Why the Woolies boss was paid 1,300 times as much as a shopfloor worker
Report by Just Share exposes pay gaps in the retail and wholesale sector
Here are two unsettling facts apparently meant to assure us that the market for labour is working well. A shopfloor worker at Woolworths would have had to work for more than three years to earn as much money as the groupâs CEO Roy Bagattini made in one day. And, over at Shoprite, where the internal minimum wage is a good bit lower than at Woolies, a shopfloor worker would have had to work almost three years to make as much as Shoprite CEO Pieter Engelbrecht made in one day.
As disclosed in a recently released report by Just Share, Bagattini made R122.5-million in 2023, while Woolworthsâ internal minimum wage was R93,600 for the year. The figures at Shoprite are R64.7-million for Engelbrecht and a minimum wage of R65,263 for the year.
Many economists and all remuneration consultants and members of remuneration committees will happily stress that this is precisely how things should be. It is the efficient working of the law of supply and demand. In this case, there is a huge supply of potential shopfloor workers and comparatively limited demand. And there is, we are constantly told, a very limited supply of potential CEOs and a comparatively hefty demand. The combined result is a pay level for shopfloor workers that only has a floor because government imposes one, and a pay level for CEOs that actually has no ceiling.
In theory, the shareholders of those companies should be imposing some sort of ceiling. After all, the architects of executive pay assure us that executive remuneration is designed to ensure that CEOs pursue the best interests of shareholders. However, this has been taken to mean that the more you pay CEOs the more keenly they will drive the interests of shareholders.
It follows that if you pay them a little less, theyâll slack off and performance will drift towards mediocrity. That is the assumption.
In practice, the institutional fund managers who engage with the corporate executives on behalf of workers and individual investors, whose money they manage, are far too entwined with the executives to exert the sort of discipline required by a robust market. They inevitably default to assuming the more you pay executives, the better the results they will generate.
This assumption prevails despite screeds of evidence to the contrary â think Steinhoff, Tongaat, Naspers, Massmart; even Woolworths offers caution about assuming a positive link between pay and performance. The retailerâs former CEO Ian Moir destroyed billions of rands of value on an ill-considered Australian acquisition despite being exceptionally well paid. Indeed, he caused such extensive damage that the Woolworths remuneration committee decided they had to use a massively generous carrot to entice Bagattini to replace Moir when he was eventually nudged out.
Much of the generosity to Bagattini was in share-based awards, which became enormously valuable when the share bounced back as the company seemed to put its Australian nightmare behind it. That was evident in the groupâs financial 2023 year (to June 2023), the year that Bagattini picked up R122-million.
The 2024 remuneration report is not yet available, but the group has disclosed Bagattini was paid R65.3-million for 2024, which, while just half of the previous yearâs pay, still looks extremely generous in the context of the groupâs recently released disappointing 2024 results.
The recovery in the share price has faltered, sparking fears the group may never recover from its Australian adventure.
Just Share
Just Shareâs excellent report (Pay gaps and leadership diversity in the JSE-listed wholesale and retail sector) isnât limited to Woolworths and Shoprite. Just Share analyses the pay gaps at nine of the largest wholesale and retail companies listed on the JSE. Because the nature of employment in this sector tends to involve low skilled employees at the shop floor level, the pay gap will inevitably be greater than in, say, the banking sector where the lowest paid are relatively skilled individuals. But even allowing for this, the pay gap in the retail/wholesale sector is immense.
Woolworths and Shoprite may be outliers in the sector, but in the sector as a whole, the average lowest paid worker would need to work almost two years (21 months) to earn what an average CEO gets in one day. âIn other words, CEOs in this sector earn on average 597 times the wages of the lowest paid workers,â says Just Share.
Foschiniâs CEO received R36-million, while the lowest paid Foschini employee got R64,537 (pay gap 560). Sparâs relatively new CEO picked up R25-million; the lowest paid Spar employee got R59,483 (pay gap 420). Dis-Chem was at the low end with its CEO getting R16.7-million, and the lowest paid employee getting R64,537 (pay gap 259). The lowest pay gap (155) was at Pick ân Pay, where figures were distorted by the mid-year change in CEO.
