Imagine, if you would for a minute, living in a world where the average worker's salary was higher than the average financial industry employee's annual bonus.

Now you may scoff at such an absurd-sounding statement in today's economic climate, but it's no joke. In 1985, the average annual salary for all workers across the country was, if you can believe this, actually several thousand dollars higher than the average bonus: $19,000 to $13,970. [Disclaimer: I am not making this fact up, it just seems that way].

Over twenty-five years later, the average Wall Street bonus has soared almost 14 times higher. The ratio between average CEO pay and average U.S. worker pay is 319 to 14--meaning that the average worker's salary has essentially been stagnant since the mid-1980s.

It's gotten so bad that bonuses at many bailed out banks greatly outpace the amount of profit generated by the banks. For example, while Goldman Sachs earned $2.3 billion last year and received $10 billion in TARP funds, they paid out $4.8 billion in bonuses--an amount that is more than double their net income. Goldman Sachs has set aside more than $16 billion for bonuses, and big banks that were bailed out by taxpayers have set aside a record $140 million for 2009 salary and bonuses.

The reality is that skyrocketing CEO pay and bonuses have not slowed since our economic crisis hit.

Other facts and figures on wage inequality for Main Street vs. Wall Street that may make your eyes bug out like the crazy but lovable red-headed germ-a-phobic teacher Emma on hit TV show Glee:

• As of 2007, the top ten percent of American earners brought in 49.7 percent of total wages. This is the highest share of total U.S. income made up by the top 10 percent of earners in almost a hundred years, including during the Great Depression.
• During the economic expansion of 2002-2007, the top 1 percent captured two-thirds of income growth.
• Today, the average CEO today makes in one day what the average worker is paid in a year.
• The amount the top five executives at each of the 20 banks that accepted the most federal bailout money received in personal compensation from 2006 to 2008: $32 billion.
• A quarter-billion dollars: The total amount of compensation the 20 CEOs at these bailed-out companies made. When you break it down, the payout "rewarded" to each exec averages $13.8 million.

And last, but certainly not least, there are banksters who claim that big banks using taxpayer funds to pay out massive bonuses and create massive inequality is actually a good thing for the economy.

Don't believe me? Watch this, starting at around 2:50:

Goldman Sachs's Griffiths Says Pay 'Inequality' Helps Everyone

Yesterday the Federal Reserve announced a plan to cut executive pay by as much as 90 percent for CEOs at the seven biggest TARP recipients--companies like Bank of America, Citibank and AIG who have received hundreds of billions of dollars in taxpayer bailouts since their risky deals brought the economy to its knees last year. It's a good start, but it still leaves dozens of other banks that are still taking billions in tax dollars and paying out huge bonuses to their top execs.The sweeping move by the Fed comes right before the bankers' association meeting in Chicago from the 25th through the 27th, where thousands are going to gather in the largest demonstration against bank greed since the financial meltdown began.

On the eve of the first G-20 summit since the global financial collapse, SEIU has a new report measuring the severe impact the economic crisis has had on working families. The report breaks down not just the cost of the bailouts, but also the (much, much bigger) associated costs that came along with them.

Here are some of the astounding highlights:

• Taxpayers have committed $4.7 trillion to the financial sector over the last year--only $700 billion of that $4.7 trillion was through TARP.
• The bank-induced economic crisis has cost American families $11 trillion in wealth in 2008, nearly 18% of their net worth.
• Americans have lost $6.1 trillion in homeowner wealth since June 2006.

Even banks like Goldman Sachs that returned their TARP funds earlier this year continue to benefit from other bailout programs, such as the $12.9 billion that Goldman received as an AIG counterparty that it will never have to pay back.

Meanwhile, banks continue to...

• Pay themselves millions in bonuses: the nation's top six banks paid out $31.2 billion in bonuses this past winter.
  
• Set aside $$ for future bonuses. In the first half of 2009 alone, banks set aside another $74.4 billion for bonuses and compensation--an amount alone that would solve the budget shortfalls in 15 states, including California.
  
• Make excessive profits on the backs of consumers: banks continue behaviors such as refusing to modify mortgages to prevent foreclosures and reducing their small business lending--they actually now give out less money than they did before their TARP infusion.
  
• Gouge us on overdraft fees. Americans will pay more than $38 billion in overdraft fees alone in 2009, more than $125 for every man, woman, and child in the United States.

The worst part? Big banks and other financial institutions aren't merely back to their old tricks and the same practices that caused the crisis in the first place--they're actually standing in the way of real reform that would protect consumers and prevent a future crisis.

Companies in the financial, insurance, and real estate sector spent $321 million lobbying against federal reforms such as:

• The creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Agency
  
• Limits on bonuses
  
• Loan modification proposals that could help keep millions of Americans in their homes,
  
• And the Employee Free Choice Act--which would provide a much-needed check on corporate power by giving workers a real voice in the workplace.

Read and download the report here:

Trillion Dollar Bank Job -

"We now understand that the actions of a small group of greedy CEOs and Wall Street investors can wreak havoc on the global economy, yet we still haven't taken the necessary steps to prevent a future crisis," said SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger at a briefing to release the report. At noon tomorrow, outside a secret meeting of the Financial Services Roundtable at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Washington, D.C., workers and community groups will kick off a month of actions in more than two dozen cities across the country.

Download the report here: The Trillion Dollar Bank Job: How Wall Street and the Big Banks Are Holding Up America's Economic Recovery.

Worker Pay vs. Executive Pay Ratio between average CEO pay and average U.S. worker pay: 319 to 14 Ratio between average CEO pay and minimum wage: 740 to 15

A new report out today from the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) shows the extent to which Wall Street's continued practice of paying out big figure bonuses to the architects of our economic collapse continues. The study found that the CEOs of the 20 financial industry firms that received the largest bailouts were paid nearly 40 percent more last year than other CEOs at Standard & Poor's 500 companies. The average CEO pay was 430 times larger than for the pay received by the average workers.

The new report shows how many of the CEOs responsible for our country's economic downfall are now using the crisis as a jumping off point for even greater personal windfalls. Some of the study's findings:

• $32 million: The amount the top five executives at each of the 20 banks that accepted the most federal bailout money received in personal compensation from 2006 to 2008.


• 1,000 years: The number of years 100 average workers would have to work for to make as much as these 100 executives made in three.
• $90 million: That's how much stock options soared in 2009 for nine of the 20 bailout banks, based on IPS's examination of corporate proxy statements.
• 160,000: The number of employees who have been laid off since January 1, 2008 at the top 20 financial industry recipients of taxpayer funded bailout money.
• A quarter-billion dollars: The total amount of compensation the 20 CEOs at these bailed-out companies made. When you break it down, the payout "rewarded" to each exec averages $13.8 million.

This alarming study should serve as yet another reminder that giving astoundingly huge rewards to corporate executives only serves to give executives a much greater incentive to behave outrageously--and engage in reckless behaviors that put American taxpayers and our economy at great financial risk. Download the report "America's Bailout Barons: Taxpayers, High Finance, and the CEO Pay Bubble."

No. (That answer came pretty easily to us!)

On Thursday, bailed out banks like Bank of America--which have not paid back their billions in taxpayer-funded bailouts--had to submit proposals for executive pay and bonuses to Obama's pay czar, Kenneth Feinberg. Feinberg said yesterday that he has broad and "binding" authority over executive compensation, including the ability to "claw back" money already paid...."I have the discretion, conferred upon by Congress, to attempt to recover compensation that has already been paid to executives not only in these companies, but in any company that received federal assistance," said Feinberg.

As Obama's pay czar is weighing how and whether to use that power, we're hoping he takes into account the laundry list of reasons why Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis and other top banking executives don't deserve bonuses this year. We've laid out our "Top Ten" here.

#1: Bank of America has received nearly $200 billion in taxpayer bailouts and backstops.
As long as Bank of America is reliant on billions of taxpayer bailout funds, they should not be allowed to pay out bonuses to top executives while millions of Americans continue to lose their homes, jobs, and retirement savings.

Read all ten (after the jump).

Citigroup - recipient of $45 billion in bailout funds - apparently isn't feeling the economic crunch. In fact, it's considering paying a $100 million bonus to one of its employees, protesting that it can't tear up a contract.

Tell that to California state employees.

Almost 100,000 state employees in California are feeling the effects of California's budget crisis - facing furloughs and wage cuts, thousands of state employees are realizing the realities of today's economy.

SEIU's Stephen Lerner compares the two vastly different situations in a segment on CNBC. Watch it:

Late Friday afternoon, SEIU's Stephen Lerner debated the new executive compensation regulations approved by the House of Representatives on CNBC. Lerner argued that the insatiable desire for limitless pay and bonuses amounted to a Wall Street "Bizarro World."

Watch it:

It was reported last week that the top six U.S. banks set aside $74 billion in 2009 for bonuses and other compensation. In fact, bonuses at big banks have even outpaced earnings. CBS News reports that while Goldman Sachs earned $2.3 billion last year and received $10 billion in TARP funds they paid out $4.8 billion in bonuses--more than double their income.

Today, average CEO pay is 344 times higher than average pay for workers--the average CEO today makes in one day what the average worker is paid in a year. Skyrocketing CEO pay and bonuses have not slowed since our economic crisis hit.

While curbing excessive executive pay is an important first step, as SEIU President Andy Stern noted when the House passed its bill, "we need to act more boldly and more broadly to help Main Street recover."

"Congress must pass the Employee Free Choice Act to ensure that workers can negotiate for higher wages and benefits, hold corporate executives accountable, and win their piece of the American Dream," Stern concluded.

Can you sign our letter to CEO Ken Lewis demanding answers for bank employees? Click here to add your initials to our letter to CEO Ken Lewis.

It was widely reported this week that Bank of America is seriously considering the elimination of up to 10% of the bank's branches, with CEO Ken Lewis discussing the proposal with investors. If those reports are true, that means the jobs of up to 5,000 bank employees at hundreds of Bank of America branches are at risk.

If you are a Bank of America employee, we need you to add your initials to our letter to Ken Lewis.

"It is absurd that no matter what happens in the economy these guys figure out a way to award themselves with enormous bonuses and there seems to be no problem with laying off workers," said SEIU's Stephen Lerner. "On the one hand the government is trying to stimulate the economy by pumping money into banks. But everything these banks are doing exacerbates the problem that they are supposed to be solving."

Bank of America employees need answers to questions about these drastic closure plans--at the very least, information about how they could be affected by branch closings. "There has been no communication with workers, as far as we have talked to, about what is happening, what their rights will be, if they get severance pay, if there will be buyouts, if their health care will be continued...And most importantly, there has been no discussion if they will take the money they pay in bonuses and move it to help their workers survive unemployment," said Lerner.

So, we decided to do BofA a solid by writing a letter to CEO Ken Lewis with several questions he should answer for his employees. Here's part of the letter to Lewis:

A spokesperson described this proposal as part of the "long-term direction of the company." But with families facing continued financial uncertainty, we believe this is the wrong time to eliminate the jobs of 5,000 workers and leave millions of our customers without the financial advice they need to get through this crisis.

We deserve answers to the following questions on your closure plans and the "long-term direction of the company."

  1. How many current Bank of America employees' jobs will be eliminated?
  2. Will laid off bank employees receive any severance pay?
  3. Will you give bank employees a say in how you close branches?
  4. Will you and other bank executives continue to accept bonuses after laying off thousands of workers?

If you want answers to these questions, we need your support for our letter to CEO Ken Lewis--click here to add your initials to our letter.

As the backbone of Bank of America, frontline bank workers helped drive the growth of the company for low wages, while executives took home huge paychecks and bonuses. Take CEO Ken Lewis, for example: while the bank crashed, he made $6,019 an hour. In the last three months alone, Bank of America made more than $3 billion in profits. And according to a newly-released report by NY Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, BofA also issued $3.33 billion in cash and stock bonuses to executives last year. Merrill Lynch, which merged with BofA in January, issued $3.6 billion in bonuses despite having losses of more than $27 billion. This means that combined, the banks had 860 employees who were each given bonuses worth at least $1 million.

But that's not all....Bank of America has spent an additional $1.5 million in lobbying fees since January 2009. Does that sound right to you?

Even though taxpayers are backing Bank of America with $199.2 billion, it's the front-line bank workers who are going to hurt the most. But you can do something about it. Sign our letter to Lewis and demand answers about bank branch closures.

It appears that big bonuses are back on Wall Street....er rather, maybe they never really left.

The Wall Street Journal reported last week that "Executives and other highly compensated employees now receive more than one-third of all pay in the US... Highly paid employees received nearly $2.1 trillion of the $6.4 trillion in total US pay in 2007, the latest figures available." Let me repeat that -- more than one-third of all pay in the U.S.

Adding to the slew of evidence that big banks are already returning to their old (economy-crushing) ways, the Washington Post reports that the top six U.S. banks have set aside $74 billion in 2009 for bonuses and other compensation--up $14 billion from last year alone. These six banks -- Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Morgan Stanley -- are all TARP recipients, and we're not talking chump change here either.

So today, we thought we'd highlight one particularly egregious example of "old habits dying hard." And that's putting it lightly.

To date, Citigroup has received $45 billion dollars in bailout money. Curious as to what this deeply-wounded bank has been doing recently to get back on their feet and pay American taxpayers back? Raising interest rates on as many as 15 million credit card holders, organizing a call to "build opposition to the Employee Free Choice Act" and and doling out million-dollar bonuses to their "star" company bigwigs, of course! Because who deserves an $100 million bonus more than a big deal energy trader who works for a bank that's 33 percent owned by the government? (As Citi helpfully points out, giving company higher-ups compensation bonuses they can't really afford is how they retain talent and turn such monumental profits. Oh wait....)

"As millions of families struggle just to hang onto their homes and get through the next month's bills, the architects of the economic crisis are using our tax dollar bailouts on the kind of bonus money that finances glitzy Upper East Side Penthouses and glamorous Riviera getaways," said SEIU president Andy Stern. Rather than focusing on paying back the billions they borrowed, financial institutions like Citigroup continue to hold onto the failed policies of the past that enrich the very few at top while indebting the rest of America.

The White House's executive pay czar Kenneth Feinberg, who's charged with reining in what the administration sees as extravagantly oversized bonuses, will most likely vet whether or not Citigroup's energy trader Andrew Hall--who owns a 1,000-year-old castle and extensive modern art collection rumored to be valued at around $60 million--gets his $100 million bonus. Which begs the question: Are wealthy Americans truly turning back to pre-crisis habits, even as most of the country remains in deep economic stress?

Watch MSNBC's take on the situation:

Bailout architects have stuck to their story that the government will probably to get most of the bailout money back. But since the bailouts began almost a year ago, Wall Street's refusal to scale back dangerous pay habits like these make it seem probably that the federal government--and taxpayers--can say "sayonara" to some of their money.

Now more than ever, we need the Employee Free Choice Act to level the playing field against this kind of excessive corporate greed.

Upon hearing the news that bailed-out insurer AIG plans to reward top executives $2.4 million in bonuses next week, SEIU's first reaction was...sheer and utter disbelief. As in, YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING US. How is it possible that the same company that received the largest of all taxpayer bailouts, at a total cost of $173 billion to the American people, would decide it's a good idea to reward themselves for doing such a fantastic job of losing more money?

In a Fox News Sunday interview last month, Chamber president Thomas Donohue defended the bonuses. In his answer to interviewer Chris Wallace's question, "So are you saying if AIG wants to give million-dollar bonuses, so be it?" Donohue said:

I'm saying if -- AIG is in a lot of trouble, but I'm saying if it took the right people to fix AIG, you're going to have to pay them. Same thing right here in this network. You know, if you lost your -- you couldn't pay your very best people, I'm not sure they'd stay. They'd probably go to another network.

