5 ms·

"Afterwards, he offered me a six-figure settlement to never speak about it." Mick, thats not a settlement, thats a payoff for taking a hit so the boss doesnt t

"Afterwards, he offered me a six-figure settlement to never speak about it." Mick, thats not a settlement, thats a payoff for taking a hit so the boss doesnt take the fall. Marty wanted this to go away so he could continue ladder-climbing the tech industry. that he even attempted to do this strongly suggests hes probably paid these things out before.

stingraycharles 4y ago
Tangent, but I always wonder how these kind of payments are paid for. Would it be out of pocket money for Marty, or would he let Mick bill some phantom hours and have the company pay for it?
- aliswe 4y ago
  Maybe bookkeeped under "litigation".
- FeistySkink 4y ago
  It's a simple contract with all conditions spelled out. The company pays.
  - jszymborski 4y ago
    Why would companies go to bat for these execs that are liabilities? Why not pay out the settlement and send Marty to Zenimax's St Helena division to prevent having to pay this sort of thing out again? (or worse, risk the damage of having someone not willing to take hush money like Mr. Gordon).
    - FeistySkink 4y ago
      Having been in a similar situation on a lot smaller and insignificant scale, I wish I could say something coherent: I wrote and re-edited a long rant here, before ultimately deleting it. But then I see the Adam Neumanns et al. of this world still continuing to be successful despite their numerous public and not so screw-ups that add up to billions, and realize that it's the usual "A times B times C equals X".
    - bombcar 4y ago
      Because six figures is cheap compared to all the other things they pay for. It happens way more than you think.
      - mywittyname 4y ago
        And yet, they tried their damnedest to screw Mick out of a similar amount of money. Which leads me to believe this isn't cheap for them at all.
        bombcar 4y ago
        Different times, different problems. I've seen companies spend tens of hours of multiple employee's time to reduce a one-time cost by $1k, and then because of that reduction spend $10k elsewhere. Not my budget, not my problem.
        jszymborski 4y ago
        Yah, I think this falls under the category of a bad business decision that was easier to make because it was reactionary and not preventative.
    - Loughla 4y ago
      >Why would companies go to bat for these execs that are liabilities? 1. Companies are not alive. They are synthetic entities made up of individuals. They do not make decisions on their own. Their decisions are dictated by the decisions of the individuals inside of the company. 2. If I work in AP and receive a notice from a company executive to pay a contract that is signed by said executive (if they have clearance in policy to do so) and the person we're paying, we have all of the back end paperwork we need to pay it out, I'm paying it out. My job as AP is not to judge right or wrong. It's to process according to acceptable accounting practices, in general, and corporate policy specifically. In other words, why do people act like a company is this mysterious creature able to sort right from wrong, and ignore the influence people like actual executives of that company can have on processes?
      - jszymborski 4y ago
        You can rephrase my statement to be "Why would this synthetic entity made up of individuals go to bat for these execs that are liabilities?" I'm not sure that it makes the answer clearer. It's hard to imagine a company w/o the transparency along the chain of command required to detect and prohibit and executive from getting hush-money rubber stamped. At least not one that actually makes money and isn't robbed blind by its middle-management. On a side note, I've more than once gotten the trademark HN pedantry about "Companies not being people, but made up of them" and it never surprises me that people feel the need to remind me of it. When someone says "Company X made decision Y", it is short-hand for "The people responsible at Company X made decision Y". This is commonly accepted English. I don't think companies are mysterious creatures able to sort right from wrong, I think they are made up of individuals who can sort right from wrong.
        philwelch 4y ago
        The only individual in the decision-making process who is able to sort right from wrong here is the exec who is a liability.
        jszymborski 4y ago

stingraycharles 4y ago

Tangent, but I always wonder how these kind of payments are paid for. Would it be out of pocket money for Marty, or would he let Mick bill some phantom hours and have the company pay for it?

aliswe 4y ago
Maybe bookkeeped under "litigation".
FeistySkink 4y ago
It's a simple contract with all conditions spelled out. The company pays.
- jszymborski 4y ago
  Why would companies go to bat for these execs that are liabilities? Why not pay out the settlement and send Marty to Zenimax's St Helena division to prevent having to pay this sort of thing out again? (or worse, risk the damage of having someone not willing to take hush money like Mr. Gordon).
  - FeistySkink 4y ago
    Having been in a similar situation on a lot smaller and insignificant scale, I wish I could say something coherent: I wrote and re-edited a long rant here, before ultimately deleting it. But then I see the Adam Neumanns et al. of this world still continuing to be successful despite their numerous public and not so screw-ups that add up to billions, and realize that it's the usual "A times B times C equals X".
  - bombcar 4y ago
    Because six figures is cheap compared to all the other things they pay for. It happens way more than you think.
    - mywittyname 4y ago
      And yet, they tried their damnedest to screw Mick out of a similar amount of money. Which leads me to believe this isn't cheap for them at all.
      - bombcar 4y ago
        Different times, different problems. I've seen companies spend tens of hours of multiple employee's time to reduce a one-time cost by $1k, and then because of that reduction spend $10k elsewhere. Not my budget, not my problem.
      - jszymborski 4y ago
        Yah, I think this falls under the category of a bad business decision that was easier to make because it was reactionary and not preventative.
  - Loughla 4y ago
    >Why would companies go to bat for these execs that are liabilities? 1. Companies are not alive. They are synthetic entities made up of individuals. They do not make decisions on their own. Their decisions are dictated by the decisions of the individuals inside of the company. 2. If I work in AP and receive a notice from a company executive to pay a contract that is signed by said executive (if they have clearance in policy to do so) and the person we're paying, we have all of the back end paperwork we need to pay it out, I'm paying it out. My job as AP is not to judge right or wrong. It's to process according to acceptable accounting practices, in general, and corporate policy specifically. In other words, why do people act like a company is this mysterious creature able to sort right from wrong, and ignore the influence people like actual executives of that company can have on processes?
    - jszymborski 4y ago
      You can rephrase my statement to be "Why would this synthetic entity made up of individuals go to bat for these execs that are liabilities?" I'm not sure that it makes the answer clearer. It's hard to imagine a company w/o the transparency along the chain of command required to detect and prohibit and executive from getting hush-money rubber stamped. At least not one that actually makes money and isn't robbed blind by its middle-management. On a side note, I've more than once gotten the trademark HN pedantry about "Companies not being people, but made up of them" and it never surprises me that people feel the need to remind me of it. When someone says "Company X made decision Y", it is short-hand for "The people responsible at Company X made decision Y". This is commonly accepted English. I don't think companies are mysterious creatures able to sort right from wrong, I think they are made up of individuals who can sort right from wrong.
      - philwelch 4y ago
        The only individual in the decision-making process who is able to sort right from wrong here is the exec who is a liability.
        jszymborski 4y ago