Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678
Results 106 to 119 of 119

Thread: Without huge salaries, financial leaders won't try hard?

  1. #106
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    Financial compensation for failure is ridiculous. I'm fully aware that such ridiculous and overinflated clauses are stipulated in said contracts. Problem is, they aren't based on PERFORMANCE. The last decade has seen said payouts increase almost geometrically in proportion to whatever sad leadership they were supposed to buy.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  2. #107
    Elite Member MrsMarsters's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    HELL
    Posts
    7,238

    Default


    I hope you know that if you choose to feed it, it is your responsibility to care for it. FOREVER.

  3. #108
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    486

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grimmlok View Post
    Financial compensation for failure is ridiculous. I'm fully aware that such ridiculous and overinflated clauses are stipulated in said contracts. Problem is, they aren't based on PERFORMANCE. The last decade has seen said payouts increase almost geometrically in proportion to whatever sad leadership they were supposed to buy.
    How would you go about measuring performance? Are you saying that no one should get paid unless they produce some quantifiable result- and how would you go about measuring said result? As I have said before, it can take years to see positive results out of restructuring. So while the company suffers growing pains and losses as the business is restructured, the CEO shouldn't be paid? How about GM? It's the CEO's fault that GM made those union contracts years and years ago? Who would take the CEO job at GM if it meant turning a profit within his/her tenure? Sorry, but that business is just not going to be profitable no matter how skilled the management is and there is a general consensus that the GM head has made positive strides with GM, just not enough to overcome the burdens of the union contracts.

    Only reason those CEOs agreed to the $1 is because their stock options would be absolutely worthless if the companies went under and they had already been paid good salaries the year before.

    It's funny how all the "little" people want the big bad management to forgo their salaries and still deal with the headaches and responsibility that "little" people shirk. Most workers don't have the ambition or desire to make the sacrifices and deal with responsibility that CEO's have to deal with. When a "little" person neglects to comply with a procedure and tons of affected product has to be recalled, who do you think is held accountable for damages? Maybe the "little" person may be fired, but the big guy may be fired and held criminally liable depending on the circumstances/situation.


    How about all the wealthy members of Congress forgoing their salaries until the economy gets back on track? Bloomberg only takes $1 a year for running NYC. I'm sure Rahm Emmanuel can forgo his Chief of Staff salary since he was paid $16M for the 2 years he worked at Fannie Mae. No one is demanding that politicians forgo their salaries- so why are they expecting a CEO to do the same?

  4. #109
    Super Moderator Tati's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Your Pocket
    Posts
    18,052

    Default

    ^ Not exactly true. Obama has capped the salaries of his staff, which are nowhere near comparable to those of CEOs in the first place.

    No one's suggesting the CEOs shouldn't get paid. I'll spell it out real simple for ya. They shouldn't get to take huge bonuses out of their corporate welfare cheques. The burden shouldn't be on taxpayers to reward CEOs handsomely for their companies going under, or to incent them to stay on. I've asked this before of another poster, but you did notice the only CEO salaries in question here are those of companies accepting government bailouts, didn't you?
    If you reveal your secrets to the wind you should not blame the wind for revealing them to the trees.

    - Kahlil Gibran

  5. #110
    Super Moderator twitchy2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Milliways
    Posts
    55,411

    Default

    Oh for fuck's sake. Nobody said they shouldn't be paid. They shouldn't be paid a bonus or outrageous salaries for failure.
    "If you are not outraged, then you are not paying attention," Heather Heyer's facebook quote.

  6. #111
    Elite Member louiswinthorpe111's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Middle America
    Posts
    12,059

    Default

    Plain and simple, if you take money from the Federal Government to prevent your company from going bankrupt, then pay yourself and your cronnies exhorbitant amounts of money in "bonuses," which is really on the taxpayer's dime, is wrong and unethical. THAT's the problem here. Not only did these companies FAIL, but took bailout money from the American people.

    As a "little" person, I am paid bonuses on based on my performance. If I don't perform at my job, no bonus.

  7. #112
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,540

    Default

    No no no...not bonuses, they are called Performance Awards...All together now "What Bullshit!"

  8. #113
    Elite Member nana55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    dreaming about being on a lake in Ontario
    Posts
    4,085

    Default

    Geez, this troll is stupid. NO ONE, NO ONE said they shouldn't be paid. I don't even mind some bonuses if they show they are turning things around. But no bonuses when we are paying your fucking salary.
    If I can't be a good example, then let me be a horrible warning.

