After being bailed out three times (and counting) and reporting the largest quarterly loss in history, AIG now says certain senior executives are legally entitled to $165 million in incentive compensation.
I doubt they're right though, in any case, I'd make 'em sue me to get the money. ( I hear Barney Frank is now on the case; maybe that makes you feel better than it does me.) Regardless, it's time to re-focus away from the actual bonuses, and ask who structured and approved such breathtakingly flawed compensation contracts?
Who legally obligated AIG to pay bonuses EVEN WHILE the company is crashing and burning?
Who memorialized the idea that executives deserve more, more and more, EVEN AS AIG's very existence hinges on continued taxpayer largesse?
Who signed those contracts saying "Yeah, we'll pay bonuses for a range of scenarios UP TO AND INCLUDING AIG reporting the largest quarterly loss in American corporate history?"
Someone on the AIG Board's compensation committee apparently, someone who figured they'd learn to spell "fiduciary duty" on the first tee.
(Thanks to condron.us for the traffic!)
I doubt they're right though, in any case, I'd make 'em sue me to get the money. ( I hear Barney Frank is now on the case; maybe that makes you feel better than it does me.) Regardless, it's time to re-focus away from the actual bonuses, and ask who structured and approved such breathtakingly flawed compensation contracts?
Who legally obligated AIG to pay bonuses EVEN WHILE the company is crashing and burning?
Who memorialized the idea that executives deserve more, more and more, EVEN AS AIG's very existence hinges on continued taxpayer largesse?
Who signed those contracts saying "Yeah, we'll pay bonuses for a range of scenarios UP TO AND INCLUDING AIG reporting the largest quarterly loss in American corporate history?"
Someone on the AIG Board's compensation committee apparently, someone who figured they'd learn to spell "fiduciary duty" on the first tee.
(Thanks to condron.us for the traffic!)
Comments