In case you hadn’t heard yet, the unelected CZAR has decreed that he wants to reduce the salaries of “all” federally regulated businesses. Doesn’t matter what your contract says, he has the final say in your salary………….
Will the pay CZAR regulate the salaries of college football and basketball teams from universities that receive federal money?
Also, if the idea is to align pay with performance, does it really make sense to reduce variable compensation (ie bonus) and increase fixed compensation (ie salary)? Or is “bonus” just the evil buzzword du jour?
Recently, economists have stated that government regulation and union labor compensation/contracts have hobbled our auto industry in the global economy. Funny how these issues are left completely unaddressed.
Well, these companies may have never heard the term, “We’re from the government, and we’re here to help”. Or, maybe they didn’t know what that meant. But, they’ve quickly learned that help is rarely that.
As far as I’m concerned, these companies that needed bailouts, should have been left to their own demise from the beginning. Any slashing now, is only delayed punishment that was just.
Now the problem is, once we’ve started down this slippery bailout slope, and the mentatlity that comes and builds from it, we are now hearing of the same demise to any Federally Regulated business??? What?
That’s quite a leap, but not surprising for this administration. I’m sure there will be several posts again that show support for this European mentality.
After all, Marxist’s, Maoist’s, and general incompetent’s have run rampant among us.
I hope this solidifies the insurance world on the reasons we need to continue to be State Regulated vs Federally Regulated. Are there any doubts about this still?
Remember, a government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have. Chickens are coming home to roost, and this current government has only just begun.
Actually, removing the incentive to excel is exactly the point here. (For better or worse.)
The idea is that the old system rewarded risk taking without the commenserate punishment for when the risks did not work. The pay czar is attempting to remove the incentive to take risks in the hopes that it reduces overall risk at the enterprise.
Will it work? Who knows. Seems more style than substance (part of the salary reduction @ AIG from 2008 to 2009 is based on the fact that 10 of the 25 are no longer with the firm).
Another day & another ill thought decision out of Washington from a Czar with no accountability. While the idea of capping executive pay at government owned entitites might seem appealing to the lemmings in the general population, it is another nail in the coffin of private enterprize and capitalism. The idea was to get good talent in to save these companies – which should have been allowed to fail – so that they could pay back the bailout funds. Well, how long do folks think that a very talented senior exec is going to hang around for a job where is pay is cut by 90%+ when he can walk out the door into a high paying position in a non government controlled company. Hmmmmm-might explain why all the brains have left the White House, Congress & Government service in general leaving us with the bottom feeders and those in it solely for the pwer trip.
The compensation theory of these companies is morally and ethically flawed. It mirrors professional sports where people are guaranteed big bucks regardless of how they perform. Nice scam if you can get in on it.
Let’s look at base salary. This is intended to pay a competive amount for doing the job day-to-day. Incentive compensation (bonuses) should be paid ONLY when the company makes money and the individual achieves his/her business objectives. Retention bonuses are absurd. If people are getting results, their worth should be reflected in salary and incentive comp. Why would you pay to retain someone you count on to keep the business profitable regardless of their performance? It’s absurd.
Now the argument is if we don’t pay these loser a ransom (retention bonus), they’ll quit and go somewhere else. If these chumps want big bucks they need to get results. When they don’t, they should face the economic consequences like the rest of us.
Want to get out from under the ransom situation? Put these people on annual contracts.
It still comes down to none of these companies should have been bailed out in the first place. At the same time, the government should not be messing in the running of a these companies either. Leave the darn bonuses alone. If they put themselves back in the same pickle they were in a year ago……let ’em SINK. There are plenty of other good companies out there that will take up the slack. I’m tired of government in my business.
If the Tax payers are bailing out your company for whatever reason(That means we pay higher taxes to help you out of a pinch), yoiu should not expect to get a bonus. In private business those would have been long gone. Wake Up! Pay attention to your small part in making your company a better company so youll make a profit and my taxes and yours dont get hit again. I mean really!! Get a grip.
If it were up to me i would have let all of you hit the wall. hen where would you be. Be Thankful that the big bad government came to your rescue..
Remember the old saying, be careful what you wish for? Well America wanted change, and boy, did we get it. This Administration probably is hoping all of us older folks will die off, so all that is left are the young ones who never knew the old way of life in America. We did not have as much as we do now just 35 years ago, but we got cost of living raises every year and our health benefits were paid for by our employers and it was very SIMPLE. No tier one, two, three.
In case you hadn’t heard yet, the unelected CZAR has decreed that he wants to reduce the salaries of “all” federally regulated businesses. Doesn’t matter what your contract says, he has the final say in your salary………….
Time to move to a private island.
