Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-26-2009, 10:04 AM
 
Location: Right where I want to be.
4,507 posts, read 9,065,829 times
Reputation: 3361

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emeraldmaiden View Post
Be nice. I, personally, have not read the terms of these contracts, and I suspect, neither have you. I have also stated that my experience is in construction contracts and not employment contracts.

Now, if these people have left prior to their retention dates, or without accomplishing their tasks, their contracts would be void. I think we can safely assume that tanking the company was not one of the reasons they'd get a retention bonus.
I am nice, just frustrated.

It is very possible that some of the retention dates were before March 2009 or that those who have left already have completed their tasks. This was the clean up crew, not necessarily those who made the mess in the first place.

True, anyone who left the company and broke the contract would not be eligible for the bonus but that certainly isn't the case for those who still remain and were subject to government extortion and threats after fulfilling their contracts, after the company and the government reaffirmed their contracts. It all stinks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-26-2009, 10:04 AM
 
21,026 posts, read 22,158,177 times
Reputation: 5941
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristansMommy View Post
GD.. we were told that these "contracts" were in place BEFORE they recieved this money fromt he GOV'T and that the gov't didn't negotiate this contract!!! That means the execs of this company promised something they KNEW they didn't have.

The gov't should NEVER have given them the money until and unless these contracts were voided.. because there is NO WAY IN HELL that Americans should have to pay overbloated salaries for a crappy job PERIOD!!

They should take the $1 and be happy with it. Even the putz's resignation letter said he has no worries about money. . because he lived off "false riches" acquired by the company.

They are lucky they aren't asked to return the money they lost for the company AND this country.

STay.. fix what you ****ed up and THEN we'll give you what you worked for.

Considering how f'd up AIG STILL is.. doesn't seem like they earned that money for "doing their job".

I really could care less WHAT you say.. these men do not deservethe bonuses. Let them recieve a bonus once the company is turned around and they start earning it once again.. NOT while the rest of us are paying them to live their high life
I agree...



and isn't it funny how the repubs have fits if some poor person buys an extra bag of potato chips with our tax money(class envy???)
but because of their fear and worship of the wealthy they think it's OK for their taxes to aid the crooks and FAILURES at AIG ???

And that's the mindset of the people at AIG..."we are the wealthy, we don't care what happens to the country we will screw it and the taxpayers because the wealthy are ALWAYS right! And (LOL!) look at all the braindead repubs who are on our side!! We suck up their hard earned money and they're all for us! Wow, we REALLY have them duped!!"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2009, 10:13 AM
 
11,944 posts, read 14,788,537 times
Reputation: 2772
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
Companies cannot "break" contracts (and have them remain "contracts" ) Unilaterally.
Sure they do. Run the company in the ground deliberately, you can go to a judge and get him to agree to cancel every airline employees pension. Forget the fact that they sacrificed other benefits over the course of 30yrs, and poor administrative performance was the real cause of their punishment. Retroactively stealing someone else's money by writ is acceptable to you because they aren't the top 5%???

Participate on the pirate ship that sponsors legislation to muscle against public trust for immediate gratification.

Enter into a bogus contract based on speculation where no risk was willing to be taken, only rewards, regardless of performance. Free ride?
Industry wide business plan from the get go??? What small business enjoys that kind of gravy??

Take EXECUTIVE position, charged with steering the ship in earnest toward legitimate business endeavors, but expect to be the exorbitantly paid ferry man who didn't get you to the other side. (Don't hourly employees get paid so little because they have lesser risks???)

Gotta love when marshal law is declared throughout financial sector how some poor put upon white guy is screaming about his rights when his very profession is the ill gotten gains causing the mess. To hell with the company, to hell with anyone else. That's what passes for leadership material these days, folks, and some are more than happy to defend them as personal heros.

The irony hasn't escaped joe public that while their worth was being robbed 3 ways (frozen wages, inflation & massive tax liabilities for behemoth corporate welfare holding them hostage) to finance this guys colossal ego, he and his ilk have been arrogantly referring to joe public as thieves for the past 30 damned years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2009, 10:42 AM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 27,023,656 times
Reputation: 15645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Who?Me?! View Post
I agree...



and isn't it funny how the repubs have fits if some poor person buys an extra bag of potato chips with our tax money(class envy???)
but because of their fear and worship of the wealthy they think it's OK for their taxes to aid the crooks and FAILURES at AIG ???

