AIG exec resignation letter

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Why can these people not be paid salaries like the rest of the country? It was the insane bonus structure at these financial corps that encouraged risk taking for short term profits at the expense of long term stability. Why do we want to bring in people who will doctor the books to make it look like they did a good job restructuring the company, then grab their bonus only to leave AIG to crumble again?

Then the screw up was offering the bonuses in the first place. Once they've been offered, accepted and the work has been performed, you can't change the terms under which the employees agreed to work.

 

[Michael]

BoberFett - actually, salary + bonus (or commission or whatever else) is pretty common across all job. Turnover was high, failure to meet targets = loss of job and no bonus and the bonuses tend to be set on targets the company set.

Since these were, for the msot part, retention "bonuses" and not perfornce bonuses, I have a hard time joining in with the lynch mobs.

Michael

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Michael
BoberFett - actually, salary + bonus (or commission or whatever else) is pretty common across all job. Turnover was high, failure to meet targets = loss of job and no bonus and the bonuses tend to be set on targets the company set.

Since these were, for the msot part, retention "bonuses" and not perfornce bonuses, I have a hard time joining in with the lynch mobs.

Michael

As have I - but on the other hand, it appears that AIG lied in saying that the bonuses were offere only to people not involved in the problems.

It's unfortunate the word 'bonus' was even used for this, since it so easily causes confusion with 'award bonuses' and triggers outrage.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Xellos2099

Originally posted by: smack Down
Congress should have used its power to invalidate the contracts before or shortly after giving AIG the money. But hey better late then never.

Congress do NOT have power to void perfectly legal contract. Being the president of the US do not mean you can break contract law as they see fit.

Yes congress does read the constitution:

"To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States"

AIG is bankrupt and therefor congress can do what ever it wants with respect to contracts made by AIG.

 

[puffff]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Why can these people not be paid salaries like the rest of the country? It was the insane bonus structure at these financial corps that encouraged risk taking for short term profits at the expense of long term stability. Why do we want to bring in people who will doctor the books to make it look like they did a good job restructuring the company, then grab their bonus only to leave AIG to crumble again?

Then the screw up was offering the bonuses in the first place. Once they've been offered, accepted and the work has been performed, you can't change the terms under which the employees agreed to work.

i'd agree with everything you posted in this thread except this. the tasks given to these execs couldn't be done by any ordinary person, just as not everyone is cut out to be CEO of a large company. you would've been hard pressed to find capable and experienced people willing to do it for less.

 

[sciwizam]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: Xellos2099

Originally posted by: smack Down
Congress should have used its power to invalidate the contracts before or shortly after giving AIG the money. But hey better late then never.

Congress do NOT have power to void perfectly legal contract. Being the president of the US do not mean you can break contract law as they see fit.

Yes congress does read the constitution:

"To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States"

AIG is bankrupt and therefor congress can do what ever it wants with respect to contracts made by AIG.

I don't believe they filed for bankruptcy. We bailed them out before they went under.

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Why can these people not be paid salaries like the rest of the country? It was the insane bonus structure at these financial corps that encouraged risk taking for short term profits at the expense of long term stability. Why do we want to bring in people who will doctor the books to make it look like they did a good job restructuring the company, then grab their bonus only to leave AIG to crumble again?

Then the screw up was offering the bonuses in the first place. Once they've been offered, accepted and the work has been performed, you can't change the terms under which the employees agreed to work.

Unless of course they are just blue-collar workers and youre taking away their retirement.

 

[Xellos2099]

The ways to void a contract are that the contract is for illegal act, it was signed under duress. Even if it file for bankruptcy, the the debt and wage owned to worker due to contract still have the highest standard in burn of business law. Just because a company file for bankruptcy doesn't mean all the contract with its employee are void.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

A.I.G. business doesn't work, so nothing applies.

fact? the fact is, these people won't have a job let along the bonuses had government not paid A.I.G.

they should be grateful still being employeed. they definately don't deserve bonuses.

As the guy pointed out they were being recruited by other firms offering positions but turned them down based on the fantasy that AIG would be able to compensate them for their hard work....

If the govt hadn't paid AIG then they would simply have gone to work for someone else....the top talent doesn't need to sit idly by on unemployment, jobs find them.

I am sure this guy and his co workers will have no troubles at all finding work and making enough money so the loonbag libs here can continue to be jealous of him.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Michael
BoberFett - actually, salary + bonus (or commission or whatever else) is pretty common across all job. Turnover was high, failure to meet targets = loss of job and no bonus and the bonuses tend to be set on targets the company set.

Since these were, for the msot part, retention "bonuses" and not perfornce bonuses, I have a hard time joining in with the lynch mobs.

Michael

As the letter pointed out, I think the main problem is the lack of backing/explaination from AIG that's not fair to this exec and people in his division.

Not many people know what "retention" bonuses are, and depending on the way it's structureed, it can mean on way or the other. If Liddy discloused publically that these guys have been paid $1 (or whatever minimal salary) for the year, and the retention bonues is a contracted bouns for staying on the job for 12 month to completed certain task, and those task has been completed, I think the public outcry would have been much less. And it would have been clear that some politicians/press are making something out of nothing.