Will the pay CZAR regulate the salaries of college football and basketball teams from universities that receive federal money?
Also, if the idea is to align pay with performance, does it really make sense to reduce variable compensation (ie bonus) and increase fixed compensation (ie salary)? Or is “bonus” just the evil buzzword du jour?
Recently, economists have stated that government regulation and union labor compensation/contracts have hobbled our auto industry in the global economy. Funny how these issues are left completely unaddressed.
How much does the pay czar make?
How sad to take away incentives to excel and acheive your best. Why try anymore if you are only going to be punished.
Well, these companies may have never heard the term, “We’re from the government, and we’re here to help”. Or, maybe they didn’t know what that meant. But, they’ve quickly learned that help is rarely that.
As far as I’m concerned, these companies that needed bailouts, should have been left to their own demise from the beginning. Any slashing now, is only delayed punishment that was just.
Now the problem is, once we’ve started down this slippery bailout slope, and the mentatlity that comes and builds from it, we are now hearing of the same demise to any Federally Regulated business??? What?
That’s quite a leap, but not surprising for this administration. I’m sure there will be several posts again that show support for this European mentality.
After all, Marxist’s, Maoist’s, and general incompetent’s have run rampant among us.
I hope this solidifies the insurance world on the reasons we need to continue to be State Regulated vs Federally Regulated. Are there any doubts about this still?
Remember, a government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have. Chickens are coming home to roost, and this current government has only just begun.
Out!
Actually, removing the incentive to excel is exactly the point here. (For better or worse.)
The idea is that the old system rewarded risk taking without the commenserate punishment for when the risks did not work. The pay czar is attempting to remove the incentive to take risks in the hopes that it reduces overall risk at the enterprise.
Will it work? Who knows. Seems more style than substance (part of the salary reduction @ AIG from 2008 to 2009 is based on the fact that 10 of the 25 are no longer with the firm).
Another day & another ill thought decision out of Washington from a Czar with no accountability. While the idea of capping executive pay at government owned entitites might seem appealing to the lemmings in the general population, it is another nail in the coffin of private enterprize and capitalism. The idea was to get good talent in to save these companies – which should have been allowed to fail – so that they could pay back the bailout funds. Well, how long do folks think that a very talented senior exec is going to hang around for a job where is pay is cut by 90%+ when he can walk out the door into a high paying position in a non government controlled company. Hmmmmm-might explain why all the brains have left the White House, Congress & Government service in general leaving us with the bottom feeders and those in it solely for the pwer trip.
The compensation theory of these companies is morally and ethically flawed. It mirrors professional sports where people are guaranteed big bucks regardless of how they perform. Nice scam if you can get in on it.
Let’s look at base salary. This is intended to pay a competive amount for doing the job day-to-day. Incentive compensation (bonuses) should be paid ONLY when the company makes money and the individual achieves his/her business objectives. Retention bonuses are absurd. If people are getting results, their worth should be reflected in salary and incentive comp. Why would you pay to retain someone you count on to keep the business profitable regardless of their performance? It’s absurd.
Now the argument is if we don’t pay these loser a ransom (retention bonus), they’ll quit and go somewhere else. If these chumps want big bucks they need to get results. When they don’t, they should face the economic consequences like the rest of us.
Want to get out from under the ransom situation? Put these people on annual contracts.
It still comes down to none of these companies should have been bailed out in the first place. At the same time, the government should not be messing in the running of a these companies either. Leave the darn bonuses alone. If they put themselves back in the same pickle they were in a year ago……let ’em SINK. There are plenty of other good companies out there that will take up the slack. I’m tired of government in my business.
“The majority of compensation is to be paid in stock rather than cash.”
Why stock, why not use colored beads and shiny things? It worked for the Indians and Manhattan……
Ditto!!
If the Tax payers are bailing out your company for whatever reason(That means we pay higher taxes to help you out of a pinch), yoiu should not expect to get a bonus. In private business those would have been long gone. Wake Up! Pay attention to your small part in making your company a better company so youll make a profit and my taxes and yours dont get hit again. I mean really!! Get a grip.
If it were up to me i would have let all of you hit the wall. hen where would you be. Be Thankful that the big bad government came to your rescue..
Remember the old saying, be careful what you wish for? Well America wanted change, and boy, did we get it. This Administration probably is hoping all of us older folks will die off, so all that is left are the young ones who never knew the old way of life in America. We did not have as much as we do now just 35 years ago, but we got cost of living raises every year and our health benefits were paid for by our employers and it was very SIMPLE. No tier one, two, three.
Those ones who are ranked 26th and below – but earn more than $500k – must be laughing! (If there are any of these)
They will now be the top earners at their company!