Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't understand it? do they have to have a bonus right now. These people caused the company to go under and WE bailed them out and now WE are paying their bonuses of 160,000,000? Where is the logic?
1) CEOs always need bonuses, under all circumstances.
2) Not only the CEOs get fat bonuses, but a large number of top executives.
3) Lower income employees are the ones who do not need bonuses. They already proved they can live on limited resources.
ING is a Dutch company and is not eligible for bailout money.
I know you meant AIG but my wife works for ING and gets comments from people occasionally about money they have received. It's a little frustrating for her.
ING is a Dutch company and is not eligible for bailout money.
I know you meant AIG but my wife works for ING and gets comments from people occasionally about money they have received. It's a little frustrating for her.
If the bonus was written into YOUR employment,would YOU be willing to NOT receive it?
If a company promised you healthcare benefits for free and then reneged would you be happy with the decision?
Thousands of companies went bankrupt and couldn't respect their promises and contracts. There are others that stopped offering health benefits or offered them to employees only but not their families. I once worked for a company that matched 401k forever, but this year they did not.
Those who were expecting bonuses - I understand them. The question is why a company that received so much money from the government still wants to pay them. Let me guess that if a few low ranked employees payment was in question under same circumstances, they would have been terminated today.
Location: Visitation between Wal-Mart & Home Depot
8,309 posts, read 38,779,335 times
Reputation: 7185
Quote:
Originally Posted by redwine
I don't understand it? do they have to have a bonus right now. These people caused the company to go under and WE bailed them out and now WE are paying their bonuses of 160,000,000? Where is the logic?
Well, obviously...
If AIG doesn't stay competitive in terms of salary and additional compensation, their employees and management may jump ship and go to the competition.
Thousands of companies went bankrupt and couldn't respect their promises and contracts. There are others that stopped offering health benefits or offered them to employees only but not their families. I once worked for a company that matched 401k forever, but this year they did not.
Those who were expecting bonuses - I understand them. The question is why a company that received so much money from the government still wants to pay them. Let me guess that if a few low ranked employees payment was in question under same circumstances, they would have been terminated today.
Who knows...however the fedgov. shouldn't be deciding who gets a bonus.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
