media tell us about the arrest of Mr. Ghosn and on the sidelines of strategic developments in this case; the Florentine conspiracy that led this manager to prison recalls, once again, that in the large private groups the "footballer" equivalents are the shareholders and not the CEOs.

The latter are wage earners and the dominant economic ideology is that wages are first and foremost a cost that must be controlled; both in its number and in its composition.

This is why CEOs twirl the formulas of their pay composition to try to confuse them with capital income: fixed and variable salary, options and free or performance shares, severance pay, retirement plan, "hidden bonuses", and other possible elements.

Ultimately, they are reduced to the comparison of their incomes with those of the other employees of the company, of the wage-earners, and not with those of the capital.

Neither the unions nor the magistrates identified Mr Ghosn's gains to those of the shareholders.

It is typical that Mr. Ghosn's salary has suffered:

1- First a union criticism of the distortion of the comparative salary scale.

As an employee and whatever his responsibilities, his work is only one link in the chain and his income can not break it; under penalty of becoming "indecent", predators, fraudulent.

2- Then, the judicial criticism on the other hand on the underestimation of the declared amounts.

The employee must declare all of his income.

Unlike capital, it can not disqualify them, expatriate them, interpret them. They are a unique number.

This ambiguity in the status of the CEO is the basis of the joint intervention of the Japanese state and the Japanese leaders of the Renault-Nissan-Mitsubishi group to establish Japanese domination by ousting Mr. Ghosn from the ultimate strategic position occupied by a non-Japanese.

He is thanked as a servant after he restored Japanese companies in bankruptcy.

The facts show that Mr. Ghosn has not for one moment imagined that his Japanese alter ego would dare to use the ambiguities of the status of CEO to assign him to wage labor and would have the audacity to use the state and its legal formalism to criminalize his relationship to capital and so divest it of its power and seize it.

However, the evolution of economic clashes should have alerted him.

1- Japanese leaders are not the only ones to couple the local state and the capitalist offensive.

2- Americans are now constantly using it. Even when this alliance takes a mafia look.

Regardless of these strategic debates; what is in question is not the desire of the CEOs to acquire a financial squeeze comparable to that of the owners of capital.

Given the political importance of capital, shareholders, all leaders of large companies, especially those of global size, are faced with a question of personal representation between people of the same world.

Between leaders, they are no longer enough to be administratively powerful. They must be personally wealthy and able to exhibit their own property.

The mark of the power of CEOs is the opportunity to take advantage of the amenities offered by companies such as the use of their social goods.

Now, the union and judicial critics of Mr. Ghosn, his current prison situation, establish that this capacity does not answer the question that is not that of power but that of personal wealth.

Personal wealth is now a component of the power between leaders and it is not accessible from the salary function of corporate executives: even twisting in all directions.

Senior management of state administrations and those of the European community encounter a similar problem.

a- They solve it by the corruption and the preparation of the round-trips between the public and the private one (revamping and retropantouflage).
b) The penetration of private interests in public management, and even the subordination of the latter to the former, which results in the exclusivity of this way of personal enrichment, at the national or European level, has become a political fact both in France to the European Commission.

The Ghosn case indicates that these internal struggles of personal social prestige are now included in the strategic debates.

Will French executives have the capacity to think about it?

In other cases of entrepreneurial piracy, French executives have been able to share their idea of ​​a strategic trick committed by themselves. The French capital loses but in favor of an economic recomposition of which its executives remain stakeholder.

In this case, defeat is without appeal. There is a winner and a loser. Japan and its executives are winners. France and its executives are defeated.

This case highlights:

a- That there are conspiracy elements in the entrepreneurial debates and that they can become essential elements of these debates.

b- That these elements are notably part of the ambiguities of the formation of the incomes of senior executives.

Consideration of these issues would not change the policy debates.

Mr. Ghosn could not avoid confronting the strategic changes of the Japanese leaders of his company.

On the other hand, he could forbid anyone to attack his person, his integrity, his quality.

He would continue to act as a free man and President; instead of being detained and fallen.

Mr. Ghosn and other CEOs have posed the issue of matching their income with the integration of personal wealth into the criteria for recognizing a Chef's worth.

Their response, that of the capital enrichment of the CEOs, made the unity of the union and judicial criticism against it.

1- The enrichment of the CEO is a hindrance to the progress of the company by emptying his coffers, depriving him of legitimate income, breaking the salary homogeneity.

2- These personal financial processes fall under the charge of spoliation and fraud.

The same can be said for administrative leaders.

It would be useful to consider the possibility of compensatory compensation who would not be the treasurer of the public treasury or corporate treasury and which would ensure the capital status of senior executives without damaging their social commitment to private enterprise or public administration.

But, if one believes French private and public executives, prison, defeat and decay, are less risky and more comfortable solutions.

At the same time, public executives believe that a good, well-faceted riot is better than nasty compensation that allows the legal order to work.

It can be seen as a form of continuity.

Marc SALOMONE