Cranking up the pressure over banks' executive pay

A report showing that banks paid employees billions of dollars in bonuses last year despite needing government bailouts to survive is ramping up the pressure on Congress to rein in executive compensation.

[joekoz]

This is as bad as the oil speculation going on in the marketplace. Where did Barack go? Fix it Obama, or you won't have a prayer at reelection.

[PAYME_MO]

SUCKERS
Bwa ha ha
I'm laughing all the way to bank

[Kris]

"When the banks did well, their employees were paid well," the report said. "When the banks did poorly, their employees were paid well. And when the banks did very poorly, they were bailed out by taxpayers and their employees were still paid well."

And therein lies the problem. Such a shame our government (feds included) are in bed with the banks (& Goldman Sachs). Because just like Enron and World Com and Arthur Anderson they should have been allowed to fail and go out of business because of poor, shoddy business practices - just like all the rest. Instead we taxpayers are on the hook for millions/billions of dollars that we'll be paying off forever and the executives will be laughing all the way to their off shore accounts. Such a joke.

[Summer]

Support your community banks, not the large nationwide banks. Your local bank cares more about your community.

[Xanth]

The problem is that when the banks did very poorly, the government should NOT have bailed them out or used at least have used a little foresight (ha) and set the limits prior to the banks accepting funds. Regulating pay now through regulation is a line that just cannot be crossed, no matter how popular it may be. Once the door is opened, it can't be closed. Who will be next? Doctors?(Probably) Lawyers?(Unlikely) Small business owners? Regulation of pay puts far too much power in the hands of the government and is a bane to any free society.

[Juan Des Plaines]

Make then pay this money back to the tax payers now. Deny this bank any further help from the government. Fire any government personnel who knew this was going to occur. Any politician who knew this was happening and did not report it should be asked to resign.

[yikes]

join credit unions.....this is where anger should be vented not...lowly teachers!

[Alz]

This is more complicated that it appears.

Many of these "bonuses" are really part of the compensation. In other words, not all of the bonuses are performance related to the business.

Some are just a way to break things apart and some are personal bonuses.

The liberals pound on bonuses because they want to get people angry about them. It keeps with the liberal notion that the "rich" don't pay any taxes.

(This lie from liberals about who pays the taxes was again debunked yesterday: http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/24944.... where the top 1% pay as much as the bottom 95%!)

The danger here is the liberals will succeed and ruin our capitalism.

See, we should be CELEBRATING these bonuses! Why? Because these people pay a huge part of the tax base.

When we take the ability for people to earn money way, WE ALL LOSE. This is Socialism and we all should denounce the liberals over this (and most of their other positions.)

[Teller number three]

I agree that those making 10 million a year should pass on a bonus when their bank is having issues. But come on...you want to take the $200 extra incentive pay a teller or customer service rep makes (maybe) a quarter for accomplishing their goals set by their supervisors. When these same people are maybe making up to $13 an hour (this is after about 5 years of service). Don't lump all employees together. Let's use some common sense.

[Taxpayer]

The country is doing far worse than any of these companies and yet Congress is on track to receive their pay raises.

They still fly taxpayer funded private jets.

They still have retreats at resort hotels.

Oh the irony!!!!

[ralph]

this is like the pot calling the kettle black. we don,t vote out the people who give themselves big raises and exclude themselves from having to live under the same rules we live by.
WAKE UP AMERICA LETS MAKE A REAL "CHANGE" IN WASHINGTON VOTE THESE PEOPLE OUT !!!!

[Anne L]

There is something very wrong with this country to allow these bonuses. If there is a way for those of us who support these companies to discountinue doing so please tell us how. I don't bank and Citibank, I don't use Goldman Sachs and I don't bank at Bank of America.

[comment]

Kris wrote:

"When the banks did well, their employees were paid well," the report said. "When the banks did poorly, their employees were paid well. And when the banks did very poorly, they were bailed out by taxpayers and their employees were still paid well."
And therein lies the problem. Such a shame our government (feds included) are in bed with the banks (& Goldman Sachs). Because just like Enron and World Com and Arthur Anderson they should have been allowed to fail and go out of business because of poor, shoddy business practices - just like all the rest. Instead we taxpayers are on the hook for millions/billions of dollars that we'll be paying off forever and the executives will be laughing all the way to their off shore accounts. Such a joke.

I agree. It would have forced a level of strategy and good operations unseen in banking previous. The fear was that the Swiss banks would make greater inroads into investment banking, if all of the investment banks that were on the bubble would have failed.

There is limited oil money to be made in US anymore. This was the last bastion of large paycheck left.

I fear to say that if these pay to play schemes for publicly traded companies advance, it will only force the creation of privately held investment banks, banks and other business. This would further concentrate wealth to the capial elites of the world.

I am all for fair access to investments and capital markets for all through primary markets and a robust secondary market.

Do not let government intervene into operations of publicly traded companeis with respect to what is a Board of Directors governance decision and CEO decison on what is necessary for compensation.

What are we? Soviet Union of the 1950s?

