Merry Christmas to Peter Wilson. When it was suggested that Peter Wilson should be independent of the old board so that we can have a fresh start Peter responded with "That's your issue". Summary of the meeting here: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=594
A good summary of where we are up to by Joe Aston of the AFR, linked to from here: viewtopic.php?f=5&p=4137#p4137
If you are new to this website read the story so far: viewtopic.php?t=321#p1793
Check out some of the AFR articles, too many to list and check out some of the ABC reports: http://www.afr.com/business/accounting/ ... 215-h055ej http://www.afr.com/business/accounting/ ... 211-h02x1d http://www.abc.net.au/news/programs/the ... s,/8626662
Please join this website to participate in discussions. Also join our email list at http://eepurl.com/cWsgfb
Image

Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

A weekly round up of the issues and progress
User avatar
Brett Stevenson
Posts: 450
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:43 am

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by Brett Stevenson » Mon Jul 31, 2017 5:25 pm

I think you have summarised the situation perfectly Nelson.
Quite amazing now that we know what sort of money the CPA management are paid.
It's fairyland time currently for so many people, starting with the board and management of CPA.
The elephant in the room is governance but clearly being avoided until after the appointment of the new board, and we can thank the people who drafted the terms of reference for the Independent Panel for that. Meanwhile the board and management still call all the shots, still appoint all the new directors, are still are being paid at massive remuneration levels, and we are being asked to wait for an Independent Panel review which has its first draft report on 15th September.
It's a strange time for CPA Australia. Everyone who has been following this knows the major issues are still there but its as if we are powerless to do anything while the people who are calling the shots are either part of the problem (board and management) or are being rewarded handsomely for dotting the i's and crossing the t's what has already been exposed.
And who can afford the legal fees to take action on the issues.
And so we are left with ASIC who still remain virtually silent as our last possible hope.
Meanwhile lots of members and non-members are circling seeing how they can get into the action.

What a mess.

User avatar
Brett Stevenson
Posts: 450
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:43 am

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by Brett Stevenson » Mon Jul 31, 2017 5:34 pm

And it is worth adding Nelson, that three groups/individuals have told me in the last few days that they think the directors remuneration should be around $50,000 p.a.
I strongly disagree.
I think the directors should be paid $25,000 p.a., and that will not only set an example for the whole organisation, but it will also remove so many of the people who want to get in on the action for 'less than what's best for CPA purposes'.
Let's use board remuneration levels as the litmus test of whether members are really fair dinkum to turn our organisation around.
And if anything above $25,000 is proposed I suggest we will have failed at the first step.

fidgetspinner
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:02 pm

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by fidgetspinner » Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:08 pm

Most members here think board remuneration to go in the same direction which is down but debate about how far down. It makes sense that there will be different opinions. Grassroots members in public practice may have a different world view about what is reasonable compared to those in big corporates.

In my post above I was trying to make the point that generally “eminent” people from other boards may not be the best allies for members in the battle to reduce CPA board remuneration.

As an example I posted some board remuneration numbers for the Medibank Private board because it’s chairperson Elizabeth Alexander is one of the most high-profile persons joining the criticism of CPA Australia and a past president. At Medibank Private her pay is over $400k Medibank Private and her board are paid about $170k. They have all enjoyed pay rises of around 200% in a few years off the back of the float of a government asset.

Anyone could have a look at what other eminent persons in the debate are paid on their own boards.

If elected to a board like CPA will well paid eminent persons really follow through and take up the fight to cut remuneration to even $50k or $25k?

User avatar
Brett Stevenson
Posts: 450
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:43 am

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by Brett Stevenson » Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:39 pm

I reckon fidgetspinner that everyone needs to take a big cold bath when there is talk about board and management remuneration.
I agree that there are lots of different expectations depending on perhaps one's corporate eminence etc. And I'm sure it would be easy to find benchmarks to justify the higher rates.
I personally think what is needed as a top priority at CPA Australia is for some leadership which actually says top dollar is not what is driving us, and we recognise the need to set an example what shows that. Especially from the board members.
$25,000 p.a. is still $3,000 a day for their 8 meetings p.a.
Remember CPA is a very low risk company to oversee (revenue stream is almost guaranteed each year with membership dues and CPD/education), and expenditure is just a matter of budgeting properly to live within the revenue, as with any NFP.
Crikey we have seen the most scandalous levels of remuneration for both the board, the senior and middle management, and there is almost total silence as these people continue receiving them. And to top it off the management has failed miserably in their basic duties.
A revolution is needed at Head Office.
If the board go and set a remuneration level of greater than $25,000 then I reckon we can pretty much say we will have lost the battle.
If eminent persons see remuneration as the deciding factor and they want more than $25k, then I say we don't want them, and their eminence is getting in the way of good common sense leadership.
Do you think the current board will have reduced their exorbitant fees since the forced disclosure and member reaction? I would suggest not. So I presume Portelli. Dolin, Wade. Petty, Youngberry are on a nice tidy close to $100k each with Mr Dickson on who knows what.
You would think at least ASIC, or even Mr McPhee could have a word in their ears and say it might be good to let the membership know what the current remuneration levels are for the rump board members.
Mr Youngberry can go on his self appointed 'listening tour' but let me remind him that on a close to $100k fee you sure will not get much to listen to from most members other than derision..


