There may be no more shocking discrimination gap than that between the CEO of the office and the ordinary employees.
According to a new study from the Center for Effective Government and the Institute for Policy Studies, 100 of the biggest CEO retirement assets are worth at a combined $4.9 billion, or the full retirement account savings of 41 percent of the American families.
In other words, those 100 CEOs have higher retirement credits invested than the ombined 50 million U.S. families, or more than 116 million people.
Considered by the groups as a "tale of two retirements," the research recorded that it's more than just the absolute size of the CEOs' retirement assets that sets them apart. Chief executives are also given special kind of savings schemes and tax-deferred accounts that grants them the privilege to avoid the circumstances that was implemented to most Americans. Authors have also noted that such discrepancies allow the CEOs to set aside enormous amount of money without having to pay taxes and depriving the U.S. Treasury and state coffers of tax revenue.
Scott Klinger, director of revenue and spending policies at the Center for Effective Government, an advocacy group and think tank, takes this concern as based on a personal loss, with the authorities precisely or inevitably charging workers for failing to prepare adequately for their golden years.
Retirement issues are often described as people who aren't saving enough, Klinger added. There are great deals of incentives that have put self-interest before the public interest. And there are guidelines that help those with a lot, at the expense of those that don't.
However, that hasn't been the situation for CEOs. Experts have found out that nearly 52 percent of Fortune 500 chief executives were protected by a company-sponsored pension. Some of these pensions are exclusive retirement programs for CEOs and top executives, also known as supplemental executive retirement plans, or SERPs. More than half of the overall retirement equities of CEOs have been recorded in the report that are held in SERPs.
One argument could also be the gender gap in terms of compensation, which could go on to the executive level, as well as the tendency for men to negotiate pay packages, while women are more hesitant to do so.
