?

Log in

Previous Entry | Next Entry

More Bonus Bullshit

Lawmaker sees Fannie, Freddie bonus "insult"

When are these fucking jackasses going to get it:
If a company loses money, and has to be bailed out, no bonuses should be paid, period. They're lucky to still have jobs!

Retention? So what? These fucking entitled people should just be glad they still have a company to work for. That's their retention bonus from us, the taxpayer. We don't need to give them extra to convince them to stay. There are plenty of people willing to take their jobs from all the banks that have failed.

In every other sector, if your company loses money, you don't get any performance or retention bonuses. The only bonus you get is being spared the layoff axe. What the fuck makes these vultures think they are so fucking special that they should get bonuses on the taxpayer dime just for not quitting?

Seriously, if the manufacturing sector can rip up union contracts to avoid bankruptcy, then these jackals can rip up their precious bonus contracts for their pampered employees. Seriously, banks, it's time to put on your big kid panties and suck up the pain like the rest of us have been for years.

Comments

( 3 comments — Leave a comment )
chipuni
Apr. 3rd, 2009 11:18 pm (UTC)
You have that perfectly.

When I worked for a Big Company, the years that the company did poorly -- I got no bonus. No raise. No nothing. Even when I did well, I got nothing extra. Not even extra credit for later years.

If your company is doing so poorly that it needs a bailout... NO ONE should get bonuses.

countgeiger
Apr. 3rd, 2009 11:29 pm (UTC)
I agree with you where bonuses are concerned. But there's another aspect to this - I have myself had jobs where they knew a person with my skill set was hard to get in the first place, and harder to keep, so they'd structure the offer letter to read something like "You will be paid XX,XXX per annum, paid in twice monthly increments. In addition, if you remain employed by the Company on 31 August, 200x, you will recieve an additional lump-sum payment of $xx,xxx".

These are not performance bonuses, they're compensation packages intended to make sure that people stay in their jobs. Hell, when my father was working for Bechtel on overseas construction jobs, they'd write in similar (and quite large) completion bonuses where if he didn't quit, and didnt' get fired for cause ( there were some that did, drinking problems and the like ), he'd get a fairly large lump sum payment.

Note - I'm in NO WAY saying this justifies a $1,000,000 payment. But if these were written as part of offer letters, and phrased as retention incentives, not performance bonuses or compnay performance bonuses, then they're contractually obligated to pay them. No, not all of them were this, but I gurantee you, having had a $25,000 retention bonus in my contract with Fannie Mae as a systems admin 15 years ago, many of them are.
ravan
Apr. 4th, 2009 01:10 am (UTC)
IMO, if the company is on the rocks, they need to re-evaluate all employment contracts. They do it to union workers all the damn time. Why should banks and white collar be different?

Then again, it could be that they aren't actually "bonuses", but balloon payments of salary based on longevity.

I know that I haven't received a bonus in over two years, even with the parent corporation being in the black, because my subcompany isn't showing enough profit. I get stock awards that vest in the future as part of my annual compensation, but it isn't a bonus.
( 3 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

May 2017
S M T W T F S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner