Edison Cuts Executive Bonuses After Eaton Fire Tragedy

Utility cites responsibility for deadly blaze that killed 19 and destroyed over 9,400 buildings

Published on Feb. 22, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

Southern California Edison, the state's second-largest investor-owned power provider, announced it will reduce executive bonuses by an estimated $2 million as a result of the devastating Eaton fire near Los Angeles last year. The utility said its equipment was likely the cause of the blaze, which killed 19 people and destroyed over 9,400 buildings in suburban Altadena.

Why it matters

This is only the second time Edison has reduced executive pay due to a wildfire, signaling the company is taking more accountability for the impacts of its infrastructure. The move comes as Edison faces hundreds of lawsuits from victims and criticism that its compensation offers have been insufficient.

The details

About half of the bonus reductions will come from the pay of Edison International's president and CEO Pedro J. Pizarro. The company said it has enhanced benefits for fire victims and made a $2 million donation to support recovery efforts, but some residents and lawyers have argued the compensation is still inadequate. Edison has also filed lawsuits against local governments and another utility, claiming they contributed to the destruction.

  • The Eaton fire occurred in 2025 near Los Angeles.
  • Edison announced the bonus reductions on February 18, 2026.

The players

Southern California Edison

California's second-largest investor-owned power provider.

Pedro J. Pizarro

President and chief executive of Edison International, the parent company of Southern California Edison.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“It's kind of a reflection of what the community's been through. It's just a tragedy.”

— Pedro J. Pizarro, President and CEO, Edison International (dnyuz.com)

What’s next

Edison said it would now offer renters enough money to cover current market-rate rent rather than basing the amount on the rent they had paid before the fire.

The takeaway

This case highlights Edison's efforts to take more accountability for the impacts of its infrastructure, though victims and their lawyers argue the company's compensation has still been insufficient. It underscores the growing challenges utilities face in balancing shareholder interests with community needs in the face of natural disasters.