  9. #114
    Elite Member Grimmlok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    In WhoreLand fucking your MOM
    Posts
    55,372

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by soogar View Post
    How would you go about measuring performance? Are you saying that no one should get paid unless they produce some quantifiable result- and how would you go about measuring said result? As I have said before, it can take years to see positive results out of restructuring?
    *gives you a look like he stumbled on the SPED class*

    They're called PERFORMANCE GOALPOSTS.
    I am from the American CIA and I have a radio in my head. I am going to kill you.

  10. #115
    Friend of Gossip Rocks! buttmunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Uranus
    Posts
    31,885

    Default

    Stop throwing around those big words, Grim. It confuses teh trolls.
    'Those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.' Ben Franklin

    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."
    --Sinclair Lewis

  11. #116
    Elite Member Lobelia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    a backwards hillbilly state
    Posts
    20,801

    Default

    Bomb threat. This thread must be evacuated immediately.
    "I've cautiously embraced jeggings"
    Emma Peel aka Pacific Breeze aka Wilde1 aka gogodancer aka maribou

    Yip, yip, yip in your tiny indignation. Bark furiously on, lady dog.

  12. #117
    Elite Member Penny Lane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Over the hills and far away
    Posts
    21,646

    Default

    I will not be held accountable for any people who get left behind.

  13. #118
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,808

    Default

    "Golden parachutes" are negotiated as part of the CEO's contract by both parties.

    CEOs are not miracle workers. If the company is in really bad shape, it has to make an attractive offer to get the right person. It is not easy to run a company and turn it around. As I have said before, people who achieve that level of leadership have loads of experience and options available to them
    . The CEO does not own the company so what incentive is there to take the reigns [AND IT'S "reins" BTW] and the grief of running a company if there is no financial compensation? It can take years for structural changes to bring about benefit.
    It seems like a lot of these people are in it for the short-term. If their job is to come in and "turn things around," then do they really deserve BONUSES if they fail to do so?

    And, d'oh, the incentive to take the reins is that if the company does well, they get a huge fucking bonus. That is the incentive right there. If people get bonuses for failing miserably, then you have turned financial incentives topsy-turvey. You have just given people financial incentive to bugger around incompetently with no negative consequences for fucking up.

    If a baseball player has a clause in his contract that he gets an extra $500K bonus if he wins MVP, guess what happens if he doesn't get MVP? He doesn't get the bonus.

    Why the hell shouldn't they suffer a little like everyone else? If Joe Blow's company doesn't make their numbers, Joe Blow knows he's not going to get a turkey at Christmas, for fuck's sake!

    If the problem is that the CEOs salaries are too low and the bonus is supposed to address that deficit, then raise the salaries. I'm sure there is a reason that their compensation is structured to be mostly bonuses--I wonder what it is?

  14. #119
    Elite Member Novice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Beyond Caring, then hang a left.
    Posts
    42,273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BBDSP View Post
    It seems like a lot of these people are in it for the short-term. If their job is to come in and "turn things around," then do they really deserve BONUSES if they fail to do so?

    And, d'oh, the incentive to take the reins is that if the company does well, they get a huge fucking bonus. That is the incentive right there. If people get bonuses for failing miserably, then you have turned financial incentives topsy-turvey. You have just given people financial incentive to bugger around incompetently with no negative consequences for fucking up.

    If a baseball player has a clause in his contract that he gets an extra $500K bonus if he wins MVP, guess what happens if he doesn't get MVP? He doesn't get the bonus.

    Why the hell shouldn't they suffer a little like everyone else? If Joe Blow's company doesn't make their numbers, Joe Blow knows he's not going to get a turkey at Christmas, for fuck's sake!

    If the problem is that the CEOs salaries are too low and the bonus is supposed to address that deficit, then raise the salaries. I'm sure there is a reason that their compensation is structured to be mostly bonuses--I wonder what it is?
    Well, the rest of us get told that its to motivate us, which would work for the CEOs too, except when they get their bonuses when they fail too....
    Free Charmed.

Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: April 3rd, 2008, 09:12 PM
  2. Hard financial facts turning against Hillary Clinton
    By ingi in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 24th, 2008, 09:44 AM
  3. Don't be fooled by $1 C.E.O. salaries
    By celeb_2006 in forum U.S. Politics and Issues
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: June 10th, 2007, 12:09 PM
  4. Star salaries coming down in Hollywood - report
    By mtlebay in forum Gossip Archive
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: May 4th, 2006, 07:34 PM
  5. Mariah sports huge engagement ring...HUGE
    By ourmaninBusan in forum Gossip Archive
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: December 11th, 2005, 05:05 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •