Open Thread: Does JPMorgan CEO Dimon deserve $23 million?
Jamie Dimon is the chief executive officer of JPMorgan Chase.
May 15th, 2012
10:03 AM ET

Open Thread: Does JPMorgan CEO Dimon deserve $23 million?

Jamie Dimon, the CEO of the nation's largest bank, JPMorgan, went before before shareholders at the company's annual meeting Tuesday and had his $23 million pay package approved, CNNMoney.com reports.

The meeting came  just days after the bank disclosed a $2 billion trading loss, an event that led to the departure of its chief investment officer and forced its CEO to apologize for what he called "a terrible mistake."

Dimon, who also serves as the bank's chairman, faced shareholders who have seen the company's stock decline by more than 14% over the previous five trading sessions.

In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, shareholders have looked upon the nation's largest banks with increased scrutiny, and have often used shareholder meetings to push an agenda of reform.

Read about how JPMorgan made its multi-billion dollar blunder, and how Dimon gets $23 million for 2011 and bragging rights and then let us know in the comments section how you feel about the CEO's $23 million compensation package.

Do you think Dimon should get that kind of compensation? Does he deserve the pay considering how much his company profits or does a message need to be sent to major bank executives? Let us know below and we may feature your comments on CNN.com

Post by:
Filed under: Business • Economy • Finance
soundoff (871 Responses)
  1. Jamie Dimon

    Absolutely!

    May 15, 2012 at 1:21 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Charlie

    If he was only paid $400,000 a year we would up with incompetent CEOs Like Bush and Obama running these companies.

    May 15, 2012 at 1:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Really?

      It is fair pay for what they have to deal with. To compare this to a 50,000 a year job is lunacy. The folks that moan about this would not last until lunch time in environments like these. Get over it. So it takes you two lifetimes to earn what he does in six months. You are not doing a tough job.

      May 15, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mary Carter

      Well, you do have a point there, however, I can't think of anyone who is worth that kind of salary. How are we ever going to get the economy going and job creation if all of the available money goes to management? Why do you think they send jobs all over the world? They don't want to pay Americans a decent living wage. Therefore no jobs and inferior quality merchandise while CEO's live the life of royalty and the companies go to heck.

      May 15, 2012 at 1:34 pm | Report abuse |
  3. TPar

    No one deserves this kind of pay. The company/banks money is made off of the workers, investors, account holders and in this case, the tax payers too. Workers, investors, account holders are not given the value they deserve when those at the top get a disproportionate share. The other big money waster in this country is politicians. We could do with 100 representatives and 1 senator for each state. 150 politicians that earn over $200,000 a year know as much about what I need and want as 450 do. This would also lower costs for their huge and expensive staffs.

    May 15, 2012 at 1:22 pm | Report abuse |
  4. PraiseTheLard

    Capitalism at its finest... Perhaps the Peter Principle should be renamed the Jamie Principle...

    May 15, 2012 at 1:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • werthrough

      No GREED at it's finest! There is nothing wrong with being a capitalist as long as greed doesn't take over.

      May 15, 2012 at 1:29 pm | Report abuse |
  5. Ken

    Problem is that while JPMorgan can take a $2B hit on their books other banks that can take the same risky gambles can not take that size hit and we will be bailing them out again or spiraling into another downturn.

    May 15, 2012 at 1:22 pm | Report abuse |
  6. Tank

    This quarter- $2 bil trade loss. After tax PROFIT for this quarter in which they take the loss- better than $4 bil. The company did not LOSE money. As usual the report is missing some key information and, as usual, everyone gets all excited like puppets making statements about a partial picture. So, yes, a man that can take such a hit and when something like this happens and still come out profitably- he deserves the $23 mil. How big was your profit someone else asked. Answer that.

    May 15, 2012 at 1:23 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Sandra Doyle

    I AM IN AGREEMENT WITH THE MASSES – NO ONE IS WORTH THAT KIND OF MONEY - HE SHOULD DONATE IT TO THE UNEMPLOYED IN THIS COUNTRY!!

    May 15, 2012 at 1:24 pm | Report abuse |
    • TheDJ

      There is a good point. DONATE... I would assume every person on this site would want it confiscated by the IRS through an armed theft system known as taxation at gun point. But I think DONATE would a very good choice. Something Hollywood should be more interested in rather than having their wealth confiscated. Then again I work for my money and although I may not be wealthy I have to say the thought of someone telling me I make too much and that it should be TAKEN from me as opposed to me having the ability or choice to DONATE it to a good cause or people that need it as opposed to my money being given to a bunch of LOBBYISTS or defunct bankrupt green companies then I would like to have that choice.

      May 15, 2012 at 1:33 pm | Report abuse |
  8. wm.knight

    the usa will never be great again until this greed ends. it will never happen though because the stink goes all the way to the white house.

    May 15, 2012 at 1:25 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Laurie

    It's time for state owned banks. Profit can be returned to the shareholders (taxpayers) instead of going to some fat cat who doesn't deserve it. And when banks charge outrageous fees at least we will know it is going to educate our kids and not in some jerk's pocket. And, when the CEO of a state owned bank loses money, the taxpayer can fire him!

    May 15, 2012 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
  10. Rob1961

    He loses two billion and as a punishment gets 23 million. I'm sure the Republicans find nothing wrong with this–after all it's the free market myth at work. How much longer can we put up with their protection of the Wall Street moguls and their abuse of this myth.

    May 15, 2012 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
  11. Marci

    Hell NO

    May 15, 2012 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
  12. Polar Bear

    None of my business. It would only be my business if a were a senior party official in a socialist state. And I'm not and we're not. Many here who can't or don't commenting on those who can and do. Wealth envy, pure and simple. I don't see "taxpayer bailout" anywhere in the story so let's move on.

    May 15, 2012 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
  13. wesdesman

    Why not feed the hungry and clothe the poor ? What is wrong with this picture ?

    May 15, 2012 at 1:26 pm | Report abuse |
  14. Polar Bear

    Who got the most money from Wall Street in the last election? Look it up.

    May 15, 2012 at 1:27 pm | Report abuse |
  15. acajunthatsagun

    Is that all he's getting, after all under his leadership the company just lost 2 billion and there will more to come. Pay for performance – what a joke. He admits to not knowing what was going on as did Ina Drew, the only casualty so far. If these people are so far out of the loop who really needs them to begin with?

    May 15, 2012 at 1:28 pm | Report abuse |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44