SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
CEOs Paid 335 Times Average Rank-and-File Worker; Outsourcing Results in Even Higher Inequality
2016 Executive PayWatch highlights Mondelez International’s Pay Inequality
WASHINGTON
CEO pay for major U.S. companies continues to soar as income inequality and outsourcing of good-paying American jobs increases. Outsourcing has become a hot presidential election topic with candidates calling out corporations who say they need to save money by sending jobs overseas. Meanwhile, according to the new AFL-CIO Executive PayWatch, the average CEO of an S&P 500 company made $12.4 million per year in 2015 - 335 times more money than the average rank-and-file worker.
The Executive PayWatch website, the most comprehensive searchable online database tracking CEO pay, showed that in 2015, the average production and nonsupervisory worker earned approximately $36,900 per year, a wage that when adjusted for inflation, has remained stagnant for 50 years.
"The income inequality that exists in this country is a disgrace. We must stop Wall Street CEOs from continuing to profit on the backs of working people," said AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka. "Last month when I stood with the Carrier workers in Indianapolis whose jobs making home heating furnaces are being shipped to northern Mexico, I saw first-hand how corporate greed destroys communities. Carrier is a subsidiary of United Technologies and its CEO Gregory Hayes made nearly $10.8 million in 2015. It's shameful that a CEO can make that type of money and still destroy the livelihood of the hard-working people who make the company profitable."
Mondelez International, highlighted in this year's PayWatch, represents one of the most egregious examples of CEO-to-worker pay inequality. The company, which makes Nabisco products including Oreos, Chips Ahoy and Ritz Crackers, announced earlier this year that in order to reduce costs, it is sending 600 family-sustaining jobs from Illinois to Mexico, where workers face poor labor and safety standards. Mondelez CEO Irene Rosenfeld made $19.7 million in 2015 - that's $9,471.15 per hour.
"It seems that hard work doesn't matter anymore. This is the corporate attitude," said Mary Willis, who was among hundreds of Nabisco workers from the South Side of Chicago laid off in March. "They quit me. I didn't quit them. It used to be that places like Nabisco were proud places to work, but now workers like me are tossed to the curb despite years of dedication."
While the trend of companies putting profits over people is rampant, working people are fighting back. The AFL-CIO has endorsed the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers' International Union (BCTGM) boycott of Nabisco products made in Mexico.
Working families also are joining striking Verizon workers on the picket lines fighting for a fair contract. Verizon wants to ship more good jobs overseas, outsource work to low-wage contractors and transfer workers away from their families for months at a time, provoking the strike by 39,000 working men and women who help make it so profitable. Over the past three years, Verizon has made a record $39 billion in profits. In 2015, CEO Lowell McAdam made $18.3 million - 498 times the average pay of a rank and file worker.
More information about United Technologies, Mondelez and Verizon's massive CEO-to-worker pay disparity and inequality among S&P 500 companies can be found at www.paywatch.org.
The American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) works tirelessly to improve the lives of working people. We are the democratic, voluntary federation of 56 national and international labor unions that represent 12.5 million working men and women.
LATEST NEWS
'That Was Done by Iran,' Trump Lies as More Evidence Shows US Was Behind School Massacre
"I guess acknowledging that you attacked a school and killed a bunch of children right off the bat might spoil POTUS's splendid little war."
Mar 09, 2026
US President Donald Trump baselessly claimed over the weekend that Iran was behind the strike on an Iranian elementary school that killed more than 160 people—mostly young girls—during the first wave of US-Israeli bombings, even as evidence mounted that an American missile attack caused the devastation.
A reporter aboard Air Force One asked Trump straightforwardly whether the US bombed "a girls' elementary school in southern Iran on the first day of the war," to which the president responded: "No. In my opinion, based on what I've seen, that was done by Iran."
The reporter then asked Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth, standing right behind the president, whether the claim was true, and he declined to endorse it, saying, "We're certainly investigating."
JUST NOW: “It was done by Iran.”🤔
Despite NYT analysis that a 🇺🇸 bomb killed those Iranian school girls, Trump insists Iran did it. (Hegseth hesitated to agree)
Color us unconvinced.
