Interesting People mailing list archives
Re: Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned?
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:45:14 -0400
Begin forwarded message: From: Mark Blacknell <mb () blacknell net> Date: March 19, 2009 6:31:50 PM EDTTo: David Farber <dave () farber net>, <ChrisSavage () dwt com>, <lauren () vortex com > Subject: Re: [IP] Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned?
Chris raises fair points in response to Lauren's concerns. Relevant to the first and second points, you can find a copy of the compensation agreement
here - http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2009/03/aig-bonus-contracts.php?p age=1 You'll see that they became effective Dec 1, 2007 (when I think it's reasonable to say that management at AIG had a clue as to what was goingon), and that there's next to no "performance" component to it. It's simply
a schedule for large payments. Not really the sort of arrangement most people would understand for bonuses.Finally, while I would understand Lauren's concern in another context, those that are targeted by this bill have profited handsomely by exploiting the
goodwill and trust of others. I'll save my tears for someone else. Cheers, Mark ~ Mark Blacknell Washington, DC +1.202.270.5909 http:/blacknell.net/dynamic/ On 3/19/09 6:13 PM, "David Farber" <dave () farber net> wrote:
Begin forwarded message: From: "Savage, Christopher" <ChrisSavage () dwt com> Date: March 19, 2009 5:25:43 PM EDT To: <dave () farber net> Subject: RE: [IP] Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned? Dave: A few points:1. Any comments about whether the bonuses were or were not appropriateunder the contracts are without foundation unless one has read the contracts.2. Even if the bonuses were paid in accordance with the contracts, thatdoes not mean that the contracts themselves are valid and enforceable. There are any number of possible grounds for attacking them in the abstract although, again, without seeing the contracts and knowing the circumstances, it's hard to know which if any might apply. 3. Lauren's comments assume that the individuals who received thebonuses were, in effect, innocent of wrongdoing, either with respect to the underlying mess or with respect to what would be needed to clean itup. If that is true then he might have a point. I have not seen information to show that it is true, however. Chris S.
------------------------------------------- Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/ Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Current thread:
- Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned? David Farber (Mar 19)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned? David Farber (Mar 19)
- Re: Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned? David Farber (Mar 19)
- Re: Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned? David Farber (Mar 19)
- Re: Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned? David Farber (Mar 20)
- Re: Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned? David Farber (Mar 20)
- Re: Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned? David Farber (Mar 21)
- Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned? David Farber (Mar 21)
- Re: Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned? David Farber (Mar 21)
- Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned? David Farber (Mar 22)
- Re: Congress' reaction to AIG bonuses -- am I the only one concerned? David Farber (Mar 22)