Comments on: The Big 4 and A Living Wage http://retheauditors.com/2008/04/04/the-big-4-and-a-living-wage/ The Business of the Big 4 Audit Firms Tue, 22 May 2012 15:02:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: re: The Auditors » Blog Archive » Laboring In The Big 4 – A Labor Day Special Report http://retheauditors.com/2008/04/04/the-big-4-and-a-living-wage/comment-page-1/#comment-90713 re: The Auditors » Blog Archive » Laboring In The Big 4 – A Labor Day Special Report Wed, 24 Feb 2010 18:05:07 +0000 http://76.12.174.187/?p=643#comment-90713 [...] to fair pay, the Big 4 has to worry about whether they’re paying their own staff as well as their vendors fairly. And based on the lawsuits and labor problems, they’re not doing a very good job of [...] [...] to fair pay, the Big 4 has to worry about whether they’re paying their own staff as well as their vendors fairly. And based on the lawsuits and labor problems, they’re not doing a very good job of [...]

]]> By: Garry http://retheauditors.com/2008/04/04/the-big-4-and-a-living-wage/comment-page-1/#comment-2551 Garry Sat, 14 Mar 2009 07:44:50 +0000 http://76.12.174.187/?p=643#comment-2551 what a interesting story I read in this journal, respct! what a interesting story I read in this journal, respct!

]]> By: Anonymous http://retheauditors.com/2008/04/04/the-big-4-and-a-living-wage/comment-page-1/#comment-504 Anonymous Mon, 07 Apr 2008 04:59:00 +0000 http://76.12.174.187/?p=643#comment-504 I saw the title "The Big 4 and a Living Wage" and some wishful thinking led me to believe that this post would discuss how Big 4 Auditor salaries (while considered 'high' for students directly out of college) particularly in New York and other big cities barely qualify as a Living Wage for working professionals. <br/><br/>Big4AuditorNY I saw the title “The Big 4 and a Living Wage” and some wishful thinking led me to believe that this post would discuss how Big 4 Auditor salaries (while considered ‘high’ for students directly out of college) particularly in New York and other big cities barely qualify as a Living Wage for working professionals.

Big4AuditorNY

]]> By: Francine McKenna http://retheauditors.com/2008/04/04/the-big-4-and-a-living-wage/comment-page-1/#comment-503 Francine McKenna Sun, 06 Apr 2008 22:45:00 +0000 http://76.12.174.187/?p=643#comment-503 @Content - A few comments to respond.<br/><br/>I believe the cafeteria is exclusively for PwC, who occupies the vast majority of the space in that building. I have been there many times. I also believe Aramark is PwC's vendor in this contract. If I am wrong, and you know for sure, please let me know. I don't believe the cafeteria is public or run by the owners of the building. I think Mr. Nally's comments at Penn State confirm the fact that this situation looks bad for PwC, regardless of the details.<br/><br/>The independence issue is already there, if Aramark is PwC's vendor. Section 602.02.b of the Codification of Financial Reporting ("the Codification"), states that materiality is not a consideration in the case of a direct financial interest." <br/><br/>Further, "direct and material indirect business relationships, other than as a consumer in the normal course of business, with a client ... will adversely affect the accountant's independence with respect to that client. Such a mutuality or identity of interests with the client would cause the accountant to lose the appearance of objectivity and impartiality in the performance of his audit because the advancement of his interest would, to some extent, be dependent upon the client." <br/><br/>PwC has to manage their involvement in this contract to make sure they are not getting any better deal from Aramark in exchange for lower fees to Goldman Sachs, for example. But as their auditor, they can point out that this ongoing labor dispute and any negative consequences may impact the risk profile of Aramark and its investor, Goldman Sachs. There is also reputational and litigation risk, potentially. These are within the purview of PwC to discuss with Goldman Sachs as their auditor. KPMG is Aramark's auditor. Perhaps we should also be trying to get them to understand the issue.<br/><br/>Finally, you have mistaken my interest in this subject as a deeply personal one rather than as strong interest because I think it is extremely relevant to the theme of this blog - the business of the Big 4. I would never buy stock in Goldman Sachs and try to influence the situation as an activist investor. <br/><br/>Notwithstanding the fact that some folks think I am becoming Evelyn Y. Davis, there are much better candidates for influencing Goldman Sachs both financially and politically. And I want to continue to write about Goldman Sachs. They are too rich a subject. Owning their stock would compromise my independence. @Content – A few comments to respond.

I believe the cafeteria is exclusively for PwC, who occupies the vast majority of the space in that building. I have been there many times. I also believe Aramark is PwC’s vendor in this contract. If I am wrong, and you know for sure, please let me know. I don’t believe the cafeteria is public or run by the owners of the building. I think Mr. Nally’s comments at Penn State confirm the fact that this situation looks bad for PwC, regardless of the details.

The independence issue is already there, if Aramark is PwC’s vendor. Section 602.02.b of the Codification of Financial Reporting (“the Codification”), states that materiality is not a consideration in the case of a direct financial interest.”

Further, “direct and material indirect business relationships, other than as a consumer in the normal course of business, with a client … will adversely affect the accountant’s independence with respect to that client. Such a mutuality or identity of interests with the client would cause the accountant to lose the appearance of objectivity and impartiality in the performance of his audit because the advancement of his interest would, to some extent, be dependent upon the client.”

PwC has to manage their involvement in this contract to make sure they are not getting any better deal from Aramark in exchange for lower fees to Goldman Sachs, for example. But as their auditor, they can point out that this ongoing labor dispute and any negative consequences may impact the risk profile of Aramark and its investor, Goldman Sachs. There is also reputational and litigation risk, potentially. These are within the purview of PwC to discuss with Goldman Sachs as their auditor. KPMG is Aramark’s auditor. Perhaps we should also be trying to get them to understand the issue.

Finally, you have mistaken my interest in this subject as a deeply personal one rather than as strong interest because I think it is extremely relevant to the theme of this blog – the business of the Big 4. I would never buy stock in Goldman Sachs and try to influence the situation as an activist investor.

Notwithstanding the fact that some folks think I am becoming Evelyn Y. Davis, there are much better candidates for influencing Goldman Sachs both financially and politically. And I want to continue to write about Goldman Sachs. They are too rich a subject. Owning their stock would compromise my independence.

]]> By: Content http://retheauditors.com/2008/04/04/the-big-4-and-a-living-wage/comment-page-1/#comment-502 Content Sun, 06 Apr 2008 21:59:00 +0000 http://76.12.174.187/?p=643#comment-502 I think it should be mentioned in all of this that PwC does not own 300 Madison, CIBC does, PwC leases the space. it stands to reason then that Aramark's contract is with CIBC. Furthermore, PwC acts as Goldman Sachs audiotr and I'm sure it would be an independence violation of they began to tell Goldman or its subsidiaries how to negotiate contracts. Since this an issue that you feel very strongly about, perhaps you could purchase Goldman Sachs stock and act as the appropriate party for bringing about the change you wish to see, the Goldman Sachs shareholders. I think it should be mentioned in all of this that PwC does not own 300 Madison, CIBC does, PwC leases the space. it stands to reason then that Aramark’s contract is with CIBC. Furthermore, PwC acts as Goldman Sachs audiotr and I’m sure it would be an independence violation of they began to tell Goldman or its subsidiaries how to negotiate contracts. Since this an issue that you feel very strongly about, perhaps you could purchase Goldman Sachs stock and act as the appropriate party for bringing about the change you wish to see, the Goldman Sachs shareholders.

]]>