[UCFRoadWarrior]

Just awesome....Macy’s execs get compensated for poor performance (regardless if it is from 2004...the company is losing money, now)...all the while pushing the burden of 7000 employees on the government....as we the taxpayer fund those 7000 until they find another job (thru unemployment, food stamps, taxpayer paid re-training, etc)...of course, if they find another job in this bad economy....

Business Socialism running amok....

[keepitreal]

So if you were earned compensation in 2004 that was contractually paid over several years, you shouldn’t get paid what you are owed?

[Arguendo]

LOL, what? It's "business socialism" for a private company to lay off workers because they're pushing the "burden" of those employees on the government? You seem to be assuming Macy's somehow had responsiblity to pay for the "burden" of those people in the first place, which is a bizarre idea, particularly from someone claiming to be a conservative.

You're the one advocating what could be described as "business socialism"--the idea that businesses somehow have a responsiblity take care of employees, even when those employees are no longer profitable to keep, rather than make money.

And Macy's is not losing money. Why do you post incorrect information here?

[IYAS9YAS]

as we the taxpayer fund those 7000 until they find another job

I'd be willing to bet Macy's has paid plenty in taxes. I'd also be willing to bet Macy's paid plenty in unemployment taxes. So, forcing a company to keep workers it no longer needs is a better solution? Are you certain you're on the right site? That sounds like DU talk.

Besides, this was contractual compensation and the company is making money.