If AIG chooses to accept bailouts from the federal government, doesn't
that give the government the right to set any conditions they want? The
bonuses may be fair and earned, but an organization that is at risk of
failing due to lack of funds can no longer afford non-essential costs
like bonuses if it wants to keep providing paychecks or employment at all.
Tyler
Tom Hargrave wrote:
This issue 'came to head' with the AIG bonus payouts. I've worked for salary
as an upper level Manager and can tell you that bonuses are setup by
contractually binding goals and paid based on performance to those goals. In
other words, the bonuses were due the recipient just like your weekly
paycheck is due to you.
1. Do I like the fact that they received bonuses? No!
2. Are the bonuses fair? Yes - the bonuses were instituted (as they always
are) to increase performance & make sure goals are met. I'm sure that some
bonuses were even tied to cost cutting measures.
3. Did they earn their bonuses? Yes - see answer 2 above.
4. Should they keep their bonuses? Yes - see answer 2 above.
So, when does the Government have the right to decide that profit, bonuses
or pay in the private sector is excessive? How would you feel of the
government decided that YOU were making too much money and gave YOU a 20%
PAY CUT or TAX INCREASE?
That's what they are trying to do to AIG!
Thanks,
Tom Hargrave
www.kegkits.com
256-656-1924
_______________________________________
http://www.okiebenz.com
For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com
To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
