Guillaume Faury’s total compensation at Airbus does not read like a simple payslip. It is broken down into a fixed portion, a capped annual variable portion, and performance shares whose acquisition spans several years. This structure explains why the link between Airbus’s commercial results and the actual compensation of its CEO is neither linear nor immediate.
Time Lag Between Airbus Results and Actual Compensation
The first reflex is to compare Airbus’s record order book with the increase in its CEO’s compensation. This shortcut overlooks a structuring mechanism: performance shares are only acquired after several years, provided that financial and non-financial objectives are met over the entire period.
You may also like : Everything You Need to Know About the Validity Period of an ID Card in France
A massive delivery exercise does not automatically translate into an immediate gain for the CEO. The Board of Directors has codified a cap on the annual variable portion, expressed as a multiple of the fixed salary. Even in the case of occasional overperformance, this cap prevents any mechanical surge.
Understanding Guillaume Faury’s salary at Airbus requires distinguishing what is received for a given year from what remains contingent on deferred objectives. This distinction changes the interpretation of the amounts published in the annual reports.
Related reading : The Origin and Size of Kaatsup: Discover the Incredible Story of Kalina
Non-Financial Criteria in Airbus’s Variable Compensation
Guillaume Faury’s variable portion is not solely based on EBIT or net cash flow. The Board of Directors has integrated climate and eco-efficiency objectives into the calculation of long-term compensation. This choice distinguishes Airbus from many industrial groups where the non-financial component remains marginal or cosmetic.
According to the 2024 general assembly documents, the weighting given assigns a significant share to sustainability in the performance criteria. EBIT and cash flow remain dominant, but the environmental trajectory now weighs into the evaluation.
What These Criteria Change Practically
The addition of non-financial criteria is not just a display. If climate objectives are not met, a portion of the long-term compensation is simply not paid. The executive bears a real risk related to the group’s environmental commitments, not just its commercial results.
This indexing on sustainability creates an operational paradox. Airbus is ramping up the production of commercial aircraft to meet an unprecedented order book while displaying ambitions to reduce its carbon footprint. Faury’s compensation reflects this tension between volume and environmental trajectory.
Value Sharing at Airbus: Salary Disputes Against Dividends
Guillaume Faury’s compensation increased by 33% in 2025 according to data reported by the CGT Airbus. At the same time, salary negotiations for Commercial Aircraft employees resulted in proposals that unions describe as indecent.
The figures highlighted by the unions present a direct comparison:
- Dividends paid to shareholders reach €2.53 billion in 2026, an increase of 6.7% compared to 2025
- General salary increases proposed for non-executives amount to 1.8%, with 0.7% general increase and 0.8% individual increase on September 1, 2026
- Executives are offered a 1.5% individual increase, with no general increase
- The CGT demands an average gross monthly increase of €237, a level far removed from management’s proposals
The gap between the executive’s compensation trajectory and that of employees fuels a debate on the sharing of wealth produced by the group. Unions point out that the amount of dividends reported per number of Airbus employees worldwide amounts to over €15,000 per person.
Executive Compensation and Work Organization
The conflict is not solely about salaries. Tensions over remote work and work organization overlap with salary demands. Employees denounce what they perceive as a challenge to acquired conditions, at a time when management justifies its choices by the imperatives of ramping up production.
The legitimacy of performance-indexed compensation clashes with the perception of an imbalance in the sharing of results. The Board of Directors can argue that the compensation structure incentivizes the executive to steer the group’s sustainable growth. Employees observe that the fruits of this growth reach them sparingly.
Airbus and Say on Pay: What Shareholders Vote
Shareholders of Airbus SE vote each year on the compensation policy during the general assembly. This say on pay mechanism constitutes the only formal lever for contesting the CEO’s compensation outside the Board of Directors.
The vote concerns the overall policy and the compensation actually paid for the previous fiscal year. A rejection does not automatically lead to a modification, but it sends a signal of distrust that the Board must take into account in its subsequent deliberations.
In the European aerospace sector, Airbus displays some of the highest levels of executive compensation. The three-tier structure (fixed, annual variable, performance shares) is standard, but the amounts reflect the size of the group and the complexity of its industrial activity, spanning commercial aircraft, defense, and space.
The debate over Guillaume Faury’s compensation will not be resolved by a single figure. The question posed by employees is less about the amount than about the distribution rule. As long as production rates increase and the order book fills up, the pressure for a rebalancing between dividends, executive compensation, and salaries will remain a recurring topic in Airbus’s governance.