Hacker News Reader

Comment by Kiro | Hacker News Reader

It was not at the same time. The bonus was paid in December, before the pandemic.

Regardless of timing or events, the 30mil individual bonus was still taken while 10% of employee's salaries were cut. That's excessive and a slap in the face to those employees.

No-one could have predicted this pandemic and the drastic measures companies have to take. When they paid the bonus they had no idea they would have to cut salaries a few months later. The timing is essential since one event happened before the pandemic and one afterwards. We could argue about bonuses in general but that's a whole different topic.

But perhaps, just perhaps, the CEO could take $2M as bonus and save $28M for a rainy day?

A rainy day will arrive sooner or later - whether it is a pandemic or an economic crisis or a dry spell in additional funding, etc.

I agree but that's a whole different discussion. We can criticize bonuses in general but making this company a particular scapegoat is just wrong.

I am not sure what is so particular about this company that the CEO deserved 30M, while neglecting to have a rainy-day fund, just like any reasonable business should. With 30M of bonus, it does not seem like the company was struggling last year?

I don't think any bonus at that level is deserved but just look at how many healthy companies that apparently didn't have a rainy-day fund and are already struggling.

Thanks, that makes things different. I should've looked better at this particular case!

So the bonus has been returned?

Maybe? The discussion has derailed from a misrepresentation of facts to people holding on to their anger and finding unrelated ways to slander the company. They gave a bonus, then corona hit and they had to cut salaries, like so many other companies have.

If you ask me I think all bonuses should be returned but again, nothing uniquely evil about this company.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com