You might wanna start here...
Merrill Lynch & Co Chief Executive John Thain has suggested to directors that he get a 2008 bonus of as much as $10 million, but the battered company’s compensation committee is resisting his request, the Wall Street Journal said, citing people familiar with the situation.
The compensation committee has not reached a decision, but is leaning toward denying Thain and other senior executives bonuses for this year, the people told the paper.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/...
More below the fold...
If there was ever a time in recent memory that I've ever had cause to stand up and cheer, it's now.
Merrill Lynch's Compensation Committee is resisting the push of it's CEO, John Thain, to be paid a 10 million dollar bonus.
Merrill Lynch & Co Chief Executive John Thain has suggested to directors that he get a 2008 bonus of as much as $10 million, but the battered company’s compensation committee is resisting his request, the Wall Street Journal said, citing people familiar with the situation.
The compensation committee has not reached a decision, but is leaning toward denying Thain and other senior executives bonuses for this year, the people told the paper.
Now, I'm not one to complain about CEO salaries, if the roles and responsibilities are commiserate to the duties being performed -- but the kicker is that Merrill Lynch is up a financial creek without a paddle. And this guy is standing there with his hand out going 'gimme'. That is so not cool.
Merrill was arguably saved from extinction when it agreed to merge on September 15, an hour before Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc filed for bankruptcy. The fear was that Merrill could be next if shareholders and trading partners fled, as many did at Lehman and the former Bear Stearns Cos.
A valid point, but how does that make him any more eligible for a 10 mill bonus?
Members of Merrill’s compensation committee agree with Thain that the takeover is in shareholders’ best interest, but believe it would be foolish to ignore strong public sentiment against large compensation packages, the paper said, citing people familiar with their thinking. (emphasis mine)
So there we have it, straight from the committee. It (for once) shows that someone in the financial world is trying to develop a spine, and limit the amount of payouts these folks are getting (or in this case, asking for). There need to be more -- there should be more.
Let this not be the last.