You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #18: In some of these firms a bonus or part of one is not profit-sharing but deferred salary. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
terisan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-03-09 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #8
18. In some of these firms a bonus or part of one is not profit-sharing but deferred salary.
Edited on Tue Feb-03-09 11:01 AM by terisan
The monthly salaries are deliberately lower than in comparable jobs elsewhere and the bonus or a significant part of it is not related to to the worker's performance or the companies--it is more like deferred compensation. The company gets to withhold part of your salary throughout the year and pays you that part right before Christmas.

For the lower level employees the bonus may go toward a big purchase like a car, a huge medical bill, or next year's budget. For others it goes for luxuries-but it is essentially money they would have been paid earlier for just doing their job.

I have no affection for the big money people (even the relatively honest ones) who are compensated in the multimillions, and no problem with people not getting profit-sharing when there is no profit.

I am bothered by poliicians who, in an effort to jump on a hot button issue, like insane executive compensation, don't acknowledge these distinctions.

Robert Rubin, who just resigned his position at Citibank has been planning these fiasco bailouts. He made a fortune from his Citibank connections and has defended the subprime business. Yet he is one of the Obama administration's chief advisers.
Larry Summers, another administration bigwig, had prevented derivatives from being subject to oversight.

No one is pointing out who are the planners of the administration.s giveaways when they jump on the hot button issues with simplistic attacks.

If McCaskill or Obama simply pointed out the issue of the lower ranked employees, much could be accomplished. As it is, I beileve the super-execs will figure a way to get their big money (it will come from other pots they control) and the government insiders will be perfectly fine with it.

The real issue is why is any money going to these entities--they are not going to invest in us-they are investing overseas.

Why are you in favor og giving these fims multi-billions of taypayer money . Why are you focusing on bonuses and not the underlying crime???





I believe that in private the politicians do not express the anger they are exhibiting on stage and Rubin probably flat out says that they deserve it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC