The second side is that of companies that did not get bail outs.
Those companies of course should still be able to make any choice they want regarding bonuses, with only input provided by the shareholders, board and the employees in question.
I have a problem with Bonuses in general. It seems that any executive that just does their job is entitled to a bonus. What ever happened to "award for excellence" as a precurser to a bonus? These people we speak of all have 6 figure plus salaries, is that not enough compensation for a years work? Just when did the executives vote themselves these bonuses? It's scandalous.[/quote]
Typically the bonuses are given to avoid Federal Law Prohibiting Salaries exceeding 1 Million from being written off as payroll expenses.
Tax Avoidance is not a crime.
God help us if that ever changes, because since I am giving up smoking (Hell If I'm paying more taxes) I am technically doing it for tax avoidance reasons, thus if it becomes a crime the Federal Government would be able to cart me off to prison.
Which would be very fucking lame.
As far as the salaries + bonuses being scandalous...
Unless you are a shareholder, then it's NONE OF YOUR F* BUSINESS.
Just like it's NONE OF YOUR F* BUSINESS what I make.
And None of My F* Business what you make.