Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > News > Mac News > Ahrendts' high pay in part to compensate for lost Burberry stock

Ahrendts' high pay in part to compensate for lost Burberry stock
Thread Tools
NewsPoster
MacNN Staff
Join Date: Jul 2012
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 12:25 PM
 
The extremely high compensation package given to Apple's new retail head -- Angela Ahrendts -- was in large part to pay for the stock she abandoned with her early departure from Burberry, Apple explains in its SEC filings. In total, she received $73.4 million last year, beating out any other executive at the company. Since May, she has accumulated roughly $70 million in Reserved Stock Units (RSUs); of this, $37 million was specifically addressed toward the lost Burberry stock, though most of the Reserved Stock Units (RSUs) are not presently sellable, and are contingent on continued employment.

The remaining $33 million in RSUs were granted to her as a new hire. 40 percent of it is performance-based though, and the rest of the stocks will vest over the course of three years. The RSUs are valued based on the worth of the stock at present; their value may go up, or down, by the time Ahrendts is granted them. Like Cook and other executives, she forfeits the stock if she is fired or leaves the company before they vest.

Beyond company shares, Ahrendts received a $500,000 cash bonus, and $457,615 in relocation expenses. Her annual salary is $411,538 plus bonuses, which is more comparable with other Apple executives. Another unusual award, however, is a severance agreement that would pay her a lump sum equivalent to her salary for the remainder of the three-year window.

Ahrendts was once the CEO of Burberry, a leading UK fashion retailer, and is often credited with turning the company around financially. Her hiring by Apple is believed to have been not just for her retail competency, but her expertise in fashion, since the company is venturing into that field for the first time with the Apple Watch.
( Last edited by NewsPoster; Jan 24, 2015 at 12:26 AM. )
     
mac_in_tosh
Forum Regular
Join Date: Dec 2011
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 12:33 PM
 
but don't pay store employees for the time they have to stand in line for inspection when they leave work.
     
DiabloConQueso
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 01:12 PM
 
Which is in perfect compliance with the law(s).

That's not passing judgement on the activity as being either good or bad, just stating that they're well within the bounds of the law to not pay employees for that time, and that almost all the time (barring a handful of outlier cases), the amount of time spent waiting in security check lines is minimal and insignificant.
     
azrich
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Prescott, AZ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 01:36 PM
 
Sure it complies with the laws. That doesn't mean it isn't crappy. 15 minutes to an hour each day out of my life for a requirement by an employer that isn't compensated adds up.

Back to Ahrendts- Holy crap that's a lot of money. She had better earn it. This shows Apple feels their retail stores are very important!
     
DiabloConQueso
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 01:51 PM
 
Where did the figure of 15 minutes to an hour each day come from? Is that really what happens, or is 15 minutes to an hour one of the handful of outlier cases?

Yeah, I'd throw a stink if it took an hour each day, but I cannot believe without supporting evidence that that's actually the amount of time most Apple employees are subjected to each and every day they go to work.

As an aside, the reason it's currently legal is because it falls into the same category as travel time to and from work, which you're not compensated for, either -- even though you can skew it to say that travel time to and from work is "job related" and that it's time taken out of your day necessary to perform your job duties.

Some people like to think that you should start getting paid the moment you set foot on company property, which I think is ridiculous. Should the clock start as soon as I park my car in the parking lot? Should it start the minute I walk into the lobby of a gigantic building? Should it start the minute I get in the elevator for the two minute ride up to the 50th floor where my office is located?

I think the clock should start when I start working and end when I end working. There's buffer time on either end of that time period to allow for driving to and from work, walking to my work, navigating the building to get to the office, and any pertinent security checkpoints along the way. Call me crazy.
     
azrich
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Prescott, AZ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 02:16 PM
 
Actually, I think an employee should be paid from the minute they are required to be there (assuming you ARE there) to the time when they are free to leave. Waiting in line for security isn't free to leave. I (personally) don't buy the commute argument as an employer is mandating this commute! An employer mandated inspection is still 'work' and not a 'commute' in my book.