One of the stark facts to emerge from the list is the lack of entrepreneurs amongst our high-paid executives. These CEOs are what you might call corporate bureaucrats who have worked their way through layers of management to lead businesses set up by entrepreneurs years or decades ago. Entrepreneurs, who have usually begged and borrowed money to set up a business, tend to be more tight-fisted, and as significant shareholders they are inevitably more active than the fund managers who now play at being shareholders. Entrepreneurs are traditionally more circumspect when it comes to remuneration.
Significantly, Dis-Chem is the âyoungestâ of these businesses. The founder, Ivan Saltzman, who stepped down as CEO in 2023, was one of the lowest paid CEOs in the sector. He was of course a major shareholder.
While Woolworthsâ generosity to Bagattini in 2023 has pumped up the average, the seemingly low payment to Pick ân Payâs recently re-appointed CEO Sean Summers has reduced it. Summersâ R10-milllion package comes with four million shares, which will vest if certain performance targets are met over the next three to five years. If the former CEOâs pay had been used instead, the pay gap would probably have been closer to Sparâs. Pieter Boone, who left Pick ân Pay half way through the year, was paid R25-million, including a âtermination feeâ of R16-million when he walked away from a company that is facing an existential crisis.
Second-largest employer
As Just Share points out, the wholesale/retail sector is a key part of the SA economy. It is the second-largest employer in the country after government, employing about 17% of the workforce, and âit makes a substantial contribution to GDP and holds considerable importance in the daily lives of South Africansâ, says the report.
Just Shareâs senior inequality analyst Kwanele Ngogela adds: âWhile the sector undoubtedly plays an important role in providing employment to low- and semi-skilled workers, it is nevertheless crucial to also recognise the contribution of the extreme vertical wage gaps which characterise these companies to the countryâs overall high levels of inequality.â The report states: âInsisting on reasonable pay gaps is a key move towards a more equitable and sustainable society and economy.â
Coming ahead of the promulgation of the Companies Amendment Act, which was recently signed by the President, the report highlights the pointlessness of companies pushing back against the more detailed disclosure requirements. By digging through the copious amounts of information already available and making reasonable assumptions, Just Share was able to do its own pay gap analysis.
âOnly two of the ten companies â Woolworths and Shoprite â publicly disclose their internal minimum wage. Woolworthsâ minimum wage is 57% higher than the sectoral determined annual minimum wage, and Shopriteâs is 10% higher,â says the report, explaining later that where the information was not provided by the company the authors have used the prescribed minimum wage in the sectoral determinations.
The report urges companies to be more forthcoming. âWithout disclosure of wage gaps and the remuneration of the lowest-paid employees, shareholders cannot ascertain whether executive remuneration is fair and responsible within the context of overall employee remuneration, as mandated by the King Report on Corporate Governance (King IV).â
Letters
Dear Editor
I am a senior student doing LLB applying and preparing for my practicals next year. And such inequality you root out in the corporate sector is widespread and open in the legal field, for the system makes it clear that you cannot study advocacy if you are from a struggling family. The irony being that more than 50% of SA's population is living in the margins.
The costs are unsympathetic to a black graduate coming out and what is demeaning and frustrating is how the advocates bar associations are privately governed, which means different bars are allowed to charge their own fees, hence you are coming out in a education system owing a lot of debts, into another systems demanding payment from you in order to offer you practice, which again does not guarantee employment, it just guarantees mere membership.
I plead for more noise to be made to such unforgiving methods being used to train law students- particularly advocates.( This is very crucial, as there are a few black advocates, whereas you get more recognition as an advocate than an attorney in senior potions as well as in higher courts, which means more remuneration for you).
you cannot speak of transformation, whilst still operating a system that casts aside a majority of South Africans from actively participating due to financial restrains, these unfair wages dripple down to families that have restraint budget with only enough to buy basics, hence where will the money for such fees come from?
Thank you for making the noise on these economic exploitation, and hope in due time, it shall bring the desired and necessary change we all pray and yearn for.
© 2024 GroundUp. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
You may republish this article, so long as you credit the authors and GroundUp, and do not change the text. Please include a link back to the original article.
We put an invisible pixel in the article so that we can count traffic to republishers. All analytics tools are solely on our servers. We do not give our logs to any third party. Logs are deleted after two weeks. We do not use any IP address identifying information except to count regional traffic. We are solely interested in counting hits, not tracking users. If you republish, please do not delete the invisible pixel.