Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: AIG pays $165 M in Bonuses!

  1. #1

    Thumbs up AIG pays $165 M in Bonuses!

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...n-bonuses.html

    Yeah, those bonuses are legally required.

    But if I were one of those execs on the receiving end, and I'm already making unseemly amounts of money, I would decline it, or ask that it be donated to charity.

    I certainly wouldn't need it, and it would win me public relations points.

  2. #2
    Non unionized worker also get bonuses for two major reasons.

    They are free agent and there working contract are between 1 or 2 years so other companies are seeking this professional so bonuses is a way to keeping them in the company.

    Secondly non-unionized workers can lose there jobs in an instant since there are no concept of seniority or working conventions. Bonuses become a way to compensate for a risky working market. Its the equivalent of making over time money for unionized workers since non union worker are payed by a yearly salary and union worker are payed by the hour, the extra hours on non-unionized professional is only recognized by the size of there contribution beyond the call of duty in over time with bonuses.

    An engineer can make between 4k$ to 8$k in bonuses for a salary that run between 50K to 70K.

    Also its important that all this money is taxable by the federal and provincial government so after taxes the professional can be left with much less.
    ------------------------------------
    peace out!

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Visiting Planet Earth
    Posts
    4,160
    Quote Originally Posted by bond_james_bond
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...n-bonuses.html

    Yeah, those bonuses are legally required.

    But if I were one of those execs on the receiving end, and I'm already making unseemly amounts of money, I would decline it, or ask that it be donated to charity.

    I certainly wouldn't need it, and it would win me public relations points.
    Hello Mr. Bond,

    I applaud the basic principle of your sentiments, but anyone would be foolish to decline it. It's highly commendable for a any person to live within reasonable comfortable mean without the gross excess. And there's nothing wrong with having more tucked away for unforeseen needs or hard times.

    I agree with your implication that this episode you cite is disgusting. I realize that basing reward on the principle of merit is extremely naive in the reality of the world, but giving out these bonuses at such a time is despicable. As I heard this explained on CNN this morning the reason was the legal obligation of AIG to make these payments. However, since AIG could not make these bonus payments without the influx of public money into the companies financial resources, I wonder if the government couldn't legally block the bonuses. Since this is not money the company earned in my view it should not be considered accessible for possible bonuses. If the company could not continue without the government funds then the funds should not be considered a resource for any previous contractual obligations. The government funds were given for essential operations and bonuses are not strictly essential.

    Anyway, it's just another shameful example of corporate excess at the expense of the public, and how big business is really about the greed of a de facto aristocracy, not "good business" that is both profitable and a benefit to society.

    Quote Originally Posted by player_82
    They are free agent and there working contract are between 1 or 2 years so other companies are seeking this professional so bonuses is a way to keeping them in the company.
    Hello Player,

    Yeah, I understand this and agree with this principle and necessity up to a point. But in these times and this situation such views amount to BULLSHIT. This company would be nothing without the government money. In fact, AIG got off pretty freaking easy when they were able to get the bailout money after so many other large companies had already failed and been left for dead. Apart from the fact that such bonuses tend to be grossly excessive at any time, AIG did not earn this money. This is tax-payer money and these people getting bonuses are just damn lucky they aren't at the unemployment office...never mind getting any bonuses at all. So in this case the rationale of keeping the best people is total BULL. They all helped run the company into near oblivion so how could they possibly be the best people anyway. Nothing against you personally...but a very big BULLSHIT to the view that these people should get any bonuses.

    PUUUUUKE!

    Merlot
    Last edited by Merlot; 03-15-2009 at 10:34 PM.

  4. #4
    I also agree with you Merlot. I don't believe top executives should get bonuses in a government subsidized company. My point was more directed to the working middle class professionals like engineers, accountants, doctors, chemist etc. Who work hard without the benefits off collective conventions. Also the government should withdraw from the private sector and only intervene in a market regulatory fashion, establishing the rules of the trade.

    Happy to hear were on the same wavelength
    ------------------------------------
    peace out!

  5. #5
    possibly be the best people anyway. Nothing against you personally...but a very big BULLSHIT to the view that these people should get any bonuses.
    Took the words and the spirit in which they were meant right out of my mouth!

    However a comment was made that since its public funds, then the receivers of such bonuses should also be public, nothing like full disclosure


    While the instigators of "bad paper" are rewarded, the family man now has to live in a "paper box" .

  6. #6
    These "bonuses" are to be paid largely to sales staff and not to Corporate Officers of AIG. The company has obtained a legal opinion that it is required to pay them.

    These are the same US labour and contract laws which prevent the auto companies from ignoring bloated UAW contracts.
    You are either in favour of enforcing the laws in both situations or changing them. Just don't suck and blow at the same time.

