Posted on 02/04/2009 10:33:03 AM PST by Wolfie
Report: Macy's execs get bonuses day after cutting 7,000 jobs
NEW YORK, NY -- Macy's Inc. announced Monday that it would cut 7,000 jobs, almost 4 percent of its work force, and reduced its contributions to its employees' retirement funds and slash its dividend to preserve cash amid a severe pullback in consumer spending.
But a day after Macy’s executives announced the lay-offs, Cincinnati.com reports that top company officials received a final installment on $1.39 million in performance bonuses from 2004.
According to Cincinnati.com:
"The stock credit plan created in March 2004 brought five top executives “phantom stock units” or stock credits after a three-year holding period ended on Saturday, according to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing on Tuesday.
Half of the incentive was paid in February 2008 with the remaining amount paid Monday."
Department stores have been especially hard-hit by the poor economy as shoppers cut spending and turn to discount stores. Last month, Fresno, Calif.-based department store chain Gottschalks Inc. put itself up for sale and said it had filed to reorganize in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Dallas-based Neiman Marcus Group Inc. said this month that it was cutting about 375 jobs, or 3 percent of its work force.
Have you seen their recent figures? They are on the ropes...if they are so profitable why lay off 7000 people. This means I will not shop there.
Being an executive is a job also. If you fail at it you can
get fired just as easy as anyone else. A lot of this comes
from robber baron companies. But sooner than later they will
fail, (naturally). You can only monkey with the balance sheet
for so long. Then you have to go to Washington and try to get
to prop you up. Which isn’t natural at all.
Obviously it didnt fire the executives who made the bad decisions that cost the company money. You seem to be quite “Socialist” in that regard
Do not accuse of me of being from DU. I am real American Conservative. And I will criticize poor business decision-making
They won’t hire people back...fire more and get more bonuses.
For all the years since 9-11, all we have heard from the boardroom is how either the employee groups make concessions, or people will lose jobs and we will file for bankruptcy. AND, we have all had to sit by and watch how management have enjoyed the fact that they receive lucrative salaries, bonuses and perks, and that THEIR concessions have been minimal to none.
My husband has remained on active duty practically since 9-11. Sure, he loves serving our country and enjoyed being recalled under President Bush, since many of the reasons he left active duty for the airlines to begin with had a lot to do with Bill Clinton. He makes about the same flying in the Marines as he does for American. He is eligible to retire from the Marines, but at this point, he’s recalled now until the end of the year.
IN case you missed it...our economy is already destroyed.
They go into business to reap bonuses and large salaries...don’t much care if the company makes money it seems.
Should have deferred them again.
So What????
I don’t know. I worded that sentence poorly - I am speaking of retirees losing retirement pay, in general. We keep hearing about these groups of employees across the US losing their retirements because there is no money.
I would not think of giving myself a “performance bonus” for running my own business. Why would I want to cut into my profits needlessly? Put the money back into the business and let it grow...
You still don’t get it, do you? They have not taken a TARP bailout.
It isn’t yours or my business what they do. This article makes them look real mean, but we don’t know all the facts. Wake up. How ‘bout lets have Bawney Frank take things over. That ought to fix it. Right?
This article is just another demonization tactic by leftists to make it easier for the government to seize all businesses.
They slashed the dividend too.
I'm well aware Macy's is publicly traded, but it is still privately owned as opposed to government-owned. Thus it is none of the government's (or your) business what they do, unless you're a shareholder.
Obviously Macy’s did not make a profit, or much of one...if they had to lay off 7000 people...cut benefits of the remaining...
No one says they "had to" do this to survive. It may just have been a good business decision to keep them profitable. If you knew anything about business you would understand how decisions like this are evaluated.
Of course, you wont address the tax burden put on the rest of us for the 7000 now-unemployed Macy’s executives....is that kind of Socialism OK with you?
And I'm not a fan of extensive taxpayer support for the unemployed, but why is this Macy's' problem? They never had an obligation to these 7,000 employees in the first place. They chose to hire them when it made financial sense to do so, and now they're choosing not to continue employing them. If the government wants to give them lots of unemployment benefits, why is that Macy's' concern?
Employees are never needed it seems ....bonuses always.
Whoops. #70 was meant for you.
Yes it is wrong for the government to mandate what a business does in the course of perfectly legal actions.
What Macy’s did was not illegal...just bad business. They compensated one group of employees while axing another...not smart if they were trying to limit losses.
Because they expect the economy to slow, and they want to remain profitable. They're not laying off 7,000 people because they need to do so to survive, they're doing it because it makes the most financial sense to keep them profitable. Do you have any idea how business decisions are evaluated from a financial standpoint?
Then why do you think companies have an obligation to keep employing workers who are no longer profitable for them to keep? This is one of the most socialistic positions someone can hold.
So fire everybody. Sell the fixtures and the rest of the
inventory and close the stores. That’s what companies do all
of the time. Some time it’s not the executive’s decision.
Sometimes it’s the share holder’s. Because the stock price
will fall through the floor and no one will buy the stock.
Because it is not performing. You only get to vote if you
have stock in the company. Is Macy’s an employee owned
company?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.