[ALZ THE COMMY]

ALZ SAID, See, we should be CELEBRATING these bonuses! Why? Because these people pay a huge part of the tax base. OH REALLY STUPID, SO ALZ WE SHOULD GIVE YOU A BONUSE BECAUSE YOU ARE SO STUPID AND GREEDY, JUST LIKE THESE MILLIONAIRES?
THE USA CITIZENS ARE GIVING THESE GREEDY C******* THE MONEY FOR WHAT ? BEING GREEDY. THEY DONT DESERVE ANYTHING JUST LIKE YOU STUPID.

[Another side]

Alz wrote:

This is more complicated that it appears.
Many of these "bonuses" are really part of the compensation. In other words, not all of the bonuses are performance related to the business.
Some are just a way to break things apart and some are personal bonuses.
The liberals pound on bonuses because they want to get people angry about them. It keeps with the liberal notion that the "rich" don't pay any taxes.
(This lie from liberals about who pays the taxes was again debunked yesterday: http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/24944.... where the top 1% pay as much as the bottom 95%!)
The danger here is the liberals will succeed and ruin our capitalism.
See, we should be CELEBRATING these bonuses! Why? Because these people pay a huge part of the tax base.
When we take the ability for people to earn money way, WE ALL LOSE. This is Socialism and we all should denounce the liberals over this (and most of their other positions.)

No, YOU attempt to make it more complicated. When compensation advisors sit on boards of directors....paid directors as well, there is no oversight on CEO compensation, including bonuses. The rate of pay from CEOs to workers went from 24 x 1 in the 1970s to over 385 x 1 now. People like you want to blame organized labor for every problem in the economy. Guess you can't do it here, so you choose to blanket blame liberals. Very few public companies have had stockholders stand up and say no to CEO excess, and that is a pity. Verizon stockholders succeeded on one point, narrowly, and top management was pised off. ATT tried as did Quest, voting close but not enough for a change. These banks, who have received bailout dollars need to have their board stripped and have new members---non-compensated like non-profits, assigned in order to initiate oversight on these parasites. Keep in mind ALZ---the elite in the Soviet Union lived pretty high on the hog. They don't do bad in Communist China either.

[Another side]

Some are just a way to break things apart and some are personal bonuses.
The liberals pound on bonuses because they want to get people angry about them.
I found your comment fascinating...just a way to break things apart. Did you mean to say, perhaps cook the books?? Personal bonuses indicates that the COMPANY profited due to exceptional performance. I don't see excepional performance by any of the management of these companies who took public welfare. Please do not lump pay raises for tellers in with the horrendous greed that the top managers rake in. The audacity that these, and not all, CEOs have is plain outrageous. If you can stick up for this behavior, then even shock therapy won't help you out.

[BELFASTBOB]

why did they demand concessions from the auto workers and not the executives? a contract is a contract.

[Alz]

Another side wrote:

<quoted text>
No, YOU attempt to make it more complicated. When compensation advisors sit on boards of directors....paid directors as well, there is no oversight on CEO compensation, including bonuses. The rate of pay from CEOs to workers went from 24 x 1 in the 1970s to over 385 x 1 now. People like you want to blame organized labor for every problem in the economy. Guess you can't do it here, so you choose to blanket blame liberals. Very few public companies have had stockholders stand up and say no to CEO excess, and that is a pity. Verizon stockholders succeeded on one point, narrowly, and top management was pised off. ATT tried as did Quest, voting close but not enough for a change. These banks, who have received bailout dollars need to have their board stripped and have new members---non-compensated like non-profits, assigned in order to initiate oversight on these parasites. Keep in mind ALZ---the elite in the Soviet Union lived pretty high on the hog. They don't do bad in Communist China either.

Let's see for every $100,000 the government is spending, only $55,000 is being paid for - by taxes, etc. The rest is being borrowed and printed.

The liberals have you all worried about companies - which produce jobs and innovation - while they are forcing the whole country to go broke.

You should be angry at the liberals who run government - including Bush who spent on expanding Medicare.

the difference now is we have Obama and the other liberals demonizing companies and working to tax and regulate them to death. We will not have a way to pay back the monies they are spending!

[sounds good]

Kris wrote:

Because just like Enron and World Com and Arthur Anderson they should have been allowed to fail and go out of business because of poor, shoddy business practices - just like all the rest.

Huh?

How did Arthur Anderson sneak into this? You have to realize that quite the contrary!!! Arthur Anderson -- a HUGE American company that employed thousands at all pay levels -- was PUT out of business by "W"!

All because one person supposedly told some Enron employee to shred certain documents. Not because of anything the company did, just what one person in the company did.

And "W"s action left all of their thousands of employees, many of whom worked in American offices overseas, were suddenly and inexplicably jobless!!!!!! It was a totally unfair thing and cut income to the government as well through lost taxes -- the one possibly fair thing about it!

No one could say the taxpayers or anyone else bailed them out!!! They got scrooed. Even "W" himself later admitted that it was a bad decision.