.

User avatar
nakedadmin
Site Admin
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:38 pm
Location: Iceland

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by nakedadmin » Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:42 pm

Brett Stevenson wrote:
Mon Jul 31, 2017 5:34 pm
And if anything above $25,000 is proposed I suggest we will have failed at the first step.
I think it's clear that the current levels are too high. But Brett, in your proposed levels you have the President at $100K which fair enough is down from $400K but it's a big discrepancy from President to normal Director. It's a bit of a judgement call about the levels but I think the President should not be on so much more than the others.
The Naked Webmaster

User avatar
Brett Stevenson
Posts: 450
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2017 10:43 am

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by Brett Stevenson » Mon Jul 31, 2017 9:02 pm

I just used the same ratio that was currently being used. Currently chairman on $400k, and directors on $100k.
Just knock 75% off both of them to $25K and $100K.

But I am not too sure what is required of the Chairman, and am a wee bit ambivalent on that so long as not too high, which to me would be anything over $100K.
I just have the feeling that lots of people see the CPA directors job as easy money, which it has been for the last decade, for some pretty woeful performance.
Somehow the message needs to be changed to say we want directors who are interested in the board positions for other than the financial remuneration, and we want people who can be at least competent to challenge group think and make a stand for the best interests of the profession and the organization and membership.
In other words the opposite of what has been displayed to date.
It just seems to me that if the remuneration is pegged too high (which in my view is anything over $25K) then all those problems rear their heads again.
Remember these were voluntary positions prior to the Malley decade (apart from the President). I'm not saying they should be voluntary because it cuts out a lot of good members who cannot have their time subsidised by a large employer or the government (if in public service). But if CPA is going to change for the better it needs to start setting an example to distinguish itself from what has been happening.

Sunkcost
Posts: 23
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 9:02 pm

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by Sunkcost » Tue Aug 01, 2017 8:35 pm

People should want to be in the positions for the prestige rather than the monetary return. The problem at the moment is CPA's credibility means these positions aren't that prestigious. I think a big drop (rather than incremental) and the people willing to work for the good of the industry rather than the money will do a lot to improve CPA's credibility.

JWheldon
Posts: 357
Joined: Wed May 24, 2017 6:43 pm

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by JWheldon » Tue Aug 01, 2017 10:48 pm

The individuals that are apart of the board, appear to be there for the wrong reasons. The money is the driving force. Was Richard Alston there for the money or there to represent somebody or to make a contribution?

Brett is right about the pay. If you have a look at the remuneration of the board, they get paid for working one day a month or twelve times a year, but the value is not really there for the input and lack of accountability to the general members.

There does not appear to be a need for the independent board members, because they have not stopped the Alex Malley problem, nor the CPA Australia Advice financial mess, not the explosion of board & management remuneration excess. The independent board members do not appear to really represent any body, nor any specific group, nor add to the overall good of the CPA body. Therefore they should be removed.

The CFO controls the organisation and therefore the CEO should be done away with also. There does not appear to be a need for two COO and there are two many overpaid senior management, who receive bonuses, for doing a job. Alex Malley boosted that the management team received a bonus for each year in the last 7 years. then the bonus structure was wrong, and it should be done away with. There are two many chiefs and not enough workers.

Individuals that have worked for CPA Australia, have commented, that the top end of CPA is highly paid, but lower ranks were not. The management team live in there own unrealistic world.

There does not appear to be a need for a CEO, because the marketing team go out to represent the organisation. The CPA President might as well be the defacto CEO, without to over the top remuneration. Why have a CPA President? With Chairman of the board, the position of CPA President becomes unnecessary, as it appears to be a token position, which the general members have no respect for and is chosen because of an out dated system. Might as well make the CPA President a separate individual appointed by the members, that does the marketing and represents the organisation like the CEO, each year. This new President is not paid as a CEO, and may be someone from the vast depth of the member base, not just the top end of the highly educated, highly paid and narrow end of the members pool.

