4 ms·

Yes, and all executives who resign after a scandle do so voluntarily. No one ever resigns because the people above them offered it as a mutually-beneficial alte

Yes, and all executives who resign after a scandle do so voluntarily. No one ever resigns because the people above them offered it as a mutually-beneficial alternative to getting fired. I'll totally accept her motivations at face value.

soneca 10y ago
I don't see it the way you do. I never heard of an executive being pushed to earn less money the way executives are pushed to resign. Usually is quite the opposite, companies pay resigning executives a wealth sum as it is in the best interest of the company that the burned executive leave as soon as possible and with no intentions to harm the company after leaving. The board usually couldnt care less about the money a leaving executive gets. An executive leaving money on the table (and distributing among other employees) is extremely rare and I think your cynism have no logical thinking support here.
- 36bydesignBL 10y ago
  They don't pay them a wealthy sum when their actions lowered Verizon's buying price by billions. If you crunch the numbers, there is a 0% chance Marissa did this 100% voluntarily with no pressure on her.
  - jsjohnst 10y ago
    > when their actions lowered Verizon's buying price by billions. You mean 0.35 billion?
- tyingq 10y ago
  It is common enough that it has a name...claw back provision. It's risen in popularity since the subprime mortgage crisis. Used more often to claw back bonuses for fraud, but used for lackluster performance as well. Voluntarily forgoing your bonus versus an embarrassing board decision isn't that odd.
bogomipz 10y ago
>"No one ever resigns because the people above them offered it as a mutually-beneficial alternative to getting fired. " When C level executives are involved in a scandal, this is exactly what happens. The folks above them "ask" for their resignation. The subtext is that it is mandatory. Resigning keeps them from the disgrace of being fired and also often allows them to keep certain things like bonuses, pensions etc.
- skinnymuch 10y ago
  In case you didnt realize, [s]he was being sarcastic.
  - bogomipz 10y ago
    Ha, I did not realize that. My sarcasm filter failed me :) Cheers.
    - skinnymuch 10y ago
      Cheers!
TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago
Please don't do this here. If you have something to say, say it. In a forum with participants from a plurality of nations, and various states of wakefulness, sarcasm is going to be missed by someone. Additionally, it doesn't add anything to the conversation that several sibling comments haven't already stated in a clearer fashion.

soneca 10y ago

I don't see it the way you do. I never heard of an executive being pushed to earn less money the way executives are pushed to resign. Usually is quite the opposite, companies pay resigning executives a wealth sum as it is in the best interest of the company that the burned executive leave as soon as possible and with no intentions to harm the company after leaving. The board usually couldnt care less about the money a leaving executive gets. An executive leaving money on the table (and distributing among other employees) is extremely rare and I think your cynism have no logical thinking support here.

36bydesignBL 10y ago
They don't pay them a wealthy sum when their actions lowered Verizon's buying price by billions. If you crunch the numbers, there is a 0% chance Marissa did this 100% voluntarily with no pressure on her.
- jsjohnst 10y ago
  > when their actions lowered Verizon's buying price by billions. You mean 0.35 billion?
tyingq 10y ago
It is common enough that it has a name...claw back provision. It's risen in popularity since the subprime mortgage crisis. Used more often to claw back bonuses for fraud, but used for lackluster performance as well. Voluntarily forgoing your bonus versus an embarrassing board decision isn't that odd.

bogomipz 10y ago

>"No one ever resigns because the people above them offered it as a mutually-beneficial alternative to getting fired. " When C level executives are involved in a scandal, this is exactly what happens. The folks above them "ask" for their resignation. The subtext is that it is mandatory. Resigning keeps them from the disgrace of being fired and also often allows them to keep certain things like bonuses, pensions etc.

skinnymuch 10y ago
In case you didnt realize, [s]he was being sarcastic.
- bogomipz 10y ago
  Ha, I did not realize that. My sarcasm filter failed me :) Cheers.
  - skinnymuch 10y ago
    Cheers!

TheSpiceIsLife 10y ago

Please don't do this here. If you have something to say, say it. In a forum with participants from a plurality of nations, and various states of wakefulness, sarcasm is going to be missed by someone. Additionally, it doesn't add anything to the conversation that several sibling comments haven't already stated in a clearer fashion.