Bit outdated, since I believe the ratio in the US has since peaked at 400:1.
As mentioned the standard model for CEO pay heavily favors stock options. The absolute lowest I've seen was a 1:1:2 distribution for salary:benefits:stock options. As mentioned in previous Wall Street threads stock options make up the bulk of annual bonuses, which in turn make up the bulk of any CEO's earning. The usual argument is that stock options give the CEO an incentive to increase shareholder value; i.e. hike the stock price, but since so much stock is given to begin with the CEO still makes millions unless the company goes Chapter 11. In any case its easy for the company because they don't have to search for the liquid cash you need to pay one guy millions in compensation.
(Incidentally, this really works best with high ranking officers whose actions tangibly affect the company's stock price. My last company gave me stock options as part of a regular bonus last year, but I can't really affect the stock price. On paper its worth 8 months my salary, but it promptly dropped beyond the strike price immediately after issuance. I never exercised it.)
Since one CEO's pay doesn't mean any statistics-wise, here's a comparison of CEO pay in worldwide banks in 2009.
Forget comparing USA to China's gigantic state-owned banks; Compare the CEO of HSBC to the CEO of JP Morgan. Both are gigantic financial institutions equally guilty in the global recession, its the best apples-to-apples comparison of the ridiculous pay of America.