- Kelly McParland: Jack Layton keeps getting paid for underformance
A few days ago I posted a press release from Jack Layton, in which he complained about executives at pension firms getting bonuses in a down year, adding a snarky comment of my own. Jack didn't have such a great year himself, I pointed out, so why is he still getting paid? I thought the point was self-evident, but a number of readers complained that they didn't get it. So I shall elucidate.
Layton's initial complaint was a class-based cheap shot hoping to cash in on lingering resentment about the rich bonuses awarded to well-paid executives at financial firms. There was justifiable outrage in the U.S. when people learned that million-dollar bonuses were going to some of the same fat cats at AIG insurance who helped cause the economic meltdown by placing huge bets on high-risk investments while ignoring the enormous dangers involved. AIG had to be rescued with a US$173 billion bailout, yet the executives still wanted their bonuses, as did their colleagues at a number of other bailed-out institutions, notably Merrill Lynch. Layton extrapolated on these cases to ask why executives at Canada's Public Service Investment Board were getting bonuses despite a $9.3 billion loss this year.
So what's wrong with that? This:
An Internet Fisherman who uses barbless hooks and this one dimensional world as a way of releasing the frustrations of daily life. This is my pond. You are welcome only if you are civil and contribute something to the ambiance. I reserve the right to ignore/publish/reject anon comments.
No comments:
Post a Comment