Posted on 10/28/2008 5:44:55 PM PDT by markomalley
The nine largest U.S. banks receiving $125 billion from the government were asked on Tuesday to hand over information about their compensation and bonus plans to a Congressional panel. Rep. Henry Waxman, chairman of the U.S. House oversight committee, sent letters on Tuesday to the banks' chief executives asking them to provide information about the total compensation paid or projected to be paid to the 10 highest paid employees for the last three years. Waxman, who has publicly blasted other executives for their lavish pay packages, wants the information broken down by salaries, bonuses and benefits and a description of the reasons for the year-to-year changes in the amounts. Nine major banks, including Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and Bank of America, soon will be receiving cash from the Treasury Department's $700 billion financial services rescue package. "While I understand the need to pay the salaries of employees, I question the appropriateness of depleting the capital that taxpayers just injected into the banks through the payment of billions of dollars in bonuses...," Waxman, a Democrat from California, said in the letter. Waxman's committee also wants information on the number of employees who were paid, or projected to be paid, more than $500,000 in total compensation for each year from 2006 to 2008. The deadline to hand over information is November 10. |
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
The banks should be limited to the existing government pay scales as long as they have the US government as a major partner.
You can find those scales at the www.opm.gov site.
The Military, the Postal Service, the Public Health Service, etc. are all paid in accordance with a primary standard ~ no civil servant or military officer may be paid MORE THAN a Congress critter.
I wouldn't limit a look-see to the top 10. Rather, if I were the regulator I'd simply note the requirement above and demand my partners adhere to it under penalty of law (fine, imprisonment, forfeiture, amputation, etc.).
They're bankers. They'd understand.
Ah, yes. But Congress can vote themselves a raise.
Limit CEO pay and pensions.
Oh, but limiting everyone’s is fairer ... except Congress.
It's an obscure bit of history, but the concept of using a "bank" structure within the postal system is really old.
The idea is that government has a monopoly on letters. Bills and payments for bills (checks) are, in essence, simply letters. By creating the "bank" the customers make deposits, agree to bill payments, and the postal bank credits the accounts. Small wage earners and workers can also open savings accounts.
The Postal Bank is an enormous institution in Japan (for example).
Given government's monopoly over money (in place since the abolition of private currency in the early 1800s) it's really never been considered "socialistic" for the government to own a bank ~ not even in the US. Abolish that money monopoly and government ownership of banks would be a moot issue.
Regular as clockwork everytime Congressional pay is raised, so is the civil service and military pay scales.
They can even vote a raise for you. I suggest you write your Congress critter and ask him for one.
there was an interesting article by a constitutional scholar
in yesterday’s nyt’s ed page that made the point that
palin was correct that the v.p. is a legislative position.
maybe mccain will use her as his point woman in the u.s. senate.
they need a pit bull with lipstick!
It’s the Dem/Libs way of “looking out” for their constituency. They must have a way to pay for all they want to give to the have-nots. The only way is to take from the haves.
That’s all I’m saying. Raises will occur based on the passage of the bill and its effective date. Might be years, could be months.
LOL!
I believe that it was called “United States Postal Savings Bank” initiated in 1910.
Thanks for the reminder. ;-)
LOL.
The government has had control over employee pay and compensation for decades! (At least huge parts of it)
Ever hear of the McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act (SCA)?
The SCA requires contractors and subcontractors performing services on covered federal or District of Columbia contracts in excess of $2,500 to pay service employees in various classes no less than the monetary wage rates and to furnish fringe benefits found prevailing in the locality, or the rates (including prospective increases) contained in a predecessor contractor's collective bargaining agreement.
Ever hear of the Davis-Bacon Act?
The Davis-Bacon Act, as amended, requires that each contract over $2,000 to which the United States or the District of Columbia is a party for the construction, alteration, or repair of public buildings or public works shall contain a clause setting forth the minimum wages to be paid to various classes of laborers and mechanics employed under the contract. Under the provisions of the Act, contractors or their subcontractors are to pay workers employed directly upon the site of the work no less than the locally prevailing wages and fringe benefits paid on projects of a similar character. The Davis-Bacon Act directs the Secretary of Labor to determine such local prevailing wage rates.
Sounds great, right? Make sure that those nasty contractors pay a reasonable wage to their employees, right?
Well, in practice, what it does (in a competitive environment) is makes sure that no contractor pays his employees any sizable amount more than the minimum…for every contractor pays his employees much more than the minimum, there will be many competitors who will not. And when it comes to competing or recompeting for a service contract, the lowest bid will win.
With the amount of influence federal contracts have on the economy, that tends to actually depress wages overall.
The point is that the framework for wage control is already in effect.
at a stop light the other day,
1. a plumbing pickup pulled up, slightly bent, older, paint not in good condition.
2. meanwhile, another pickup pulled up, a city pickup, brand new.
1. pays taxes for 2.
I simply cannot recall the Socialists making a big deal out of banks ~ in fact, most of the old Fabians and their running dog lackeys probably thought of bankers as useless eaters.
The Commies thought they could run an economy without money/money. That early experiment by Lenin lasted almost as long as the "no visible rank" Army insignia.
The CEOs who bought us fascism should be in jail. Not getting bonuses.
Thanks for the “edumaction”, I guess the socialism of America is just more blatant today then in my youth. ;-)
I'd say that this is exactly backwards. Certainly more so when it comes to Military pay scales.
i hope so.
Many of the CEO's and their VP's who brought us this mess are sitting on a beach some place sipping a cold one. The people who have the expertise to clean up the mess aren't going to work for Obama style wages.
Technically you are correct ~ but the top rate in the military payscale is "limited" (see reference above) to not exceed certain civilian senior executive pay levels, and that's probably why I was under the impression the limitation standard was based on what Congress critters get.
Anyway, no one gets everything the payscale says they can get ~ it's a trick ~ an incentive ~ to make a federal government employee think he can get a lot of money.
You are correct. These banks have the option to NOT take taxpayer money and manage their own affairs.
For now.
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.