And that's the mindset of the people at AIG..."we are the wealthy, we don't care what happens to the country we will screw it and the taxpayers because the wealthy are ALWAYS right! And (LOL!) look at all the braindead repubs who are on our side!! We suck up their hard earned money and they're all for us! Wow, we REALLY have them duped!!"
Where do you get that anyone (at least here) is "all for them"? I think it's been said quite plainly that while the bonus was disgusting it was done properly by contract both with AIG AND the government so should be upheld but not done again. It's called integrity, you know, following through with what you agreed to even if it hurts?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2009, 10:47 AM
 
21,026 posts, read 22,158,177 times
Reputation: 5941
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj View Post
Where do you get that anyone (at least here) is "all for them"? I think it's been said quite plainly that while the bonus was disgusting it was done properly by contract both with AIG AND the government so should be upheld but not done again. It's called integrity, you know, following through with what you agreed to even if it hurts?
..."we are the wealthy, we don't care what happens to the country we will screw it and the taxpayers because the wealthy are ALWAYS right! And (LOL!) look at all the braindead repubs who are on our side!! We suck up their hard earned money and they're all for us! Wow, we REALLY have them duped!!"



INTEGRITY would involve RETURNING ill-gotten bonuses that YOU and I have had to pay for.

INTEGRITY would involve thinking of your country FIRST!

INTEGRITY would involve knowing you FAILED (whether on purpose or not) and don't deserve bonuses paid for by the people you SCREWED!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2009, 10:50 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,830,565 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
Companies cannot "break" contracts (and have them remain "contracts" ) Unilaterally.
Perhaps. But contracts can be, and have been re-negotiated. See UAW. Where were you? Let me guess... criticizing UAW?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2009, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Thumb of Michigan
4,494 posts, read 7,483,911 times
Reputation: 2541
Quote:
Originally Posted by Who?Me?! View Post
..."we are the wealthy, we don't care what happens to the country we will screw it and the taxpayers because the wealthy are ALWAYS right! And (LOL!) look at all the braindead repubs who are on our side!! We suck up their hard earned money and they're all for us! Wow, we REALLY have them duped!!"



INTEGRITY would involve RETURNING ill-gotten bonuses that YOU and I have had to pay for.

INTEGRITY would involve thinking of your country FIRST!

INTEGRITY would involve knowing you FAILED (whether on purpose or not) and don't deserve bonuses paid for by the people you SCREWED!
Since B. Obama has been elected, prinicple and personal responsibility have been elusive of those that lean hard-right. You'd think the market was cornered, so to speak, when it comes to ethics and integrity.

It'd be nice to see a spoof of AIG and the GOP consisting of a commerical called "Got Principle" in lieu of the Got Milk ads that run on t.v. Another good one would be "American Principle Card: Don't leave home without!" it in light of American Express credit card.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2009, 11:51 AM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,100 posts, read 39,273,270 times
Reputation: 4937
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Perhaps. But contracts can be, and have been re-negotiated. See UAW. Where were you? Let me guess... criticizing UAW?
That was an agreement, redone, bi-laterally. If BOTH parties agree - there is no problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2009, 11:57 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,830,565 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
That was an agreement, redone, bi-laterally. If BOTH parties agree - there is no problem.
And why can't/shouldn't it be done in this case?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-26-2009, 12:10 PM
 
Location: Right where I want to be.
4,507 posts, read 9,065,829 times
Reputation: 3361
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
And why can't/shouldn't it be done in this case?
It was.


"Give back your bonus or we'll publish your names and you'll be hounded by the public, news media and stupid politicians will call you to testify before Congress to humiliate you into submission. Or, we'll confiscate 90% of your bonus (leaving the other 10% to pay state taxes) or we'll send bus loads of angry citizens to intimidate you and hopefully none of them are the crazy people who want to string up your entire family with piano wire. Do you agree to the new terms?"

"Yes."


Contract renegotiated!! Aren't you proud of your government??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:33 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top