Maybe Pay for Performance might not be a bad deal...
|
Maybe Pay for Performance might not be a bad deal...
|
03-31-2009, 04:31 PM
because we could cut off salaries under the payment for performance of CONGRESS...since they have all done a miserable job for years. Barney wants to extend this government deciding what you get paid further than just some execs. Barney is such a loser. How do people like this keep getting elected?
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politi...58597.html
03-31-2009, 04:57 PM
samintx wrote:Same way the Republican Losers are, people like you. BGnR 
03-31-2009, 05:08 PM
samintx wrote: One word: Gerrymandering
03-31-2009, 05:59 PM
How is it that folks on every single message board are linking to this exact same story from the exact same web site within an hour or less of each other? Did Rush Limbaugh mention it or something?
BTW, here's the text of the bill. Where exactly is the problem, people? The part where you can't get extraordinary compensation at the taxpayers' expense, or the part where the Secretary has to submit the standards to be followed within the next 30 days -- which would mean Congress, the White House and we can pass judgment on these standards? After all, it was our screaming and kicking that started this and our screaming and kicking can continue to influence this despite what talk radio would like you to believe. Text of H.R.1664 as Introduced in House Grayson-Himes Pay For Performance Act of 2009 To amend the executive compensation provisions of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES March 23, 2009 Mr. GRAYSON (for himself, Mr. HIMES, Ms. LEE of California, Mr. WELCH, Mr. ELLISON, Mr. ORTIZ, Mr. PERRIELLO, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, and Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services To amend the executive compensation provisions of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to prohibit unreasonable and excessive compensation and compensation not based on performance standards. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION NOT BASED ON PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. (a) Prohibition on Executive Compensation Not Based on Performance Standards- Section 111 of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (12 U.S.C. 5221) is amended by redesignating subsections (e) through (h) as subsections (f) through (g), and inserting after subsection (d) the following: ‘(e) Prohibition on Executive Compensation Not Based on Performance Standards- ‘(1) PROHIBITION- No financial institution that has received or receives a capital investment under this title, or with respect to the Federal National Mortgage Association, the Federal Home Loan Montage Corporation, or a Federal home loan bank, under the amendments made by section 1117 of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, may, while that capital investment remains outstanding, make a compensation payment to any executive or employee under any pre-existing compensation arrangement, or enter into a new compensation payment arrangement, if such compensation payment or compensation payment arrangement ‘(A) provides for compensation that is unreasonable or excessive, as defined in standards established by the Secretary in accordance with paragraph (2); or ‘(B) includes any bonus, retention payment, or other supplemental payment that is not directly based on performance-based measures set forth in standards established by the Secretary in accordance with paragraph (2). ‘(2) STANDARDS- Not later than 30 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Secretary shall establish the following: ‘(A) UNREASONABLE AND EXCESSIVE COMPENSATION STANDARDS- Standards that define ‘unreasonable or excessive’ for purposes of subparagraph (1)(A). ‘(B) PERFORMANCE-BASED STANDARDS- Standards for performance-based measures that a financial institution must apply when determining whether it may provide a bonus or retention payment under paragraph (1)(B). Such performance measures shall include ‘(i) the stability of the financial institution and its ability to repay or begin repaying the United States for any capital investment received under this title; ‘(ii) the performance of the individual executive or employee to whom the payment relates; ‘(iii) adherence by executives and employees to appropriate risk management requirements; ‘(iv) other standards which provide greater accountability to shareholders and taxpayers.’. (b) Revision to Rule of Construction- Section 111(b)(3)(D)(iii) of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (12 U.S.C. 5221(b)(3)(D)(iii)) is amended by inserting before the period the following: ‘, except that no entity subject to subsection (e) may pay a bonus to any of its employees or executives, without regard to when the arrangement to pay such a bonus was entered into.’.
03-31-2009, 06:12 PM
$tevie wrote: Did Rush Limbaugh mention it or something?Why yes, yes he did! Talking to a buddy who worships at the alter of Rush, mentioned it. BGnR
03-31-2009, 07:14 PM
Next you'll want AIG calibre multimillion dollar bonuses for that AIG type acceptance performance.
Doing nothing would net a SUPER bomus.
03-31-2009, 08:33 PM
Yes indeedy, Rush was all over the topic in Hour 1 of his fib fest:
http://mediamatters.org/limbaughwire/2009/03/31#0030
03-31-2009, 09:07 PM
Gutenberg wrote: Good lord. Reading that makes me remember what a shameless liar and cynical con artist Limbaugh is. I rarely allow myself to get slimed that much by his asinine patter. 
04-01-2009, 06:11 AM
Rush knows his audience, that's for sure!
2112 wrote: |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