(H/T @Acyn) pic.twitter.com/jgPkudSm2h
— The Tennessee Holler (@TheTNHoller) March 7, 2026
Michael Waltz, the US ambassador to the United Nations, similarly declined to back Trump's claim, telling ABC's Martha Raddatz on Sunday that he would "leave that to the investigators to determine."
"I can tell you, as a veteran, in no uncertain terms, the United States does everything it can to avoid civilian casualties," Waltz added. "Sometimes, of course, tragic mistakes occur."
The administration officials' comments on the massacre, which Human Rights Watch said should be investigated as a possible war crime, came as video footage, satellite images, and other evidence further indicated it was likely US forces who carried out the February 28 attack on the Iranian school in Minab. Reuters reported last week that, contrary to Trump's claim, US military investigators believe American forces were likely behind the school bombing.
"I guess acknowledging that you attacked a school and killed a bunch of children right off the bat might spoil POTUS's splendid little war," Brian Finucane, a former US State Department lawyer, wrote on social media.
The new video footage, which shows a Tomahawk missile hitting an Iranian military facility near the school, was released by the Iranian outlet Mehr News and analyzed by Bellingcat.
"The US is the only participant in the war that is known to have Tomahawk missiles," Bellingcat noted. "Israel is not known to have Tomahawk missiles."
New video footage shows a US Tomahawk missile hitting an IRGC facility in Minab, Iran, on Feb 28, showing for the first time that the US struck the area. The footage also shows smoke already rising from the vicinity of the girls’ school, where 175 people were reportedly killed. pic.twitter.com/4jBXrNcRJO
— Trevor Ball (@Easybakeovensz) March 8, 2026
The New York Times, which independently verified the video, observed that "as the camera pans to the right, large plumes of dust and smoke are already billowing from the area around the elementary school, suggesting that it had been struck shortly before the strike on the naval base."
"This is supported by a timeline of the strikes assembled by the Times that shows the school was hit around the time as the base," the newspaper added. "The Times has identified the weapon seen in the new video as a Tomahawk cruise missile, a weapon that neither the Israeli military nor the Iranian military has. Dozens of Tomahawks have been launched by US Navy warships into Iran since February 28, when the US-Israeli attack on Iran began."
A group of six Democratic US senators said in a joint statement late Sunday that they are "horrified" by the latest reports on the school strike, noting that "independent analysis credibly suggests the strike may have been conducted by US forces, which if true, would make it one of the worst cases of civilian casualties in decades of American military action in the Middle East."
"The killing of school children is appalling and unacceptable under any circumstance," said Sens. Brian Schatz of Hawaii, Patty Murray of Washington, Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Mark Warner of Virginia, and Chris Coons of Delaware. "This incident is particularly concerning in light of Secretary Hegseth’s openly cavalier approach to the use of force, including his statement that US strikes in Iran wouldn’t be bound by ‘stupid rules of engagement,’ in his words."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'So Be It,' Says Schumer After Trump Issues Unhinged Threat Against 2026 Voting Rights
"Senate Democrats will not help pass the SAVE Act under any circumstances," vowed the Senate Minority Leader.
Mar 08, 2026
The extremes to which the Republican Party will go to sway the 2026 elections in their favor was highlighted again on Sunday after US President Donald Trump said he will sign no other legislation into law this year until the SAVE Act—a bill that would deeply erode voting rights and threatens ballot access for tens of millions of Americans—is passed by Congress.
"It must be done immediately," Trump declared in a characteristically unhinged social media post on Sunday, referring to the SAVE Act, versions of which have passed the Republican-controlled House but so far stalled in the Senate.
"It supersedes everything else. MUST GO TO THE FRONT OF THE LINE," Trump continued in an all-caps tantrum. "I, as President, will not sign other Bills until this is passed, AND NOT THE WATERED DOWN VERSION - GO FOR THE GOLD: MUST SHOW VOTER I.D. & PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP: NO MAIL-IN BALLOTS EXCEPT FOR MILITARY - ILLNESS, DISABILITY, TRAVEL: NO MEN IN WOMEN’S SPORTS: NO TRANSGENDER MUTILIZATION FOR CHILDREN! DO NOT FAIL!!!"
Voting rights experts and Democratic lawmakers have denounced the SAVE Act as a dangerous threat to millions of eligible voters, calling it a clear effort by the GOP to tip the scales in their favor by depressing voter turnout in 2026 and beyond.
"In every form, the SAVE Act would require American citizens to show documents like a passport or birth certificate to register to vote. Our research shows that more than 21 million Americans lack ready access to those documents," warned Eliza Sweren-Becker and Owen Bacskai of the Brennan Center for Justice, which advocates for robust voting rights, in a blog post last week.
"Roughly half of Americans don’t even have a passport," Sweren-Becker and Bacskai continued. "Millions lack access to a paper copy of their birth certificate. The SAVE Act would disenfranchise Americans of all ages and races, but younger voters and voters of color would suffer disproportionately. Likewise, millions of women whose married names aren’t on their birth certificates or passports would face extra steps just to make their voices heard."
In response to Trump's threat on Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) characterized the SAVE Act as "Jim Crow 2.0" as he condemned the president and his GOP allies.
"If Trump is saying he won’t sign any bills until the SAVE Act is passed, then so be it: there will be total gridlock in the Senate," said Schumer. "Senate Democrats will not help pass the SAVE Act under any circumstances."
Melanie D'Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health, said Sunday that the SAVE Act—which Trump said last week must be passed "at the expense of everything else"—is not a voter ID bill, but rather "voter suppression" legislation bill masquerading as a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
"If it was a voter ID bill, it would provide people with the proper IDs to vote, with no barriers — but it doesn’t," noted D'Arrigo. "The voter fraud rate is .0001%, and this bill would potentially prevent up to 69 million women, 40 million who don’t have access to their birth certificate, and 140 million without a passport, from voting."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Oh Come on,' Says Senate Democrat After Jake Tapper Plays Voting-Against-the-Troops Card
"The American people don't want this war," said Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut. "Virtually nothing good happened from sending thousands of Americans to die in Iraq in the 2000s and if we don't learn that lesson then shame on every single one of us."
Mar 08, 2026
Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut offered immediate push back on Sunday when CNN anchorJake Tapper said a vote against an expected $50 billion request by President Donald Trump to fund his attack on Iran would be seen as "voting against the troops."
"Oh come on," said Murphy, incredulous. "I mean, the American people don't want this war. They don't want this war—they have seen what happens when American troops go into places like Iraq, places like Afghanistan. Ultimately we get a lot of people killed, we waste a lot of dollars. The one thing the people of the American people have been clear about is that they don't want the United States dragged into another long-term war in the Middle East."
Polling has shown that Murphy is correct, with only one out of four people—a mere 25%—in a Reuters/Ipsos poll released last week showing any kind of support for Trump's war of choice against Iran.
"If you support the troops," said Murphy, "then you should vote against this war so that we get our troops out of harm's way. Virtually nothing good happened from sending thousands of Americans to die in Iraq in the 2000s and if we don't learn that lesson then shame on every single one of us."
TAPPER: "You have said you're a 'hell no' on funding the war. We have seen this movie before. We know that vote will be cast as - especially if you run for higher office - you voting against the troops."
MURPHY: "Oh come on I mean, the American people don't want this war." pic.twitter.com/lTB5isM8I7
— State of the Union (@CNNSOTU) March 8, 2026
Trump has yet to make the formal request for the $50 billion in funding, but estimates for just one week of fighting have put the cost of the military operations thus far at something close to $1billion per day.
Murphy has said he is a "hell no" on any additional funding and other members of the Democratic caucus have echoed that message.
"Trump is already spending $1 BILLION PER DAY on his illegal regime change war of choice in Iran," said Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) on Thursday. "Now, he's going to ask Congress to give him up to $50 BILLION MORE. My vote: hell NO."
"We could be lowering the cost of health care, but instead Trump is spending BILLIONS on his reckless war with Iran," said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) on Thursday. "Trump is blowing YOUR taxpayer dollars on war and causing gas prices to spike while he's at it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular