Every week, I probably get three or four voting proxies from various companies in which we own stock. These proxies ask shareholders to vote on a variety of topics from bylaw amendments to executive compensation.

This year, I have not voted in favor of one proposal where the company has requested to issue stock or stock options for additional compensation or bonuses for its executives.

The reason? For the past eight years, I've watched shareholder value in many large companies essentially remain the same (and in some cases, drop), while a very small group of senior executives have made off with an exorbitant amount of cash.

When you look at the governing bodies of these companies (the board of directors), most of them are acting senior executives themselves. I've wondered if they have the ability to truly recommend what's in the shareholders' best interest when the person whose compensation package they are voting on, may one day be voting on theirs. It sure appears that there is a fraternity among senior executives whereby they look out for each other's best interest over those of their shareholders.

This brings me to a perfect example. Forbes magazine just ran an excellent article on how public companies are more than overpaying executives who are not performing. If you have time, you should read the entire article. I can summarize the story by giving you the facts of one example (of many):

Gary Forsee became CEO of Sprint in 2003, and negotiated a pay package that assured him riches whether he failed or succeeded.

Sprint paid him $6.5 Million in cash and stock to leave his former company. Sprint bought his existing Atlanta home to allow him to move to Kansas City. Sprint paid between $1.5 Million - $5 Million each year he was employed.

During his tenure, Sprint's stock fell from $25 a share to $7.40 a share.

At the end of 2007, Forsee was fired "without cause." Sprint gave him a $40 Million severance package. Sprint also paid for "outplacement services" that landed him the job as President of the University of Missouri.

Whatever happened to the old-fashioned notion of paying for performance? If you're a shareholder, you can always let your voice be heard by voting with your proxy.