At a time when Pfizer is slashing its work force around the world to save money and basically just survive, excessive executive perks are more than counterproductive.
In his Pharmalot blog, Ed Silverman breaks a fascinating story this week about Pfizer’s senior vp of human resources being asked to repay nearly $300,000 to the company for a weekly helicopter commute from her home in Maryland to corporate headquarters on East 42nd Street in Manhattan.
Silverman points out that its common for companies to pay for executive travel on corporate planes, but several staff members at the world’s largest drug company questioned whether commuting is a justifiable business expense.
CEO Jeff Kindler, who until recently was ok with these kinds of corporate perks, apparently has had a change of mind. Mary McLeod, and some other execs, have been asked to reimburse the company for portions of expenses that can’t be justified.
This would be a non-story, if it wasn’t for the fact that Pfizer, for the past few years, has been scrambling just to survive. To resurrect sagging share values in an uncertain world-wide market, the company is trying to save $1.5 billion to $2 billion by the end of this year through a brutal cost-cutting program that so far has seen the loss of 25,000 jobs, or 23 percent of its work force, since 2004, according to a Reuters report. And since 2003, nearly 50 — about half — of its factories and offices around the world have been, or will be, closed by the end of this year.
Reuters says company has begun to see some positive bottom line, and stock analysts — if not all shareholders — are upbeat. Many shareholders are upset that the stock is still running 25% below a year ago.
If I were one of the axed 25,000 employees, having listened to the woeful tale about the company’s desperate survival measures, I’d be more than a little miffed to learn that, A) the company’s head of human resources (hey, isn’t that the department responsible for me and the other 24,999 people now out of work?) has been riding the skies to work while I was out pounding the pavement looking for a job; and B) if she can pay back $300,000 just for her commutes, how the hell much money does she, and the dozens of other senior execs from the CEO down, not to mention the zillions of button-down consultants and PR flaks, take home every month?
Actually, getting even more personal, if I was one of the axed employees I’d be asking how many jobs like mine were eliminated because of the hundreds of millions of dollars poured into legal fees, damage suits, shady marketing, political lobbying and PR, all just to deal with the harm caused by our drugs.
In fact, I’d be wondering why I ever chose to work at a company, or in a system, that places profits above the safety of its ultimate customers, the patients.
What I enjoyed most about this article is the writing craft of turning a “non-story” into a real, meaty piece of work, that any reader could grind their teeth on, as they reflect upon the financial and product irregularities of this company. The focus is kept on those individuals likely to have originated and supported the company’s misdeeds, without including the average joe ‘worker-bee’. It’s a fine distinction.
Comment by Rory Tate — July 24, 2008 @ 2:58 pm