Should CEO's/Executives receive bonuses while in or filing for bankruptcy?

[Feldenak]

Originally posted by: Viper GTS

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Topic Title: Should CEO's/Executives receive bonuses while in or filing for bankruptcy?
Topic Summary: United Airlines sets aside 152 million for 400 managers WHILE in bankruptcy...

Sweet, America the beautiful :thumbsup:

Your mindless capitalism bashing and class envy is growing old. You have no legitimate support for anything you say, yet you post links to articles you don't understand and pop into threads like this to bash something you're not equipped to be part of.

Unless you can comprehend what is going on in this thread, please STFU.

Viper GTS

Well said.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: JS80
Fortune 500 executives are a rare commodity. If you don't offer bonus incentives to management, who's going to stay to run the company? The union leaders?

Most people here are so ignorant as to how complicated it is to run a multi-billion dollar company. They are so quick to blame management for a company's demise but rarely implicate the unions that run companies to the ground.

These are the managers that make the deals with the unions. How is it the Unions fault for asking for soemthing and having the managers agree to it. If it was a bad deal then these SAME managers should not be getting MORE money to run the company into the ground.

 

[maddogchen]

Exactly what kind of stock options are these? Aren't stock options set at the price you first started at the company? And if it went into bankruptcy after you already started that means you'll get screwed if you touch your options?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: maddogchen
Exactly what kind of stock options are these? Aren't stock options set at the price you first started at the company? And if it went into bankruptcy after you already started that means you'll get screwed if you touch your options?

stock options are sold based on an exercise price. they certainly aren't set by the IPO price.

generally no one will cash in their options when the company stock is worthless. and option is a right to buy at a specific price, and you would assume that the exercise price is higher than a stock price in bankruptcy

 

[maddogchen]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: maddogchen
Exactly what kind of stock options are these? Aren't stock options set at the price you first started at the company? And if it went into bankruptcy after you already started that means you'll get screwed if you touch your options?

stock options are sold based on an exercise price. they certainly aren't set by the IPO price.

generally no one will cash in their options when the company stock is worthless. and option is a right to buy at a specific price, and you would assume that the exercise price is higher than a stock price in bankruptcy

Yeah that was what I was thinking, I'm not talking about the IPO price, but the price they usually give you which is the price the stock was at the first day you started your job at the company. So these options that they are getting should technically be worthless right now isn't it?

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: JS80
Fortune 500 executives are a rare commodity. If you don't offer bonus incentives to management, who's going to stay to run the company? The union leaders?

Most people here are so ignorant as to how complicated it is to run a multi-billion dollar company. They are so quick to blame management for a company's demise but rarely implicate the unions that run companies to the ground.

These are the managers that make the deals with the unions. How is it the Unions fault for asking for soemthing and having the managers agree to it. If it was a bad deal then these SAME managers should not be getting MORE money to run the company into the ground.

It's the Union's fault because they will strike and run the company to the ground if management does not agree to their demands. And they can't fire and hire non-unions because that's illegal.

 

[SampSon]

If you were in that CEO's shoes, you wouldn't have a problem with it.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: SampSon
If you were in that CEO's shoes, you wouldn't have a problem with it.

And if I were in the employees' shoes (who just lost 4.6 billion in wages/pensions/benefits), I would have more of a problem than I do now.

2 sides to every coin...

 

[SampSon]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: SampSon
If you were in that CEO's shoes, you wouldn't have a problem with it.

And if I were in the employees' shoes (who just lost 4.6 billion in wages/pensions/benefits), I would have more of a problem than I do now.

2 sides to every coin...

Of course that is inherantly true, but you know work forces are never happy with executive incentives or anything that doesn't benefit them directly. Primarily because they don't understand them.

If the CEO is working hard to get the company successfully out of bankruptcy and into a profitable business model then incentives are probably due.

Also in the article it even states that these types of incentives are standard for the industry. If you want the best you have to pay for it. There won't be many top executives that will stay with a company going through the trouble it is for just a base salary. They could pack up and go to a different company and get these incentives no problem.