In this thread: people who have no idea what tva is.

10MM a year ain't bad considering he had to deal with so many Loki's.

Zobel said:

---

In this thread: people who have no idea what tva is.

---

Exactly this!

AgEngineer72 said:

---

Per google ai, current issues for TVA are inefficient leadership and senior management infighting. They issue their own bonds and are currently in $21billion debt. A major complaint is that their use of government grants has failed to help foster new businesses and has created environmental problems. Maybe the CEO isn't earning his compensation but gets it anyway? If we want to draw parallels to comparable industry, would a comparable CEO have survived thus long?

---

I don't think anyone has an issue with this guy being fired. It appears that he deserves it. The issue is what should someone in a $13 billion a year organization make.

This board is of the belief you can get that type of talent for $195,000 a year.

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

4 said:

---

Well I will tell you something, that is exactly how the founding fathers saw their roles in government.

None of them wanted to be in DC. They approached their service in government as necessary and as a sacrifice to their country. As a sacred duty.

Not a place to make a living and get rich.

They could not wait to get back to their businesses and private lives.

---

So what kind of employee will you find to run the $13 billion a year TVA for $195,000 a year as some form of "civil service"?

---

So what kind of employee will you find to run the most powerful military in the world, a 27 trillion dollar economy, and get paid $400,000 a year to do it?

---

Again, for about the 5th time, the president and cabinet positions come with prestige that makes it worth it.

Do you think Trump ran for president so he could be paid $400k a year? Did Kamala spend $1.5 billion so she could earn $400k?

People will do that for president. They aren't going to do that to run a public utility.

Teslag said:

---

I know our kneejerk response is to hate every federal employee and as a federal employee that's warranted most of the time from what I've seen.

However, we want the government to be efficient and responsible with taxpayer funds while still providing services they are required to.

That takes talent and that talent costs money. Ask yourself, do the best and brightest work for the federal government or the private sector? We both know the answer to that.

So let's take something like a large regional VA health network. That's almost 800 hospital beds and 9000 employees.

What would a private admin make managing a hospital network that large? And then we turn around and wonder why the VA has trash service and can't take care of vets while wasting billions of dollars.

---

Then it should be privatized.

Trump doesn't even take the salary, or at least he didn't in his first term iirc.

100% agree. And I said that previously. The TVA is only government owned because FDR threatens to pack the Supreme Court and they declared it constitutional in the 30's as part of the new deal.

It needs to be revisited and made private. Then every TVA employee would be subject to private accountability, including the CEO. But I can bet you that CEO would still make $10 million plus as a private company because that's what the market is for that position.

Hell I'd do it for half that

Teslag said:

---

agent-maroon said:

---

Quote:

---

If we want efficiency and effectiveness we are going to have to pay for it.

---

Seems like paying a fraction of that $10+ million is a good first step towards achieving an efficient spending budget.

So what private sector industry do you work in that makes you so wise in the matter of efficiency & fair compensation?

---

I know that you get what you pay for. And if you want someone to run a $13 billion a year company you're going to need to open the check book.

My preferred choice would've for the FedGov to spin off TVA as a private enterprise.

---

I agree with you here. Privatize the TVA and get if off the government books all together.

cevans_40 said:

---

Hell I'd do it for half that

---

All of us would. But are we qualified to run a $13 billion a year energy company? Why would we be effective?

The pay isn't the issue if you're getting what you pay for. It doesn't appear the tax payer was in this instance.

Teslag said:

---

What would a private sector CEO make for a company with similar number of employees, assets, and responsibilities?

---

My father was a pilot in the Air Force, retired as. Colonel after 33 years. His last year he was making ~$27,000/yr.
He immediately received offers ~ tripling that amount in the airline/aircraft industries.

Why would he continue to work in the military for that long at that low of pay after serving in WWII & Korean conflict.

Honor, Duty, Commitment

Some people have it some don't. Some take advantages of loopholes in government assistance programs some don't.

There is a big difference between being a career military service member and running a public utility.

One carries honor and prestige that can be self rewarding. One does not.

And currently a 33 year Air Force colonel would make $171k a year and $30k in non taxable housing pay. And retire with a full pension at the conclusion that career.

It's closer to many civil airline positions.

AgEngineer72 said:

---

Per google ai, current issues for TVA are inefficient leadership and senior management infighting. They issue their own bonds and are currently in $21billion debt. A major complaint is that their use of government grants has failed to help foster new businesses and has created environmental problems. Maybe the CEO isn't earning his compensation but gets it anyway? If we want to draw parallels to comparable industry, would a comparable CEO have survived thus long?

---

Thank you.
Yikes, you present uncomfortable facts into this discussion. Based on your post it seems we are paying millions per year for an incompetent CEO.
So I need to be reminded again why we need to pay him millions per year in order to not get a bumbling idiot for a few hundred thousand per year.