User avatar
The Nude CPA
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 4:21 pm

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by The Nude CPA » Wed Aug 02, 2017 12:40 am

JWheldon wrote:
Tue Aug 01, 2017 10:48 pm
The CFO controls the organisation and therefore the CEO should be done away with also. There does not appear to be a need for two COO and there are two many overpaid senior management, who receive bonuses, for doing a job. Alex Malley boosted that the management team received a bonus for each year in the last 7 years. then the bonus structure was wrong, and it should be done away with. There are two many chiefs and not enough workers.

There does not appear to be a need for a CEO, because the marketing team go out to represent the organisation. The CPA President might as well be the defacto CEO, without to over the top remuneration. Why have a CPA President? With Chairman of the board, the position of CPA President becomes unnecessary, as it appears to be a token position, which the general members have no respect for and is chosen because of an out dated system. Might as well make the CPA President a separate individual appointed by the members, that does the marketing and represents the organisation like the CEO, each year. This new President is not paid as a CEO, and may be someone from the vast depth of the member base, not just the top end of the highly educated, highly paid and narrow end of the members pool.
Agree with these sentiments...

Ken Crout
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 12:10 pm
Location: Victor Harbor SA 5211

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by Ken Crout » Thu Aug 03, 2017 12:17 pm

Hello Naked Webmaster,
What is going on with messages being obliterated by rows of commas?
Can this be rectified, please?
Bloody annoying!

Regards,
Ken

User avatar
Red_Ferrari
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:42 pm

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by Red_Ferrari » Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:00 pm

  Hit ctrl-F5 and they disappear. It's probably a browser issue at our end.

fidgetspinner
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 3:02 pm

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by fidgetspinner » Thu Aug 03, 2017 2:20 pm

I have seen directors on boards put in no effort and sell their souls for $25000 to $30000 and then people put their heart and soul into charity boards for no money so it depends.

Someone above said directors work 12 days a year. Well it is true some directors cruise on by but you can't just count the number of meetings and assume that is how many days worked. Directors need to put in a number of days for each meeting of the board plus subcommittees plus any other work they are doing for the organisation. For many committed directors it is a part time job and you would know passionate people who go above and beyond any remuneration they get.

Ken Crout
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2017 12:10 pm
Location: Victor Harbor SA 5211

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by Ken Crout » Thu Aug 03, 2017 3:20 pm

Thanks Red_Ferrari . . . Ctrl+F5 did it.

User avatar
nakedadmin
Site Admin
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:38 pm
Location: Iceland

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by nakedadmin » Thu Aug 03, 2017 3:43 pm

Ken Crout wrote:
Thu Aug 03, 2017 3:20 pm
Thanks Red_Ferrari . . . Ctrl+F5 did it.
I did an upgrade and for a bit the stylesheet was wrong. Your browser would have had a cached stylesheet from that time. Gotta keep the patches up to date for security reasons!
The Naked Webmaster

User avatar
The Nude CPA
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 4:21 pm

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by The Nude CPA » Thu Aug 03, 2017 4:13 pm

Ken Crout wrote:
Thu Aug 03, 2017 12:17 pm
Hello Naked Webmaster,
What is going on with messages being obliterated by rows of commas?
Can this be rectified, please?
Bloody annoying!

Regards,
Ken
I was having the same issue but thought it was just me!
Red_Ferrari wrote:
Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:00 pm
Hit ctrl-F5 and they disappear. It's probably a browser issue at our end.
That worked, cheers. Curiously, what does that shortcut do?

User avatar
nakedadmin
Site Admin
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:38 pm
Location: Iceland

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by nakedadmin » Thu Aug 03, 2017 5:35 pm

F5 is refresh the page. It will force the browser to get the latest version of the page and stylesheet. I don't think you need the ctrl.
The Naked Webmaster

User avatar
Red_Ferrari
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2017 12:42 pm

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by Red_Ferrari » Thu Aug 03, 2017 6:01 pm

I've stopped using F5. I was told it works like this:

--   F5 will refresh the page back to your ISP's server.
--   Ctrl-F5 will refresh back to the server hosting the webpage.

Time4Change
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 2:20 pm

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by Time4Change » Fri Aug 04, 2017 10:35 am

My 5 cent advice, even when a new board is establish, WE members need to have open door to the board of directors to hold them accountable. The next thing once we resolve those issue is to push for CPA to issue half yearly financial statements that will allow us accountants to know what is happening in our association and therefore ask questions rather than wait for a whole year to go.

deaneus
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:09 pm

Re: Message from Mr McPhee about Independent review requesting submissions.

Post by deaneus » Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:02 am

When is the deadline for submissions? Nothing on the website.

Also, anyone else notice all mention of the review has been taken off the front page of CPA Australia?

Post Reply