Actually, raises and bonuses might be entirely justified for top executives when the company is losing money. On the assumption that their efforts prevented the company from losing a lot more or perhaps going out of business.
Tough to determine, of course. But then the process of providing a share in profits when a business is doing well isn’t entirely logical, either, since whether a business makes money often has more to do with business climate and other external factors than with decisions made by execs.
IOW, a CEO who kept his company afloat with great effort during hard times is more deserving of a bonus than one who drifted along in good times.
A pretty large assumption if you ask me. These aren't hard times. The economy is improving, the markets are up, if a company misses its targets then its more likely bad management decisions than business conditions. These guys seem to have made big bonuses for doing a bad job.