People like me own businesses, have had employees and have been employees. Easy does it with the 'people like you' labeling, you're polarizing things.

The 15 minutes to an hour comment comes from my recollection of what the complaint was all about. Here's ZDNet's article, says daily 10-15 minutes on average.

Also, if 5, 15 or whatever minutes isn't a big deal, than pay for it. Oh, so it's not a big deal to the EMPLOYEE, but it is a big deal to the EMPLOYER? Leave 5 minutes early out of your 8 hour day to go through security. It's not a commute. Since when does an employer demand your route when you commute?

That's my opinion.
     
chucker
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 02:43 PM
 
I agree with azrich - the more money Apple makes, the more miserly it seems to become

but yet there is always ridiculous amounts of money for a chosen few
     
DiabloConQueso
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jun 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 03:32 PM
 
"People like you?" I don't recall ever typing that, unless you're referring to my comment that some people like to think that every moment you spend on company soil should be paid for, and even then, the comment wasn't directed at anyone in particular.

Here's a similar question: for those companies that have "employee-only" parking lots with a security guard and/or gate, should waiting in line for a reasonable amount of time to get into or leave the parking lot through the security gates be a part of the employee's wages? Or should the employee be responsible for planning accordingly, much like with traffic?

And what would be considered a "reasonable amount of time?"
     
azrich
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Prescott, AZ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 07:02 PM
 
I believe I did read that as people like you vs some people who... well they rhyme... My bad.

Chances are employees would have a choice to use that lot, some might not even drive. Are they searching the cars on the way out? A fenced lot would be seen as a benefit to employees which might save parking fees elsewhere. No matter how you look at it, it's not the same.

A better argument would be - the employer requires you to wear a uniform 100% time at work. You don't get paid to put it on or take it off. Even that isn't the same.

In the Apple example there is no option to not wait to be searched. If it typically takes 10-15 minutes then that should be the last 10-15 minutes of a shift. Clock out on the other side of the security line.

Sorry, but you'll never convince me that it is part of a commute. Not that it matters as my opinion doesn't affect anyone but me!
     
azrich
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Prescott, AZ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 07:45 PM
 
How do you all get spaces between paragraphs.. they disappear when I do it!
     
azrich
Forum Regular
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Prescott, AZ
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 07:46 PM
 
Arg, NOW they show up.
     
TheGreatButcher
Senior User
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Sydney, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 10:52 PM
 
$457k in relocation expenses? Was she moving from the moon?
     
Charles Martin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Maitland, FL
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2015, 11:35 PM
 
I think it was pretty canny of Apple, this time round, to wait until she'd been there over a year before rushing in with the bonuses and such. Smarter move than last time, that's for sure. Apple's board must feel she's earning her keep, and she certainly hasn't made any of the sorts of missteps her predecessor was so fond of making ...

Her salary is well in line with other Apple execs, so I think of this year's awards (some of which might be in the form of stock **options** rather than RSUs -- media reports often confuse the two but the former are never accurately valued, as you can only go by what they may be worth today) are just an outlier. Depending on how the company does, she'll earn a lot next year as well -- but probably not nearly so much.
Charles Martin
MacNN Editor
     
Feathers
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: South Pole
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 30, 2015, 12:49 PM
 
I'm impressed that Charles Martin has highlighted the matter of her predecessor. For those in the U.S.A. not familiar with the company that he left, the Currys-Dixons-PCWorld group had(has) a truly appalling retail reputation, particularly in the area of after-sales customer service. His appointment to Apple retail was met with the sound of jaws clanging to the floor on this side of the Atlantic. To say that it was a mis-step on Apple's part is an understatement, and an important lesson that Apple doesn't always get things right, or rather, frequently gets things wrong, but its crisis management is far better than that at other companies.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:03 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,