Teslag said:

---

And currently a 33 year Air Force colonel would make $171k a year and $30k in non taxable housing pay. And retire with a full pension at the conclusion that career.

It's closer to many civil airline positions.

---

What current pay & retirement benefits are is irrelevant to my point.

It is absolutely relevant. To compete with private industry the military has also been forced to raise pay to retain talent, especially as the motivations to serve erode every year.

If we want competent talented people running government organizations and be good stewards of our tax dollars you will have to pay for them.

And you won't find them on the GS wage scale.

There is no proof that he wasn't worth the $10M. People are just looking at $10M and screaming about it.

Great management talent deserves great pay, that is capitalism.

APHIS AG said:

---

Teslag said:

---

What would a private sector CEO make for a company with similar number of employees, assets, and responsibilities?

---

Lets see, he makes more than 20 times what the ultimate CEO of this country makes, the President, at $400,000.

Let the private sector pay him that amount, not the taxpayer.

---

Considering TVA pays him from revenue generated by TVA and isn't federal funded, that's already happening. Comparing him to Trump makes to sense because the government is merely a shareholder. Trump isn't his boss.

cevans_40 said:

---

Hell I'd do it for half that

---

That is the point. You are not a capable person (CEO-wise).

The man is. Hence he was hired at 10M and is being paid. Talent needs to be paid.

In fact I think he is underpaid. Private sector would have paid him 5 times more. He is sacrificing his career to work for the Govt. Give the man a raise, else he will just leave.

infinity ag said:

---

There is no proof that he wasn't worth the $10M. People are just looking at $10M and screaming about it.

Great management talent deserves great pay, that is capitalism.

---

The position warrants $10 million a year.

This guy didn't. They were losing money and many of their capital improvements came in way over budget with numerous issues.

TVA is just the largest of several similar entities geographically......you've got BPA out west, WAPA in the plains and a few others set up similarly. Reagan tried but got absolutely nowhere in Congress. Even the red states loved them some federally subsidized welfare power then and most still do if push comes to shove in Congress.

Reagan couldn't even break the preference clause the federal power folks operate under (non-profit utilities get first dibs on the federal power sold at cost (not market price) and then if anything is left over the for profits can get in line. So particularly within TVA and BPA with all that federal hydro power put in during the new deal the cost of that power is really cheap. So within the geographic areas you have the haves...and the have nots for cheap power. Reagan thought they should sell at market price and use any excess revenue over operation costs to pay down federal debt. What a concept.

Teslag said:

---

What would a private sector CEO make for a company with similar number of employees, assets, and responsibilities?

---

When I graduated in the 90's , going to work for the government meant lower salaries and being around less talented people. I see the government employees union and other entities rectified one part of that equation.

"We" aren't paying him anything. The people who buy power from TVA are paying him. TVA doesn't get federal funding.

TAMU1990 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

What would a private sector CEO make for a company with similar number of employees, assets, and responsibilities?

---

When I graduated in the 90's , going to work for the government meant lower salaries and being around less talented people. I see the government employees union and other entities rectified one part of that equation.

---

Again, this isn't about rank and file positions. We ***** about government waste and inefficiency and then scoff at paying what it takes to ensure that.

cevans_40 said:

---

Hell I'd do it for half that

---

Go apply and tell them that. I'm sure they'd love to save millions by bringing you on board.

I don't know anything about TVA beyond the basics, but I can say the salary sounds pretty reasonable. I work in an area of local government, and we always try to save money by paying below the market rate. And we constantly get hacks and low performers, because people who are good get better-paying jobs. So part of the inefficiency of government is that the public demands it.

Teslag said:

---

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

4 said:

---

Well I will tell you something, that is exactly how the founding fathers saw their roles in government.

None of them wanted to be in DC. They approached their service in government as necessary and as a sacrifice to their country. As a sacred duty.

Not a place to make a living and get rich.

They could not wait to get back to their businesses and private lives.

---

So what kind of employee will you find to run the $13 billion a year TVA for $195,000 a year as some form of "civil service"?

---

So what kind of employee will you find to run the most powerful military in the world, a 27 trillion dollar economy, and get paid $400,000 a year to do it?

---

Again, for about the 5th time, the president and cabinet positions come with prestige that makes it worth it.

Do you think Trump ran for president so he could be paid $400k a year? Did Kamala spend $1.5 billion so she could earn $400k?

People will do that for president. They aren't going to do that to run a public utility.

---

That is your narrative.

Just because you say it for a 6th time doesn't make it true by virtue of you saying it.

So the TVA position must be paid millions in salary because it doesn't have prestige?

Or is it because of the responsibility inherent in the role?

The presidency has tons of prestige but about 500 times the pita and responsibility.

The pay should reflect that or be proportional.

It isn't. Not even close.

So try something other than prestige to justify this discrepancy.

Dude is making 10 mil a year and quits? I'm more suspicious of that than other people asking why he makes so much. We are asking the wrong questions.

He's greedy and has a lifestyle, as would every poster here making 10mil/year. Not sustainable.

Guy is scared and likely making a significant amount more on kickbacks and ran. FAFO.

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

4 said:

---

Well I will tell you something, that is exactly how the founding fathers saw their roles in government.

None of them wanted to be in DC. They approached their service in government as necessary and as a sacrifice to their country. As a sacred duty.

Not a place to make a living and get rich.

They could not wait to get back to their businesses and private lives.

---

So what kind of employee will you find to run the $13 billion a year TVA for $195,000 a year as some form of "civil service"?

---

So what kind of employee will you find to run the most powerful military in the world, a 27 trillion dollar economy, and get paid $400,000 a year to do it?

---

Again, for about the 5th time, the president and cabinet positions come with prestige that makes it worth it.

Do you think Trump ran for president so he could be paid $400k a year? Did Kamala spend $1.5 billion so she could earn $400k?

People will do that for president. They aren't going to do that to run a public utility.

---

That is your narrative.

Just because you say it for a 6th time doesn't make it true by virtue of you saying it.

So the TVA position must be paid millions in salary because it doesn't have prestige?

Or is it because of the responsibility inherent in the role?

The presidency has tons of prestige but about 500 times the pita and responsibility.

The pay should reflect that or be proportional.

It isn't. Not even close.

So try something other than prestige to justify this discrepancy.

---

So what kind of employee do you think you'll find to run a $13 billion a year public utility for less than $400k a year?

Teslag said:

---

What would a private sector CEO make for a company with similar number of employees, assets, and responsibilities?

---

A private company CEO gets fired when he doesn't deliver on results

What kind of results does this guy deliver at the TVA?

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

4 said:

---

Well I will tell you something, that is exactly how the founding fathers saw their roles in government.

None of them wanted to be in DC. They approached their service in government as necessary and as a sacrifice to their country. As a sacred duty.

Not a place to make a living and get rich.

They could not wait to get back to their businesses and private lives.

---

So what kind of employee will you find to run the $13 billion a year TVA for $195,000 a year as some form of "civil service"?

---

So what kind of employee will you find to run the most powerful military in the world, a 27 trillion dollar economy, and get paid $400,000 a year to do it?

---

Again, for about the 5th time, the president and cabinet positions come with prestige that makes it worth it.

Do you think Trump ran for president so he could be paid $400k a year? Did Kamala spend $1.5 billion so she could earn $400k?

People will do that for president. They aren't going to do that to run a public utility.

---

That is your narrative.

Just because you say it for a 6th time doesn't make it true by virtue of you saying it.

So the TVA position must be paid millions in salary because it doesn't have prestige?

Or is it because of the responsibility inherent in the role?

The presidency has tons of prestige but about 500 times the pita and responsibility.

The pay should reflect that or be proportional.

It isn't. Not even close.

So try something other than prestige to justify this discrepancy.

---

I would look at it this way, if the CEO of TVA is one of the best in the business, he will quickly get recruited away to go run one of the utility companies that is willing to pay him the market rate for the position. Nothing about prestige or anything just simple free market, capitalist systems.

If someone was willing to do this job for $400k that was really good, I would question what is going on under the table.

Quote:

---

That is your narrative.

Just because you say it for a 6th time doesn't make it true by virtue of you saying it.

---

SIAP,

This is the guy who replaced hundreds of workers at the TVA with h1b visas. THE TVA!

Trump wanted to fire him during his first term, but was probably told he couldn't.

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

4 said:

---

Well I will tell you something, that is exactly how the founding fathers saw their roles in government.

None of them wanted to be in DC. They approached their service in government as necessary and as a sacrifice to their country. As a sacred duty.

Not a place to make a living and get rich.

They could not wait to get back to their businesses and private lives.

---

So what kind of employee will you find to run the $13 billion a year TVA for $195,000 a year as some form of "civil service"?

---

So what kind of employee will you find to run the most powerful military in the world, a 27 trillion dollar economy, and get paid $400,000 a year to do it?

---

Again, for about the 5th time, the president and cabinet positions come with prestige that makes it worth it.

Do you think Trump ran for president so he could be paid $400k a year? Did Kamala spend $1.5 billion so she could earn $400k?

People will do that for president. They aren't going to do that to run a public utility.

---

That is your narrative.

Just because you say it for a 6th time doesn't make it true by virtue of you saying it.

So the TVA position must be paid millions in salary because it doesn't have prestige?

Or is it because of the responsibility inherent in the role?

The presidency has tons of prestige but about 500 times the pita and responsibility.

The pay should reflect that or be proportional.

It isn't. Not even close.

So try something other than prestige to justify this discrepancy.

---

You know how much ex-presidents make in speaking fees and book deals? Bill Clinton charges anywhere from $250k-$500k per appearance, and you're talking like half hour to hour at most 2-3 dozen times a year. You know how much former TVA CEO's charge? Probably nothing because who wants to listen to them outside of an industry conference?