- 36 -
of Mr. Schoenecker would probably have been increased to some
extent through the years. However, there is nothing to show that
the percentage of income before taxes which Mr. Schoenecker was
to receive would have been increased, and, in fact, if an
unusually good year occurred, the percentage might have been
decreased, as was the situation with Mr. Shaw after an unusually
good year for BI. The top amounts paid or "maximum" amounts
shown in the ECS survey exceed substantially the amounts
determined under the formula for the fiscal years 1988 and 1991
in our computation of the amount that Mr. Schoenecker would have
received under the 1974 agreement. For the fiscal years 1989 and
1990 the amounts computed under the formula are somewhat in
excess of the amounts shown as the maximum amounts paid in the
ECS survey. However, it was the results of the very high amount
received by Mr. Shaw under his bonus plan in BI's fiscal year
1989 that caused the method of computing the bonus to be changed
so that the amounts received by Mr. Shaw in fiscal years 1990 and
1991 were approximately back to the level of the amount he
received in fiscal year 1988. It would, therefore, seem logical
that had Mr. Schoenecker been negotiating compensation at arm's
length, the amount resulting from the high income in the fiscal
year 1989 would have caused some form of decrease in the
percentage of income amount he would receive as a bonus in
subsequent years. On an overall basis, it is more favorable to
petitioner to use the amounts of the top pay as shown by the ECS
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011