  7. #7
    Even so, sales staff receive commission based on sales quotas. Bonuses are awarded usually on merit !!!

    What would have they (AIG) done if there were no bailout money?? Would they still get bonuses ?? Would sales staff get any commissions ??

    What about the sales staff that are let go because "No bailout " was offered ?? How about the families whom are ruined because of the greed and unethical practise of AIG and other similar financial institutions ??

    And now its an entitlement ???

    And who was the other financial that used part of the bailout for renovations ????

    Sound financial judgement!

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Porter
    Even so, sales staff receive commission based on sales quotas. Bonuses are awarded usually on merit !!!

    What would have they (AIG) done if there were no bailout money?? Would they still get bonuses ?? Would sales staff get any commissions ??

    What about the sales staff that are let go because "No bailout " was offered ?? How about the families whom are ruined because of the greed and unethical practise of AIG and other similar financial institutions ??

    And now its an entitlement ???

    And who was the other financial that used part of the bailout for renovations ????

    Sound financial judgement!
    You have a contract with employees that states if they do something at a prescribed level you pay them a certain amount. You either honour the contract or you get sued. The lawyers have told the company they will not win a lawsuit.

    They may or may not be able to dodge some of this by declaring bankruptcy. Employees are ahead of unsecured creditors and it appears as if they have a valid claim so they may get paid out anyway.

    I don't think AIG has any choice but to pay. Remember also these deals were made when they thought everything was ok. Not knowing things weren't ok was the big crime.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Visiting Planet Earth
    Posts
    4,160

    Simply Outrageous!!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Possum Trot
    These "bonuses" are to be paid largely to sales staff and not to Corporate Officers of AIG. The company has obtained a legal opinion that it is required to pay them.

    These are the same US labour and contract laws which prevent the auto companies from ignoring bloated UAW contracts.
    You are either in favour of enforcing the laws in both situations or changing them. Just don't suck and blow at the same time.
    Hello PT,

    It would be one thing if it was AIG money. It isn't. I stand by my view that the public money provided to AIG which allowed them to continue existing should not be applied to their contractual staff obligations since AIG did not earn that money for themselves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Porter
    Even so, sales staff receive commission based on sales quotas. Bonuses are awarded usually on merit !!!

    What would have they (AIG) done if there were no bailout money?? Would they still get bonuses ?? Would sales staff get any commissions ??

    What about the sales staff that are let go because "No bailout " was offered ?? How about the families whom are ruined because of the greed and unethical practise of AIG and other similar financial institutions ??

    And now its an entitlement ???

    And who was the other financial that used part of the bailout for renovations ????

    Sound financial judgement!
    BINGO Porter,

    If the money is applicable to AIG obligations then how about paying for the monumental damages and losses to their clients along with/or rather than giving bonuses!

    Quote Originally Posted by curious
    Apart from the obvious outrage of this, it gets worse. These bonuses were "retention bonuses"--paid to employees as an incentive to stay with the company. Apart from the obvious absurdity of paying failed employees to stay, instead of just firing them, it appears that 11 of the bonuses were paid to employees who left the company anyway. A special prosecutor should be appointed to investigate AIG. This is probably just the tip of the iceberg.
    RIGHT Curious,

    NY atty gen says 73 AIG execs got $1M bonuses

    http://www.comcast.net/articles/fina...317/AIG.Cuomo/

    ALBANY, N.Y. — Troubled insurance giant American International Group paid bonuses of $1 million or more to 73 employees, including 11 who no longer work for the company, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo said Tuesday.

    Cuomo subpoenaed information from AIG on Monday to determine whether the payments made over the past weekend constitute fraud under state law. He says contracts written in March 2008 guaranteed employees 100 percent of their 2007 pay for 2008, regardless of their performance.

    President Barack Obama and Washington lawmakers have blasted AIG for paying more than $160 million in bonuses to employees of its Financial Products division, the unit primarily responsible for the meltdown that led to a federal bailout of the company, while the company has received billions in taxpayer bailout funds.

    Cuomo said AIG mailed the bonus checks Friday.

    continued...

    As I have said: if bonuses are meant to encourage the best to stay then why did they pay those who have left. Oh yeah, contractual obligations to those who destroyed the company if not for the bailout funds from the same tax-payers AIG failed. And, those who run a company into near oblivion sure aren't the "best" in any conceivable way.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...38395#29738395

    I fully agree with the tone of this statement...not the suggested act of suicide itself.

    Disgusting,

    Merlot
    Last edited by Merlot; 03-17-2009 at 05:40 PM.

  10. #10
    what about nortel fuck!!!!!

Posting Permissions

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