Never one to stand quietly on the sidelines while other financial services and business lobbies are publicly flaunting their corporate greed and lack of accountability, the Financial Services Roundtable (FSR) made a particularly striking 'contribution' earlier in the week to the recent wealth of outrageous "are you kidding me?!" behavior, in an appearance on C-Span, no less. When asked by the host what the Roundtable would support instead of Obama's Consumer Financial Protection Agency to increase consumer protection, FSR's Senior VP for Gov. Affairs Scott Talbott answered "We're not for any regulation."

While Talbott went on to then describe ways he thought the system could be enhanced, his admission confirms what we already knew: That big bank executives, credit card and financial services companies will stop at nothing [even humiliating themselves on television!] to maintain the same haphazard, practically non-existent regulation that helped tank our economy in the first place. "Even as average Americans scrimp and save, there continues to be this poisonous culture in corporate America, that says that greed and corruption and 'what's in it for me' are all acceptable," said SEIU president Andy Stern.

In spite of being crowned the "Bailout King," it seems abundantly clear that insurance giant AIG's executives are still not making business decisions with consideration as for how they would improve the lives of their new investors -- us. So SEIU is offering AIG some advice from the viewpoint of the people whose hard-earned money went to bailing them out: Halt the millions in bonuses you're seeking to give to top executives, AIG. A fundamental duty to shareholders has been violated, and it's time for both AIG and the U.S. Chamber to give up their roles as chief defenders of the broken system.

Bonuses, bailouts, and a broken system: Is this the America in which big banks and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce believe in?

The Washington Post reports today that Chamber and the banking industry are intensifying their lobbying efforts against financial reform. Recognizing their parallel efforts to fund campaigns against working families, the unappetizing alliance of big bank executives, credit card and financial services companies is joining forces to intensify their lobbying efforts against financial reform. "It's no surprise that the U.S. Chamber and the big banks that drove our economy into the ground are joining forces to defend a failed financial model that enriches CEOs at the expense of shareholders, workers, and our economy," commented SEIU's Anna Burger, on efforts to block the Consumer Financial Protection Agency proposed by President Obama.

Obama's proposed agency would oversee a range of financial products, from mortgages to credit cards and checking and savings accounts to guard against anti-consumer sales practices and fight for needed reforms to protect front-line bank workers and consumers. The coalition fighting the Obama consumer agency plan views their efforts to protect those on the receiving end of multi-billion-dollar taxpayer bailouts as simply "allowing the financial services industry to serve its customers in the best way possible." Um, U.S. taxpayers who've been forced to subsidize banks' bad behavior with billions of their hard-earned money might not agree. The coalition's prescription for financial reform to make their case so far include rebranding the same reckless policies that will drive families deeper into debt and launching a massive PR campaign to scare Americans with 'Harry and Louise' style TV ads.

BofA "encourages" its employees to help consumers rack up debt

This comes a week after current and former Bank of America workers stepped forward to expose harmful anti-consumer practices by the bank that encourage customers to sign up for high-interest-rate credit and cash advance services to max out customer credit, as well as structuring a variety of check and debit card services resulting in overdraft fees and other charges. A former BofA employee from Landover Hills, MD, Gabby Inaleis, said that although initially she thought she was taking financial services job, it didn't take very long to realize BofA had no interest in helping customers reach their financial goals. Under constant pressure from her manager to meet unrealistic sales goals (example: sell at least 40 checking accounts every Friday), Gabby reported she would often sell multiple checking accounts to clients that didn't need them by offering to waive the account fees for a couple of months. "It became standard practice to make a customer who wasn't planning on opening an account wait for up to an hour to speak with a personal banker," she says.

No employee bonuses until grandmothers everywhere are penniless (and cold): Among the former bank workers who spoke out was Chris Feener, an ex-employee with 15 years' experience in the industry who worked in BofA's collections department. The department's #1 priority, said Chris, was to collect payment from customers who hadn't made a payment on their credit card for 180 days--no matter the cost. "There was a time I was encouraged to tell an elderly woman to sell her stove and cook on a Bunsen burner to pay off her credit card debt that [the bank] had inflated over time," said Chris.

The questionable practices BofA employees were made to engage in to ensure their jobs were safe didn't stop there, for Chris and his coworkers. "In 2007 when BofA's numbers were particularly low, we were given scripts to read on our customers' answering machines, threatening to sue them or collect any assets they had if they didn't," he said. "It was called the Maxwell message, and for three months straight we used that method, forcing customers needlessly to file for bankruptcy."

And that's not all! Enter more violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act Chris says he and his team members were pushed to do if a customer had a delinquent account: publicly humiliate the customer to shame them into paying. "We were required to call every customers neighbor on every account--the sole purpose was to embarrass the customer and encourage the neighbor to personally bring a phone note to the neighbor to deliver the messages for us."

The BofA bank workers who shared their stories all acknowledged they felt as though the practices like the ones described above were unethical. But one should not underestimate how powerful the pressure to "sell, sell, sell" can be when it comes from a person of authority, like one's manager--or an entire institution (like Bank of America). Without any real whistleblower protections, most workers are too afraid to speak up for fearing of losing their job--something no one supporting themselves in this dismal economy can afford to chance.

SEIU, U.S. PIRG and the National Association of Consumer Advocates have outlined new protections to ensure front-line bank workers can speak out and create a financial industry that puts consumers and the health of our overall economy ahead of quick profits for bank executives. Read them here. "It's clear that big bank executives and the U.S. Chamber will stop at nothing to stand in the way of real solutions for our economy," says Anna Burger. "That's why it's more important than ever that bank workers be a part of any financial reform package."

The Financial Times reported yesterday that Citigroup is raising credit card interest rates on 15 million customers. Citigroup has received three taxpayer-funded bailouts totaling $45 billion and the latest plan to keep the failed bank afloat gives the government and taxpayers a 34 percent stake in the company.

Said SEIU's Anna Burger, "It's shameful that Citigroup would raise interest rates on millions of Americans during a time when record unemployment and home foreclosures are forcing families to rely more and more on their credit cards just to get by." This news comes a week after Citigroup announced it is also raising salaries by as much as 50 percent for investment bankers and other top executives, to accommodate for smaller annual bonuses. Citigroup needs to commit to give any new raises to front-line bank employees, who struggle just to make ends meet while dealing with the rising costs of healthcare, not top executives who have contributed to this mess.

Signing petitions for change on Twitter

Sign and Tweet this petition - Tell @Citi_Forward (Citigroup) to give raises to front-line bank workers, not top executives: http://act.ly/2h. Retweet to sign.

Learn more about using Twitter as an advocacy tool with act.ly here. Check out who's in the hot seat on act.ly right now.

Tomorrow, Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis will face tough questioning in his testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform at 10:00 a.m.

He'll be asked about his role in the acquisition of Merrill Lynch, the excessive bonuses paid to Merrill executives and the billions that taxpayers have provided to bail out the country from the deep losses and economic damage Bank of America's decisions caused. This will be Lewis' first trip to Capitol Hill since Bank of America failed the federal government's stress tests and a coalition led by SEIU delivered nearly 100,000 "Taxpayer Proxies" demanding that the Bank fire Ken Lewis.

Tomorrow, will Ken Lewis....

a) Apologize for his bank's role in bringing down the economy?
b) Commit to transparency and real financial reform?
c) Commit to ending consumer abuses like exorbitant overdraft fees, predatory financial practices, and the bank's irresponsible lending and acquisitions?
d) Commit to providing affordable healthcare for all employees?
e) Stop lobbying against solutions--such as banking reform and pro-worker legislation like the Employee Free Choice Act--that would give bank workers a voice on the job, protect consumers, end corporate excess, and finally build an economy that works for everyone?

We'll hopefully find out the answers to these questions after tomorrow's testimony. In the meantime, let us know your thoughts---do you think Ken Lewis will do the right thing in in his testimony and commit himself/Bank of America to being a partner (instead of a toxic asset) in rebuilding our economy?