General public don't know how Wall St. work, they see "bonus" the first reaction is reward for job well done. They don't know specifically how hard those people worked or how much they contributed to make AIG mess more managable, the only info general public have is AIG is a mess and the first reaction is all associated with AIG is responsible for the mess.

So I wouldn't call general public mobs, it's just the lack of info, and lack of dissemination of info by those responsible. And the lack of backbone by those who should have stood out and explain like the letter pointed out.

 

[Xellos2099]

Obama knew what the bonus was about yet he condemn it. If he has keep silence or tell us the truth thing won;t be as bad right now.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus

Originally posted by: JACKDRUID
pathetic.

$742,006.40 is not a payment from A.I.G, its a payment from us. Its not "donated", its giving back rightfully.

we really need to hang these dumb ass AIG execs.

You either don't know how business works, or don't care to find out some facts.

Bandwagon FTL

A.I.G. business doesn't work, so nothing applies.

fact? the fact is, these people won't have a job let along the bonuses had government not paid A.I.G.

they should be grateful still being employeed. they definately don't deserve bonuses.

Grateful to be making $1 a year??

That makes sense.

to you and winnar: he stated repeatedly that he and others continued under AIG only with repeated assurance that his division would receive their bonuses. They turned down stable job offers under the assurance that they would indeed be paid over the course of the year.

He also claims that none of this sank him, but I do identify with the fact that he feels slighted by Liddy and by an unfair witch hunt. Sucks that those truly responsible for AIG's collapse seem to have slunk off into oblivion.

Honestly, I'm not sure if this bonus money is directly funneled from Fed Bailout, or if it was allocated beforehand. either way, it's still quite tasteless when you consider what's going on,.

 

[Vic]

Who gives a fsck? He'd be out of work anyway if the govt didn't bail out AIG. So now he's complaining and resigning that the bail out that saved his job came with strings attached? Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: CPA
Folks, this has nothing to do with "feeling sorry" for anyone. This comes down to contract law, a basis of our whole economic structure. AIG had a binding contract, plain and simple. You can't just change the terms of a legal contract because of political pressure. Furthermore, why isn't there more outrage about the unconstitutionality of taxing these bonuses at 90%? Talk about taking away rights.

It's always funny how supposed 'small govt' Republicans always fall back on this supposed taking away of rights whenever they're thieving from the public treasury.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Why can these people not be paid salaries like the rest of the country? It was the insane bonus structure at these financial corps that encouraged risk taking for short term profits at the expense of long term stability. Why do we want to bring in people who will doctor the books to make it look like they did a good job restructuring the company, then grab their bonus only to leave AIG to crumble again?

Then the screw up was offering the bonuses in the first place. Once they've been offered, accepted and the work has been performed, you can't change the terms under which the employees agreed to work.

Unless of course they are just blue-collar workers and youre taking away their retirement.

and/or their health care.

 

[cubby1223]

Originally posted by: Balt
He has a choice, doesn't he?

<snip>

I'm sorry that the AIG exec feels like he's not going to be getting what he is owed, but if he is unwilling to make sacrifices when average citizens who earn far less are making them then that's on him.

Is this forum *seriously* this stupid? What do you think is going on? Foreign based companies are expanding their operations, recruiting the best talent out of the U.S. based companies. What a sweetheart deal that is! "Come work for us where you can earn your pay without harassment from the U.S. Government, and without taxpayer funded ACORN running bus tours of your private residence."

We have a choice too, and our government has decided to shit on all of us. :roll: We're just allowing even more of our money to be sent overseas all in the name of appeasing the dumbass mobs...

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: Vic
Who gives a fsck? He'd be out of work anyway if the govt didn't bail out AIG. So now he's complaining and resigning that the bail out that saved his job came with strings attached? Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

He'd be in another job, or would have retired early and spent the last year with 60 hour weeks with his kids instead of his company. Seems to me he did get lied to and taken advantage of. That doesn't make him disadvantaged (seems pretty well off already) but that doesn't make what happened to him any more legal, or any more fair.

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: CPA
Folks, this has nothing to do with "feeling sorry" for anyone. This comes down to contract law, a basis of our whole economic structure. AIG had a binding contract, plain and simple. You can't just change the terms of a legal contract because of political pressure. Furthermore, why isn't there more outrage about the unconstitutionality of taxing these bonuses at 90%? Talk about taking away rights.

It's always funny how supposed 'small govt' Republicans always fall back on this supposed taking away of rights whenever they're thieving from the public treasury.

That was far from a rebuttal to CPA's very good points, by any standard. This is not a question of political parties or social equality. This is merely a question of abiding fairly by the laws of the land or circumventing them. We should all be able to agree, regardless of party or our views on other issues, that the government, corporations and individuals should all be equally subject to existing law.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: CPA
Folks, this has nothing to do with "feeling sorry" for anyone. This comes down to contract law, a basis of our whole economic structure. AIG had a binding contract, plain and simple. You can't just change the terms of a legal contract because of political pressure. Furthermore, why isn't there more outrage about the unconstitutionality of taxing these bonuses at 90%? Talk about taking away rights.

