3 ms·
Given the choice of paying back the 28 million in bonuses or the paying back the 65 million in state aid, the execs took the hard choice and decided to keep the
by stuaxo 5y ago
Given the choice of paying back the 28 million in bonuses or the paying back the 65 million in state aid, the execs took the hard choice and decided to keep the bonuses.
- greydius 5y agoHard choice indeed
- ocdtrekkie 5y agoThis feels like something stockholders should sue over, as it's a deliberate choice for executives to screw the company to pad their personal profits.
- Aeolun 5y agoOf course, and it will show great executives what a swell place to work booking.com really is. Even if the comp is a bit low by executive standards, at least they have your back.
- elliekelly 5y agoA derivative suit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_suit https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_suit
- mypalmike 5y agoThe successful result of such a lawsuit: average stockholders will get a $12 credit towards their next booking.com excursion. Class action lawyers take their $18M commission. And the execs keep their jobs and those bonuses.
- bradleyjg 5y agoThat’s why boards hire “executive compensation consultants” to bless what they want to do anyway.
- s1artibartfast 5y agoWhy do you think there was a choice? I don't see anything supporting that in the article. The governments position was stated as follows: it was more important to maintain a consistent government than to apply the bonus rule retroactively and without warning. Seems like the company payback was entirely voluntary and this is an example no good deed going unpunished.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- amelius 5y agoPerhaps time for a new law concept: "jury by referendum".