Skip to comments.Report: Macy's execs get bonuses day after cutting 7,000 jobs
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 Macys 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.
Nothing wrong with that. Besides, it was the final installment from bonuses earned in 2004.
A company that lost money is giving bonuses;these people have divorced their compensation from the bottom line...why am I surprised...cut 7000 jobs too. Well, it is their right-private business-but I have a right not to shop there.
So, they aren’t selling as much and need fewer employees.
Deferred compensation for earnings in 2004? I guess since the economy went south, they’re not entitled to it anymore.
The media sure is working on ginning up support salary caps for all execs.
The proletariat must rize up and sieze from these people what is rightfully theirs! Then we will live in peace and harmony for ever and ever, in a land of plenty. ... *sigh*
At least Macy’s kept its promise. What a novel idea.
If cutting 7,000 or 17,000 jobs resulted in the greatest shareholder value the did the right thing and deserve the bonuses. If anyone wants to participate in the decision making of a private sector institution like Macy’s all they have to do is buy stock and vote your shares.
Poor timing, but agreed. It was a bonus for performance in an earlier year.
This compensation was based upon the bottom line from 2004. It was earned then and the payment deferred until now.
These executive bonuses are chump change compared to the money scammed between Tom Daschel and his lobbist wife.
Off with their heads! Take over Macy’s!
I can’t wait to walk in a government Macy’s and see all those previously packed racks with all the latest styles turned into an empty store with one government issue sweater that no one wants hanging by itself.
Oh and 500 government employees to treat me rudely.
True and if I was one of those stock betters, I would bet they are going to sell even less in the future.
Perhaps the 7000 unneeded employees and the costs to keep them was dragging them down.
They simply streamlined. People don’t take the responsibilty and trouble to go into business to employ people, they go into business to make a profit. Otherwise why bother?
Sure, don’t shop there. Then they’ll hire plenty of people back. Take your business to a good government store.
Don’t we see the populist panic that is being fanned and which is threatening to destroy our economy?
Well, that may be true, but it certainly won’t make any difference will it? The economy is tanking.
Wrong, companies that do what makes sense and lay off workers in a recession increase their value. If the government comes in and forces them to rehire the 7000 people they will destroy the business.
Gawd, doncha just LUUUUUUVVVVVVVV wealth envy????
If it’s deferred compensation from 2004, why shouldn’t they be paid???
It’s THEIR money, NOT ours!!!
Tacky. Mean-spirited. But not illegal.
My question would be, did the actions taken by the executives save Macy’s from going under? Bonuses from 2004 are not worthy of discussion in 2009.
It is a shame isn’t it. Even conservtives are falling for the leftist trick of demonization of that you want to conquer.
I hope that some of the people here who want CEO pay cut and laid off workers rehired and businesses that laid off workers boycotted, will step back and also right some historical wrongs:
Isn’t it about time the government got involved and rehired all those people laid off from the beaver skin cap companies? Those filthy capitalist bastards laid everybody off when the market for beaver fur collapsed.
Then we can turn to helping the blacksmiths union and the horse feed industry.
They’re bonuses from 2004 that were agreed upon long before the current economic crisis. So what’s the big deal?
Yes! In this case, I was just looking at a Clairborne shirt and some Bostonian loafers.
It's called free enterprise.
A “company that lost money”? What are you talking about? They made more than $700 million in the past year.
And I’m guessing the job cuts were a smart business decision in a shrinking economy.
Sounds as if the compensation is in the form of stock. When employees get stock as compensation,they have to wait years before they can finally cash all in. If it’s in the form of options, then the stock has to be above where it priced at when they were first awarded.
I’m getting the feeling that the media is trying to get us all to become anti business.
shouldn’t the federal government be cutting jobs too?
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....
“People dont take the responsibilty and trouble to go into business to employ people, they go into business to make a profit.”
This has been happening at AMR/AA since pilots, attendants and mechanics made huge concessions to save our company from bankruptcy back in, I believe, 2003. Since 2003, we have been living on my husband’s salary which is still 40% LESS per year than his salary in 2003.
When pilots and employees are being furloughed, and we’re trying to save our company, I’m sorry, but NO one should be receiving bonuses until we are all back onto the playing field.
If that’s what it took to make a profit. If you don’t like it
start up a business that will employ 500 million people and
put them out of business. (But don’t use the government to do
it.) You’ll have to look up in the Constitution what the
government’s job exactly is.
So what? Many salespeople and others on incentive pay program deserve and should receive “bonuses”. In many cases this is a part of their total compensation. Besides I haven’t heard that the gummint bailed out Macy’s (yet!) so it’s no concern of theirs.
My new business plan:
Get rid of bonuses and competitive pay for executives.
Over hire and over pay low level employees, especially when sales are down.
And then tell the government, “we’re too big to fail... we need a few billion.”
So if you were earned compensation in 2004 that was contractually paid over several years, you shouldn’t get paid what you are owed?
Who makes these decisions, Macy’s or Federated Department Stores which owns Macy’s?
Lets see, a communist muslim from Kenya lies his way into the WH promising to raise taxes and redistribute wealth and he’s surprised that corporations are cutting costs and hiding money?
A real economic genius, this lawyer from Harvard who’s tuition was mysteriously paid for by a muslim extremist, and there ain’t no 1994 GOP revolution in the works to turn this around.
Corporations are doing exactly what POTUS MUZZIE HUSSEIN and his commie comrades least expected; giving the USSA government all of the responsibility for the workers they no longer need because they don’t have the money to pay them anymore and still remain profitable.
They’re shedding them before the socialist government makes it illegal to fire people.
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?
Aren’t some of these retired employees contractually owed their retirements, too?
The parent company (formerly “Federated Department Stores”) was renamed “Macy’s.”
The employee cuts would not be so bad...if the executives didn’t pocket the savings as bonuses.
Macy’s did nothing for their shareholders or their company by paying off their executives
I have a small business...and it wouldn’t exist if I decided to pay myself a bonus for not making money. You can tell by a lot of the comments on here that people are clueless on running a business
And taking it to its logical conclusion, Macy’s should never let anyone go, even those who barely work for the pay they receive. After all those lazy folks will just go on welfare.
Did Macy’s cut retirement programs??
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.
Macy’s didn’t take TARP/taxpayer monies - they are entitled to do what they want.
I used to be part owner of a small business. If sales were down or taxes were to high, we had to let people go.
What worries me about this demonization of business is that we are playing into the leftist hands.
Soon they will be running everything, you will be forced to run a business and do the work and the government will pay you whatever they think you should get for the trouble.
We are on a very slippery slope and people need to reject this notion. All this hate for business is generated by the politics running DC.
It irritates me because most business owners are good hard working people already up against an unfriendly government who make it hard to survive.
Good points...I can understand
There are just too many comments on here from people who have no clue on running a business...or what goes on in running a business.
The majority of Americans who work for a living will take cuts in pay to save their jobs and companies....unfortunately too many executives these days lack the same loyalty to their employers.
And, we are getting a lot of “failed executive love” from the “living in parents basement” crowd
Oh, I didn’t realize that. Thanks!!
If the company isn’t making money, no. I should not be compensated when the company is not making money
Of course, I would never defer a bonus in the first place. If a “performance bonus” or “profit bonus” was deserved in the first place....it would not have been deferred. Obviously they really didnt deserve the 2004 bonus if it had to be deferred