It's always funny how supposed 'small govt' Republicans always fall back on this supposed taking away of rights whenever they're thieving from the public treasury.

That was far from a rebuttal to CPA's very good points, by any standard. This is not a question of political parties or social equality. This is merely a question of abiding fairly by the laws of the land or circumventing them. We should all be able to agree, regardless of party or our views on other issues, that the government, corporations and individuals should all be equally subject to existing law.

We should all be able to agree that straw men are weak and fallacious arguments too, but that never stops people from using them.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Vic
Who gives a fsck? He'd be out of work anyway if the govt didn't bail out AIG. So now he's complaining and resigning that the bail out that saved his job came with strings attached? Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

You don't get it. We the tax payers have put in how many billions of dollar into AIG now? Tell me who in the right mind is going to go into AIG and take care of the mess there now? You gotta work like crazy, you get paid but you don't know if government is gonna take that away, and you walk on the street you'd have to risk getting spit in the face. Without any qualified people, how the hell we are going get AIG out of the mess it is in right now?

Keep treating people at AIG with mob mentality and stupid politic and we will never see the hundreds of billions we already put in.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Vic
Who gives a fsck? He'd be out of work anyway if the govt didn't bail out AIG. So now he's complaining and resigning that the bail out that saved his job came with strings attached? Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

You don't get it. We the tax payers have put in how many billions of dollar into AIG now? Tell me who in the right mind is going to go into AIG and take care of the mess there now? You gotta work like crazy, you get paid but you don't know if government is gonna take that away, and you walk on the street you'd have to risk getting spit in the face. Without any qualified people, how the hell we are going get AIG out of the mess it is in right now?

Keep treating people at AIG with mob mentality and stupid politic and we will never see the hundreds of billions we already put in.

We will never the see the money. It is gone. So acting liking giving million of dollars to the assholes who lost it is going to get it back is false.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Vic
Who gives a fsck? He'd be out of work anyway if the govt didn't bail out AIG. So now he's complaining and resigning that the bail out that saved his job came with strings attached? Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

You don't get it. We the tax payers have put in how many billions of dollar into AIG now? Tell me who in the right mind is going to go into AIG and take care of the mess there now? You gotta work like crazy, you get paid but you don't know if government is gonna take that away, and you walk on the street you'd have to risk getting spit in the face. Without any qualified people, how the hell we are going get AIG out of the mess it is in right now?

Keep treating people at AIG with mob mentality and stupid politic and we will never see the hundreds of billions we already put in.

We will never the see the money. It is gone. So acting liking giving million of dollars to the assholes who lost it is going to get it back is false.

I think rchiu might be right, though as I posted in another thread, I'm concerned it appears AIG lied about the bonuses not going to people at the problem unit.

I don't see any basis for the conclusion you have reached - it seems quite plausible to me that with the right people, the units could be sold for more and we get more money back.

 

[JJChicken]

Originally posted by: Sawyer
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03...antis.html?ref=opinion
DEAR Mr. Liddy,

<snip>

Cool, thanks for the read

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Vic
Who gives a fsck? He'd be out of work anyway if the govt didn't bail out AIG. So now he's complaining and resigning that the bail out that saved his job came with strings attached? Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

You don't get it. We the tax payers have put in how many billions of dollar into AIG now? Tell me who in the right mind is going to go into AIG and take care of the mess there now? You gotta work like crazy, you get paid but you don't know if government is gonna take that away, and you walk on the street you'd have to risk getting spit in the face. Without any qualified people, how the hell we are going get AIG out of the mess it is in right now?

Keep treating people at AIG with mob mentality and stupid politic and we will never see the hundreds of billions we already put in.

We will never the see the money. It is gone. So acting liking giving million of dollars to the assholes who lost it is going to get it back is false.

This.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Acanthus

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Vic
Who gives a fsck? He'd be out of work anyway if the govt didn't bail out AIG. So now he's complaining and resigning that the bail out that saved his job came with strings attached? Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya!

You don't get it. We the tax payers have put in how many billions of dollar into AIG now? Tell me who in the right mind is going to go into AIG and take care of the mess there now? You gotta work like crazy, you get paid but you don't know if government is gonna take that away, and you walk on the street you'd have to risk getting spit in the face. Without any qualified people, how the hell we are going get AIG out of the mess it is in right now?

Keep treating people at AIG with mob mentality and stupid politic and we will never see the hundreds of billions we already put in.

We will never the see the money. It is gone. So acting liking giving million of dollars to the assholes who lost it is going to get it back is false.

This.

It's easy to post wisecracks on the Internet until you realize the hundreds of billion (starts with B not M) is actual money, have actual impact on the economy and the financial well being of the US going forward.

If you want to admit defeat now, that's your right. But I hope the rest of America is smarter than that and at least give the possibility of getting those money back a shot.