Making hay (Banks are paying bonuses even as shareholders make losses. That is a problem)

The Economist ^ | 10/17/2009

[boomstick]

Yes, I would leave.

For a bit of context, I have a math/science/engineering background from top schools, plus teaching experience in and out of the classroom. I commute ~2hrs each way, and work 12 hour days. I do this because coming out of grad school it seemed like the best path to financial security. If compensation were to be significantly and permanently reduced, I would be gone the same day. Where? Someplace less productive (teaching at a school, or working for the government), or just less stressful/time-consuming (working for a computer/electronics firm), or starting a business with my wife, but in all cases somewhere less remunerative.

Also, it is important to note that (at least at my company) compensation is a matter of growth rate. So being considered a high performer means that your percentage increase will be higher than average (or in a year like 2008, less negative). So in order to get paid well, it is necessary to perform well, usually for multiple years in a row, and to be in a business that is performing well, and for the company overall to be performing well. And an increasing percentage of the compensation is in the form of stock, which vests over a few years (and even the part that has vested usually isn’t delivered to your account until some years have passed).

Note, by the way, that I’m not saying that we’re not willing to take a temporary reduction in comp if the company isn’t making money and if the prospects for future performance are good. But if my company were under tight govt supervision, and there were little hope of improvements, it wouldn’t make sense to continue.

[VOA]

bump

[Vendome]

they are a 6ortune 200. Totally unexpected.

Life Happens.

have my own company, again and life is great.