Slashdot Mirror


WorldCom Wins $25M Bonus Judgement

tekBuddha writes "According to this article at CNN.com WorldCom has won a suit allowing them to pay $25 million in bonuses to certain 'key employees' that are necessary for their re-organization." They hope to be out of bankruptcy protection by mid-2003. Hopefully this will help them retain important members of their sales and service teams.

186 comments

  1. Heh by SexyKellyOsbourne · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's nothing less than legalized robbery.

    1. Re:Heh by tanveer1979 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's nothing less than legalized robbery.

      yes, if we did it.... robbery. But they are rich. They robbed the common investor.. thats it. For the lawmaker the layman doesn't count. Democracy was supposed to be "for the people, by the people, of the people"
      Now its just "Far the peple, buy the people, off the people".
      It is really pathetic that the same people who ruined the lives of thousands of small investors are getting bonuses.
      --
      My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
      FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
    2. Re:Heh by SubtleNuance · · Score: 2

      Hear Hear!

      CowboyNeal: Hopefully this will help them retain important members of their sales and service teams.

      Are you kidding? Your going to waste $25M on sales? Service, or Engineering I might agree with... but the fat-boys in Sales should probably be locked up. Executive sales ALWAYS inflate their projections - there in a better place than any to raise the "we are loosing revenue" flag... but they never do.

      That said, paying a "few key executives" of ANY stripe is a bad idea... the day one of these pompuous-windbags-with-a-good-hair-cut-and-nice-su it does 100000times the productive work of a janitor (or any other member of labour) is the day Ill eat these words.

      Legalized Robbery is right.. fraud.. and another example of American Corporatism run absolutely wild.

    3. Re:Heh by macdaddy357 · · Score: 2

      Most investors are just gamblers. The people who really got screwed are the thousands who used to have a job until, the robber barons bankrupted the company. $25 million in bonuses? Where is the money coming from? How will a bankrupt company keep the checks from bouncing? Democracy? What has happened is the result of an economic theory called capitalism, not any form of government. Capitalism has nothing whatsoever to do with democracy. All power in the hands of a few rich old men is more like feudalism.

      --
      How ya like dat?
    4. Re:Heh by plus5insightful · · Score: 1

      Most investors are just gamblers.

      While a lot of investors are indeed Make Money Fast gamblers, many more simply want to keep their money appreciating at least with inflation (e.g. It isn't a good idea to keep money in your mattress). To do this you find an organization with strong fundamentals and a good balance sheet, and you invest your money: The cycle of economics.

      Worldcom, though, had bogus books: What was supposed to be a solid company, by all information that the public could see, was perilously in danger. Many low-risk, non-gambling investors were defrauded because of this misrepresentation. Don't clump them in with Yahoo.com investors, or other momentum type stocks.

    5. Re:Heh by iocat · · Score: 1
      Democracy and capitalism have nothing to do with each other. We have a (theoretically) democratic, capitalistic system in the United States (and the West in general), but you can't substitute one for the other. For instance, Afghanistan under the Taliban was a capitalist society, but certainly not a democratic one.

      The cool thing about our society is that, at least in theory, we can exercise our democratic rights to reign in the excesses of free-form capitalism.

      Before you start capping on me about how unfree our society is, how unregulated capitalism is in the US, blah blah Chomsky blah blah blah. I would like to offer the following point. A good system doesn't mean that bad things will never happen; it frequently will allow bad things to happen, but with some error correction. After years of fraud, etc. our system is now catching up with the latest problem, and will be (probably) regulated out of existence. Doesn't mean our system is perfect, or there aren't better ones, but the fact that flaws are caught and at least sometimes fixed is much more hopeful to me than if that didn't happen.

      Put another way: if Bush and Cheney were really pulling the strings as much as liberal conspiracy theorits argue, we'd already be drilling in ANWR. The fact that we're not is to me evidence that our system works to some extent.

      --

      Dude, I think I can see my house from here.

  2. $25 million by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $25 million....now there's a pinky-in-the-mouth amount.

    1. Re:$25 million by Doug+Renner · · Score: 1

      I think this is a evil, evil thing.

  3. Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    They be smoking crack? More bonuses? What the fuck for?

    1. Re:Huh? by e8johan · · Score: 2

      The poor key employees will soon be out of work, so they will need some cash to live off when looking for a new company to run into the ground... (IMHO)

  4. This was funny the first time it happened by docstrange · · Score: 5, Funny

    .....when the company was called Enron. And the bonuses were awarded BEFORE the bankrupcy was filed.

    --
    Remember that you are unique, just like everybody else.
  5. Well....... by eclectro · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hopefully this will help them retain important members of their sales and service teams

    One can always hope, can't they???

    --
    Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  6. i just hope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    that those key people aren't the ones responsible for buying the $5k shower curtains for their $12 million NYC apartment.

    $25 million tho ... eh, who cares. they'd need to have like $250 million to waste before the price of my T1 through them comes down any. $25 million is a drop in the bucket.

    non-dark-fibre-lighting-bastards

    1. Re:i just hope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i believe the shower cutain thing was the tyco fiasco. i could be wrong, though.

  7. WorldCom's business plan by squidinkcalligraphy · · Score: 1, Funny

    1. Pay millions to executives
    2. ????
    3. PROFIT!!!

    --
    "I think it would be a good idea" Gandhi, on Western Civilisation
    1. Re:WorldCom's business plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Who is the loser who keeps moderating this shit as funny? FUCK!

    2. Re:WorldCom's business plan by Unknown+Relic · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It should be noted that according to the article, the $25 million will be used as incentive for 325 key sales and service employees, not executives. So not only is this money not going to the executives, but it only works out to be approximately $75,000 per person. While that's hardly chump change, it seems more like an attempt to stop key employees from jumping ship and causing the company even more turmoil than a corporate pay-off.

    3. Re:WorldCom's business plan by a_borowski · · Score: 2, Funny

      You forgot part 2:

      2. Pray for a miriacle

    4. Re:WorldCom's business plan by grantm · · Score: 1
      Who is the loser who keeps moderating this shit as funny?

      I can't answer your question but I can say that if you saw the episode of Southpark this was lifted from (the business plan involved the theft of underpants I believe) then you might find it an amusing meme.

    5. Re:WorldCom's business plan by Scaebor · · Score: 1

      you realize, of course, that this very strategy is of the utmost importance for the most successful corporations out there. Without providing competitive pay, one cannot attract the best leaders to the company and thus cannot make a profit. Of course, I am in no way defending the criminal acts of some executives in this company, but the point stands nonetheless.

      --
      "Hey brother Christian with your high and mighty errand / your actions speak so loud I can't hear a word you're saying"
    6. Re:WorldCom's business plan by plugger · · Score: 1

      A mere 75K bonus? The poor, poor lambs. How do they cope?

    7. Re:WorldCom's business plan by plugger · · Score: 1

      The highest paid employees are not always the best. Those companies which award the highest bonuses to their executives are not necessarily the best performing.

    8. Re:WorldCom's business plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      high bonuses attract good people - maybe, they certainly attract 'greedy' people (politley put as those seeking the best for themselves or is that selfish).

    9. Re:WorldCom's business plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The jokes a lot older than that. - I remember a poster that had basically the same joke back in the early 90's

    10. Re:WorldCom's business plan by Loki_1929 · · Score: 2

      "1. Pay millions to executives
      2. ????
      3. PROFIT!!!"


      2. Rob, cheat, lie, steal, defraud, forge, beguile, deceive, delude, misguide, misinform, misinstruct, mislead, distort, extort, exaggerate, misstate, befool, dupe, fool, gull, con, fudge, short, double-cross, betray, sell-out, spoof, bluff, two-time, bamboozle, hoodwink...

      The list goes on and on ;)

      --
      -- "Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
    11. Re:WorldCom's business plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you were currently working at a company that filed for bankrupcy and had an offer at a different company what would you do:

      a) stay at your existing company and hope you still had a job in 12 months
      b) jump ship and accept a new, stable, job.

      $75k is a pretty penny, but it needs to be to offer sufficient reward for taking the risk of choosing option a

    12. Re:WorldCom's business plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never be bitter about other peoople's ability to negotiate good bonuses. Instead, find a way for *you* to negotiate similar packages. It never ceases to amaze me when people are jeolous of other's keen negotiation skills.

    13. Re:WorldCom's business plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      turn 2 or 3 sales for 10 or 12 million, some Exec VP will get a HUGE bonus, and the guy or guys, or ladies for that matter, that worked the deal get squat. If companies ACTUALLY payed by contribution I am QUITE sure that the board members WOULD NOT be on top via that method. Not to say that none of them work but MOST are too busy playing golf and LUNCHING to actually work, they delegate that and then collect for the goodwork or fire people for failure.

  8. Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "WorldCom has won a suit allowing them to pay $25 million in bonuses to certain 'key employees' "

    Lawsuit? Am I missing something or why can't they pay whatever they want to whoever they want? It's up to the board to decide.

    1. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Every single dime coming into or leaving Worldcom has to be approved by the Bankruptcy Court. Good ol' Chapter 11.

    2. Re:Uh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was just to damn tired :-)

      Worldcom, now I remember who they are!

  9. is this good??? by squarefish · · Score: 1

    I mean it sucks for all the good people that worked for them, but they commited major crimes. should anderson consulting, enron, martha, and many other be forgiven? I have a hard time with this...

    --
    Creationists are a lot like zombies. Slow, but powerful and numerous. And they all want to eat our brains.
    1. Re:is this good??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You'll have to deal with it. It's the republican way... "How much of that money in your pocket, which ultimately belongs to me, can I get back from you, and not have you complain about it?"

      Ever notice that this crap happens when the Republicans are "at the wheel", and things simmer down substantially when the Democrats or Independents are there???

    2. Re:is this good??? by chez69 · · Score: 0

      Notice how all this started during the hight of the bubble of the Clinton administration?

      --
      PHP is the solution of choice for relaying mysql errors to web users.
  10. Nice tactic by houseofmore · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Run the company into the ground, then line up for you bonus.

  11. Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by schave · · Score: 5, Informative

    $25 million / 325 key employees = $76,923 per key employee.

    Wow.

    1. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably find most of it goes to a select few ( 20) the rest (the "most" part) get a token amount to round out the request.

    2. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by MalcalypseTheYounger · · Score: 2

      That would only be if it were divided evenly. Most likely anyone with a three letter acronym for a title that begins with a 'C' will see at least a million of that per person and there rest of the service staff will get to bend over and take one for the company.

    3. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by MalleusEBHC · · Score: 5, Funny

      That would only be if it were divided evenly. Most likely anyone with a three letter acronym for a title that begins with a 'C' will see at least a million of that per person and there rest of the service staff will get to bend over and take one for the company.

      Ok, say for sake of discussion the top 20 guys take a million apiece, thus leaving $5 million for 300 people. That's nearly $17k per person. If that's bending over for the company, let me be the first one to grab my ankles.

    4. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by Cruciform · · Score: 5, Funny

      For gods sake, don't accept a cheque!

    5. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by panaceaa · · Score: 1

      Is $77k/year a lot? No! That money's not just salary, but also benefits (which they're legally required to provide salaried employees), support costs, office space, etc. A human resources manager once told me that salary is only 50% of the total cost of having an employee, and I think that's accurate. So, $40-$45k for employees, $60-$70k for managers... that seems perfectly fair.

      (Excluding the fact that WorldCom is a corrupt company, this money is coming from taxpayers, and instead WorldCom should be shut down instead to set an example.)

    6. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by MalleusEBHC · · Score: 2

      ...instead WorldCom should be shut down instead to set an example

      Well that's great in theory and all, but there's this little issue of the UUnet. For right now it's probably better than a known quantity (as bad as they may be) controls it.

    7. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, +5 Informative just by dividing numbers. :)

    8. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      Is $77k/year a lot? No!
      Dude, read the article again. The approved amount wasn't earmarked for salary per person per year. It was for retention bonuses. Puts it in a different light, eh?
    9. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by Phemur · · Score: 5, Informative
      Unfortunately that's not how it works. Here's the typical breakdown for bonuses:

      • 75% goes to the top 5 employees (CEO, CFO, etc)
      • 15% goes to the next top 50 employees (sr VPs, directors
      • 10% goes to the remaining "key" personnel, which is typically only a fraction of the employees

      That means that the sales and service employees of WorldCom would get about 9250$ each, and the top 5 execs would share over 18.5 million, or about 3,750,000

      (Note: I read this on Forbes or Fortune, but I can't find the article for reference. I'll keep looking.)

      If you think this is absurd, consider this: The Ottawa Business Journal released their annual CEO compensation report. It's basically the breakdown of what CEOs and other COs make in the city of Ottawa every year. This year they had to produce two statistics: one that included 5 JDS Uniphase executives, and one that didn't. This was required because the total revenue for the 5 JDS execs on the list was 14 times the compensation for the other 120 non-JDS execs on the list. Consider:

      Average Salary (inc. JDS execs): 6.3 M$
      Average Salary (not inc. JDS): 430 K$

      Total Compensation, JDS execs: 724 M$
      Total Compensation, remaining 120 execs: 51 M$

      (And that includes the executives from Nortel, Corel, Cadence, Cognos, and bunch of other fairly large (1000+ employees) companies.

      Ottawa Business Journal

      It remains to be seen what WorldCom does with this money, but I predict it will be more of the same.

      Phemur

    10. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by p0rnking · · Score: 1

      "That's nearly $17k per person. If that's bending over for the company, let me be the first one to grab my ankles." If you are right, that the top 20 take a million each, that's $17k more than 300 others would have gotten if they didn't win the judgement.

    11. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by WeedMonkey · · Score: 1

      This is Slashdot. A lot of people round here need help with this sort of thing.

    12. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by plus5insightful · · Score: 1

      Well, at least the executive staff at JDS earned it, right?

      Disgusting executive compensation like that is completely unfounded in metrics: CEOs can yabber on about how it's necessary to get the best, but industry studies have found that the exorbinantly paid do not do any better than the conservatively paid. Indeed, one could make a credible case that such absurd compensation quickly creates executives who simply don't care about the health of a company: When you have $40 million after two years, do you really care if the company is going in the shitter? Joe Worker, who's scraping by month to month while waiting for these executives to lay off several hundred people; a collection that together make less than the single executive.

      When organizations such as JDS lose money, fines should be doled out to executives who looted the boardrooms during the good times. Wouldn't that be a fair balance?

    13. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by jafac · · Score: 2

      That's the rough equivalent of 26 weeks of severence pay for an engineer.

      I was in a company that was bought and shut down, and that was the bonus offered to the people who stayed on an additional 3 months to close up the business. We were the guys to turned out the lights when we left.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    14. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by ivan256 · · Score: 2

      Ok, say for sake of discussion the top 20 guys take a million apiece, thus leaving $5 million for 300 people. That's nearly $17k per person. If that's bending over for the company, let me be the first one to grab my ankles.

      Say you make $90-120k/year. (Not hard to do... Even a few years out of college) If you make that much money, and your current employer considers you a "key" employee, there's a good chance that there is job available for you at another company because if you weren't good at what you do, you wouldn't both be making that much money, and be considered a "key" employee. Now, if you were making that much money at a company that just filed for bankruptcy, and were offered another job at a company that wasn't bankrupt for the same salary, how much would it cost to keep you working at the bankrupt company? As somebody who went through this recently, I can tell you that $17k was not enough for me.

    15. Re:Thats Almost $77,000 Per Employee! by marauder404 · · Score: 2

      If you're that important a person, would you stay on with a company that had already filed for bankruptcy? Keep in mind that future bonuses are unlikely to be nearly as high as company performance is going to suck for a while.

      The ship is burning. The captain offers you a bag of gold if you stay on the ship to help put out the fire. Do you jump ship or do you start hauling buckets?

  12. seperate but not equal by intermodal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't see huge amounts of money being given to individuals who royally fuck their finances and claim "accounding errors" for huge debts. That's fraud, my friend. If WorldCom were a person, they'd be doing time. They should be disbanded with all speed. And if not, then businesses are liable for less than a human. Therefore, if a human is more responsible for their acts, then a human should therefore be also offered more protection under the law against such entities with such limited liability and unlimited lifespan. My $.02.

    --
    In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    1. Re:seperate but not equal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Damn fuckin rights. Good on ya.

    2. Re:seperate but not equal by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      They didn't commit "murder" so lets not "kill" them, OK?

      Seriously though, they may have 60,000 employees, but they are (were?) one of my employers (and many others) largest customers. They hire (or used to) lots of contractors to do their design & construction type work.

      Ebbers & anyone else connected to him are going to get thiers from the way it looks, don't punish everyone for the wrong-doing of a relative few.

      On a side note, an ex-manager I once had (retired) had met Ebbers a few times, and said theat he seemed like a pretty shady character. Looks like he was right.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
  13. Key people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are these the same people that ruined the company? How can they be worth 25 million? How can they be worth ANY money at all, when the only ability they seem to have is to lose huge amounts of it.

    What is the logic here? "These people are geniuses! We need them around or we will never climb out of bankruptcy! [which was caused by these same people]"

  14. Great Idea by wandernotlost · · Score: 3, Insightful
    WorldCom will use the money for incentives to retain 325 employees, mostly sales and service people in its MCI and network and products services units.

    Which, of course, means that $1M will be split among the 325 employees, with the remaining $24M going to the executives for the brilliant idea of giving out bonuses to retain good employees.

    1. Re:Great Idea by the+bluebrain · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      USD 3076.92 per person? Isn't that a bit ... steep?

      Make it a round thousand, I say.

      </cynic>

      --
      yes, we have no bananas
  15. Wait... who's putting up the money? by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 2, Insightful
    So being under bankrupcy protection, does this mean that the money is coming from the government i.e. taxes? Hmm...

    I know this isn't a political decision but a legal one, but this sort of thing still pisses me off. Let someone buy the remains of the company, and if they want, pay for their own "recovery team" out of their own pockets. I don't get mad when my taxes go to good causes like science or welfare or public services, but I see no reason to bankroll sleazy and incompetent executives.

    Of course, this may not be what's happening--I don't really understand bankrupcy law.

    1. Re:Wait... who's putting up the money? by Alex+Belits · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, it's coming from investors, who would sue them otherwise for such a misuse of their money.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    2. Re:Wait... who's putting up the money? by jgp · · Score: 2, Informative

      My understanding is that the 'protection' is from creditors. The company obviously has assets and revenue streams, the question is who should get the funds first (or at all).
      When insolvent (ie you don't have the cash or equivalent to meet your current debts) you are given the 'protection' from the wolves at the door if you can show that there is a good chance that you can recover from the current short-fall without digging a deeper whole for yourself and your creditors. Resturcturings, lay-offs, liquidation, etc.

    3. Re:Wait... who's putting up the money? by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 2

      I see... so do the investors get to "write off" these losses at tax time? Anyway, I find it shocking that WorldCom's investors are still a going concern. I mean, if the WorldCom investment did not bankrupt these investors, they must really be made of money! What do they say when they go home? Aw, honey, we we kinda took a hit here with our WorldCom investment... about 10 Billion dollars, maybe a bit more... now we have to bankroll their incompetent executives with $25Mil of bonuses. Boy, we're not very good investors... but then again, we can't be so bad, since we can pay this off...

    4. Re:Wait... who's putting up the money? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Nope its coming from the banks.

      Now you may be asking yourself: why are the banks lining up to give them more money when they have already lost a fortune to them ??

      Answer: The "lendors of last resort" ie the banks giving them more money to keep going through bankruptcy protection get first dibs on the assets. Thats right, the banks are hoping to jump the queue on the dibs the assets if it still goes bust (and it will).

    5. Re:Wait... who's putting up the money? by Alex+Belits · · Score: 2

      Actually many people are indirectly their investors (or investors into the company that they owe money) -- Worldcom and WSBC stocks are is, or at least were, in mutual and retirement funds. All those money invested in Worldcom are at this point are as good as nonexistent, and SBC value dropped considerably over last few years, so value of, say, many people's 401k retirement investment may be decreased by this, robbing large part of population.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    6. Re:Wait... who's putting up the money? by Alex+Belits · · Score: 2

      Typo: s/WSBC/SBC/

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    7. Re:Wait... who's putting up the money? by Bernie+Fsckinner · · Score: 1

      Worldcom isnt completely out of money, they just owe more than they have. The bonuses are for the employees who actually do the real work for the company - run the routers, collect customer money, pay the bills and paychecks, that sort of thing. The crooks at the top (who fucked up/stole the billions of investor money) have been booted out already.
      Worldcom as a company which is still running is worth more than if they sold the equipment, the buildings and the customer lists.

    8. Re:Wait... who's putting up the money? by jaoswald · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yet another "+4 Insightful" that deserves to be "-1 Has No Clue" None of this is coming from taxpayers. When Enron crashed, the (same?) batch of slashdotters complained about bondholders getting mythical compensation from the government.

      The real loss was suffered by stockholders when their stock became worthless, and by employees laid off when the fiction of profit could no longer be sustained. Bond and debt holders now get to stand in line to get whatever is left of value in the company, for instance, by reconstituting the company, issuing new stock in exchange for the bonds and debts. So instead of an IOU, they get stock in the new company, for whatever that is worth.

      The theoretical reason for the bonuses is that the company is worth more when enough people are left that know how things are actually set up. These clueful people are the most likely to be able to get jobs at competitors (and taking with them access to good customers), so you need a bonus to keep them from doing so.

      The ethical problem, of course, is that the clueful people either were aware or should have been aware of the rampant misstatements of the accounting reality. But hey, if I'm stuck with a Worldcom IOU, I'm more interested in getting my 25 cents on the dollar than in making sure everyone gets what they deserve.

      Lesson in life: we rarely get what we deserve. Better make do with what you can.

    9. Re:Wait... who's putting up the money? by HiThere · · Score: 2

      "When Enron crashed..."
      You clearly aren't paying my tax bills. The state is still selling bonds to make up for the prices they extorted via energy market manipulation. Every single manager at that company should rot in jail for decades. We're talking about the equivalent of thousands and thousands of grand theft cases. Perhaps thousands of thousands.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    10. Re:Wait... who's putting up the money? by jaoswald · · Score: 2

      You miss my point. You weren't holding Enron bonds, the state is paying interest on bonds issued by your state (I'm guessing California).

      California decided to borrow money to pay for electric power. The easiest way to do that is to issue bonds (i.e., let people volunteer to give money to the state, in exchange for a bond, which is a promise to pay interest in the future). You are paying taxes to back up California's promise to holders of California bonds. That money eventually went to power companies, with Enron getting a commission.

      Your tax money is not going to Enron's bondholders.

      To claim that every Enron manager is criminally culpable for the energy market manipulations is a bit naive.

  16. Sales and service? by tcd004 · · Score: 5, Funny

    I called them the other day and this was all I heard.

    tcd004

  17. If there was justice...... by skitz0 · · Score: 1

    They'd be forced to liquidate the company and split the proceeds equally with all the employees that got screwed over.

    1. Re:If there was justice...... by mbogosian · · Score: 2

      They'd be forced to liquidate the company and split the proceeds equally with all the employees that got screwed over.

      I don't think the employees would want that...it would come to something like -1*10^4 dollars per employee.

      I think they should split the company up and take the resulting debt out of the personal assets of the company officers, and then put those offices in jail.

      While they're at it, they should jail the execs at fax.com too for operating illegally just so they can stretch their paychecks out as far as possible and then declare bankruptcy and walk.

    2. Re:If there was justice...... by Obliterous · · Score: 1

      Would be better than the pink-slip that many of us got....

      325 key employee's?? I would have thought that NOC personel were among that group... shows what I know.....

  18. How about some free Starbucks coupons instead? by xmark · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Works out to about 60 or 70 Large per "sales and service [employee]." This is BONUS dough, on top of regular salary.

    Just where would these people rush off to in the current abysmal telecom job market if they didn't get the bribe money?????

    1. Re:How about some free Starbucks coupons instead? by Detritus · · Score: 4, Informative

      The top performing sales people can walk out the door and get a job selling widgets in a week. The company can't afford to lose these people. If they don't get their commissions and bonuses, they will leave.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
    2. Re:How about some free Starbucks coupons instead? by jaoswald · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't think Worldcom is worried about widget sales being helped. Instead, their sales people can take their Rolodex with them to a *competitor*, and start (in order of revenue, of course), calling them and telling them yarns about how everybody with talent is fleeing Worldcom, so expect their service to go to hell quick. Better change your ISP and telephone service, before I start telling people other than my golfing buddies.

      You think selling widgets is the same as selling telecom services? That's like saying database programmers can get jobs programming embedded systems in a week. They're both programmers, right? Sure, good programmers are good programmers, but knowledge of customers and markets are valuable to have as a salesperson.

  19. Two words by dido · · Score: 5, Funny

    Golden parachute.

    --
    Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
    1. Re:Two words by Genyin · · Score: 2, Funny
      Golden parachute.
      Yeah. Imagine dropping the execs out of a plane with a (preferrably thick) golden parachute.

      ... *splat*
  20. They probably found it with my car keys... by mbogosian · · Score: 4, Funny

    After filing for bankruptcy, the company admitted finding another $3.8 billion in accounting errors....

    So that's where that other 3.8 billion went! And I thought for sure it got lost when they moved last time. It's nice to see that turn up; I was going to call the moving company and complain....

  21. And CEOs are getting paid to much? by L0rdJedi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just last week we were complaining that CEOs are getting paid to much and now slashdot is saying that it's a good thing that they get to give out $25 million worth of bonuses after filing Chapter 11? Like some other posters have already said, we know who's going to get the big bucks out of this bonus, the same executives that drove the company into the ground in the first place.

  22. This is fair and appropriate by solman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When a company goes into bankruptcy, key employees who are capable of getting a job somewhere else, usually do.

    This mass exodus of employees would massively decrease the value of Worldcom, which appears likely to emerge from bankruptcy.

    Giving the employees bonuses that are contingent on remaining with the company is the best way to ensure that this exodus doesn't happen.

    The judge's job is to maximize the value of Worldcom, thus making sure that Worldcom's creditors get as much money as possible.

    SBC, in addition to being a creditor, is also a competitor. They had an interest in decreasing Worldcom's competitiveness, so they opposed the bonuses. The Judge (and tellingly, most of Worldcom's creditors) saw through this and supported the bonuses.

    1. Re:This is fair and appropriate by Fastball · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The judge's job is to maximize the value of Worldcom, thus making sure that Worldcom's creditors get as much money as possible.

      So Worldcom's creditors should expect $25 million in the near future? I'm not trying to troll; I want to understand the logic. Yes, the judge has to ensure that all assets are revealed and accounted for. I don't see how he should ensure bankroll for a bankrupt company, especially when we all know that bonus dough is going to a select few at the top of Worldcom's food chain. I mean fuck, what about the folks that put in an honest day's work, who depended on the decision makers at the top to at minimum not assfuck their company?

      I'm starting to sound like Michael Moore, and for that I truly apologize. But let's call a spade a spade.

    2. Re:This is fair and appropriate by Justin+Cave · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I believe the logic goes more as follows--

      Worldcom, though bankrupt, has assets now with value v0. Some of these assets are tangible, i.e. fiber cable, servers, etc, with value v_tan0. Some of these assets are intangible-- i.e. the top sales guys, with value v_intan0. By definition, Worldcom's current value is

      v0 = v_tan0 + v_intan0

      When Worldcom declares bankruptcy, the servers and whatnot stay with the company and can be sold off if the company is liquidated. Worldcom, however, doesn't want to be liquidated, which would throw away v_intan0. They believe that they can provide more money to their creditors by reorganizing, where they'll be able to use both tangible & intangible assets to generate money to pay off their debts.

      Value of liquidated WorldCom = v_tan0
      Value of reorganized WorldCom = v_tan0 + v_intan0

      The problem comes in that the intangible assets aren't likely to stick around of their own volition. I'm sure Worldcom's top sales folks could get jobs with a much stabler company pretty quickly if they walked out. As the intangible assets depart, the value of Worldcom's intangible assets decreases by v_desertion. The company would then have a value v1 of

      v1 = v_tan0 + (v_intan0 - v_desertion)

      Thus, WorldCom asks to spend $25 to keep their intangible assets around. Basically, they're transferring $25 million of tangible assets to the intangible assets. The new value of the company, v2, assuming that the bonuses cause v_desertion to go to 0.

      v2 = (v_tan0 - $25) + v_intan0

      The judge has to compare v1 & v2 to see which leaves more value in the company for creditors. If v1 > v2, the bonuses are a bad idea. If v2 > v1, the bonuses, while decreasing the value of the company from its initial value, are good for the creditors.

    3. Re:This is fair and appropriate by deblau · · Score: 5, Informative
      The judge's job is to maximize the value of Worldcom

      Technically speaking, this is not accurate. It's the job of the debtors (Worldcom, et al) to maximize the value of Worldcom, so as to satisfy their creditors. IANAL.

      The judge's job is to make sure that Worldcom files a reorganization plan under Title 11, Ch 11 of the US Code, whose purpose is to regain financial stability, and that the plan is acceptable (within some limits) to all creditors. According to the article, one creditor (SBC) objected to the plan, but the judge had the authority to overrule the objection under 1129(a)(7)(A)(ii), as long as SBC

      will receive or retain under the plan on account of such claim or interest property of a value, as of the effective date of the plan, that is not less than the amount that such holder would so receive or retain if the debtor were liquidated under chapter 7 of this title on such date,
      and assuming subparagraph (B) doesn't apply. Which it might if SBC holds any liens on property in which Worldcom has an interest. This information would be contained in the 521(1) report, but it hasn't even been filed yet, because Worldcom's financials are too damn complicated. (See here for more details. Click the folders for "WorldCom Bankruptcy Case", then "WorldCom, Inc.", and look up docket #1663. Basically, Worldcom have until Jan 31, 2003 to file their 521, unless they want another extension.)
      --
      This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
    4. Re:This is fair and appropriate by solman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      WorldCom is clearly worth many billion dollars, even in its present form. That will be divided amongst the creditors (either as cash, securities in a new WorldCom, securities in an acquiring company or some combination of all three)

      WorldCom's creditors can reasonably expect that this $25M expenditure will ultimately increase the value of WorldCom by more than $25M. This is what the Judge was saying when he approved the deal.

      Keep in mind that most of the value in any company is in its people, processes and knowledge. Hard assets represent a small part of the equation. MOST of the creditors' potential for recovering their investment lies in the hope that the profitable divisions of WorldCom (and there are many) will retain their key people.

      The Judge has to evaluate the cost of NOT allocating the bonuses (people leave, and the business becomes worth less), and compare it to the $25M cost. Judges DO nix deals like these when they don't make sense. $25M is very little in comparison to the value of the (soft) assets that are being protected.

    5. Re:This is fair and appropriate by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What you say is very unlikely... it is rare for a company to emerge from bankrupcy even a chapter 11 reorg.

      A mass exodus will happen because people working there are finally hearing about the underhanded crap they all specualted and heard in the rumor mill... seeing it in newspaper headlines make you fly the coop faster than anything else...

      Finally.. these "bonuses" are certianly not going to anyone who has the ability to raise the company from the ashes... the techs in the field, the Sysadmins that worked 18 hour days for years on end, and other employees that are the real reason a company moves and makes money will never see anything but a token gesture... while I guarentee that "high level executives" all will get hefty bonuses... these same idiots and thieves that made the decisions to destroy the company already.

      you want to save worldcom? fire the top 3 levels of management right here and now. everything from the vice presidents on up. get a management team in there that has a clue about business and is actually interested in something silly like getting the company to be Number one in customer satisfaction, service and technology... if you do not focus on the customer then you fail, and fail horribly... somehow all the telcoms forgot this basic fact of business.

      "The customer is always right.... even when they are wrong"... anyone that says otherwise is a complete idiot.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    6. Re:This is fair and appropriate by bujoojoo · · Score: 0

      All the while, the execs work on their v_tans on the French Riviera...

      --
      This space for rent
    7. Re:This is fair and appropriate by plus5insightful · · Score: 1

      This is generally itemized as "Goodwill and other intangiables". For Worldcom it can be seen on the most recently available quarterly/yearly report as $37.2 billion dollars. This can be seen at this link.

      Cheers.

    8. Re:This is fair and appropriate by HiThere · · Score: 2

      That's the justification. I just don't happen to believe it. The way I read the tea leaves, when a company gets into this kind of situation, the guys at the top essentially give up on saving it, and try to see how much they can skim off before jumping ship. So they vote themselves huge "bonuses" for sticking around while they look for their next job. To make this a bit more acceptable, they disguise just how large a percentage of the amount they're taking, as promise bonuses to the people who work, but don't get to decide in the rake-off, if they'll stick around. Usually they acutally do let a few crumbs drop, for various reasons, none of which have to do with fairness.

      Ideally the guys making these decisions would end in the slammer at hard time. Instead they get to earn even more than they normally would, while the people who actually do proper work are left to hang in the wind.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    9. Re:This is fair and appropriate by solman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1. When large public companies with profitable units go bankrupt, they almost always either re-emerge from bankruptcy, or are sold for substantially more than asset value. Even grossly unprofitable concerns (witness Exodus) are able to fetch a substantial premium to asset value by keeping the key employees in place.

      It is flat out wrong to suggest that keeping key employees in place does not have a massive positive impact on value to creditors. For proof, you need look no further than the frequent endorsement of these bonus packages by creditors. They are looking out for their own best interests when they do this. Its their money that's ultimately paying these bonuses.

      2. As I mentioned elsewhere, these bonuses are standard practice. Key employees are likely to be made aware that retention bonuses are in the offing before they make alternative employment plans.

      3. Right now WorldCom executives have to make a series of difficult decisions on how best to wind down unprofitable operations and prepare profitable ones for sale or re-emergence. Tens of thousands of jobs are at stake. Very complicated negotiations amongst many different classes of creditors are required. Much of the top two levels of management are gone. Firing the remaining managers would plunge the company into chaos, while the new managers spend many months learning enough about the organization to figure out what to do. Its bad for the creditors, bad for the customers, and would most probably cost many thousands of innocent employees their jobs. I understand your emotional reaction, but its terrible policy.

      4. This is going to sound harsh, but sysadmins can be replaced. If one quits, another can be hired without significant cost to the organization and its valuation. Working 18 hours a day is great dedication, but it doesn't make them irreplacable. In a multi-billion dollar business like WorldCom, there are many upper level management people whose sudden disappearance, in the middle of a massive restructuring, would cost large quantities of money. (And the more executives that leave, the more important the remaining executives become). Fair or not, ultimately the marginal difference in valuation created by firing a high level executive is much larger than the valuation change produced by firing a sysadmin.

  23. Sounds like dogbert by twoslice · · Score: 3, Funny

    was up to no good at Worldcom...

    --

    From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
  24. The Art of WorldCom by GreatDave · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sun Tzu argued that a soverign (or business) required knowledgeable leadership (executives), the blessing of the Heavens and the Earth (the cooperation of the Powers That Be, in this case the court, which it seems they have now) and Justice (doing what's right -- I'd say they've learned their lesson) to overcome adversity and opponents (their creditors.)

    I'd say WorldCom is doing a good job of getting back on their feet. 'Tis a good thing. UUNet falling into the hands of say, a Baby Bell like SBC (as FCC Chairman Michael Powell wanted at first) would not be a good thing at all.

    --
    "I am root. Bow before me." To this I say, "You are root, and you bear the sins of the world upon your shoulders."
    1. Re:The Art of WorldCom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      UUNet employees rightfully view themselves as held captive by Evil Bernie's Empire. Becoming part of SBC would be a step up; becoming part of Verizon, on the other hand, would be humiliating.

  25. Yeaaaaaah, right. by gnovos · · Score: 2

    Hopefully this will help them retain important members of their sales and service teams.

    Oh, it definitly will! Just as soon as all the executives get thier "demotions" for putting thier company into bankruptcy. You know, the demotions that will put the CEOs and Vice Presidents into lowly salesmen and and service positions... that'll show em.

    --
    "Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
  26. This is to feed people who work on commission by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Salespeople often work for very low base wages and count on commissions to make up the difference. When a company tanks like WorldCom did the sales taper off and these workers suddenly find themselves without commissions. No commissions means no rent money. There are legitimate reasons to award bonuses to sales staff. And regardless of what you techs may think, good sales and support teams are critical to the success of a company.

    1. Re:This is to feed people who work on commission by Tate · · Score: 1

      This makes a good point. The article I read off Yahoo says they these bonuses are to keep the sales staff from leaving with their customers. The company doesn't care much if you can't pay your bills. The company cares a lot if you take 20 million in revnue. If the company is ever going to pay back it creditors it might be worth 25 million to retain 100's of millions or even billions of revenue.

    2. Re:This is to feed people who work on commission by matt_wilts · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't know about that - I worked for Wcom in the UK as a techie. The Account Managers were on between 3x - 4x salary than that of the technical staff (& I was a senior engineer). And that figure was BEFORE any commission. It's one of the reasons I jumped ship in 1997. Maybe the US is different.
      Matt

    3. Re:This is to feed people who work on commission by silas_moeckel · · Score: 1

      It's true sales people generaly have large expectations of commision (think multi million in some cases) there saleries are also generaly pretty high to begin with but they like most americans live as well as they can I'm sure a lot of them have morgages and car loans that would probably exceed there base salery take home.

      It does make a lot of sence to keep your good sales people lets face it sales at this level is who you know and relationship building the slaes people are inherintly valuable. With this said the core engineering teams generaly dont sell themselves as well and since they dont have commision arent going to be in huge finacial trouble but still need some incentive to stay vs move to something more stable and lucritive.

      --
      No sir I dont like it.
    4. Re:This is to feed people who work on commission by ph1ll · · Score: 1
      It's not the shareholders fault that the sales staff have over-stretched their finances.

      Let them go and save the money. If they were so good in the first place, the company would not be in the trouble it is.

      Where is the free market?

      --
      --- "We've always been at war with Eastasia."
    5. Re:This is to feed people who work on commission by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure a lot of them have morgages and car loans that would probably exceed there base salery take home.

      1. AH, then we've found the people that came up with WorldCom's interesting accounting strategy then... "Uh, OOOPS, I think we can't find most of what we earned last year... Sorry bout that... Mind helping me get the buisiness back and running, thanks..."
      2. Anyone who lives beyond there base salary, deserves what they get when the bonus or extra money goes away. That's basic fiscally responsibility...
  27. Funny Part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Is checking out who the bonus' are going to.

    Not necessarily the feet to the pavement types in Sales/Service. Actually Upper level executives with little to do with either function if the Wall Street Journal Article is right. Hardly essential to the proper functioning of a telecom company.

    Lobbyists, lawyers, lots of geeks(console/line/net design varieties) maybe. UUNET's sales core in not a bad choice either (but probably won't see a penny). Not the stuffed shirts who are obviously not the peak of their supposedly hard working profession.

    Looks like a kickback from the $800/hr Restructuring rep for his outrageous salary.

    Next Question: How is this kickback to lucky Execs from the restructuring 'third party' any less slimy than former boardmember Kellett's giving Bernie the Great those $400 million 'loans' and plush parachute?

    The more things change the more they stay the same

    pr0ct0r
    ----

    1. Re:Funny Part by march · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, I can tell you've been working for a long time. Right... The hacker makes the company run. Without them, the company would die. Riiiight.

      Get a clue. While upper management has been getting a bad rap as of late, the fact remains: They make the decisions that make the company work.

      Yes, they need the support of talented people, but they make the decisions that shape the future of the company.

      It sucks, but after many years of thinking I was the reason my company was doing well, I found out that it wasn't the case. I helped, but I didn't have the experience or knowledge to make correct decisions for the company as a whole. Maybe one day...

    2. Re:Funny Part by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      It is far more likely that these Worldcom upper managers are those responsible for the company being in it's current sorry state.

      The best strategic planning in the world won't help if the geeks can't deliver the goods. OTOH, management can do quite a bit to get in the way of those that actually produce. This isn't merely limited to the technical staff. You can be sure that those in the sales and marketing "trenches" aren't going to see any of this either.

      The fact that those that actually produce are being ignored in favor of those that just dicker around, play politics, and conspire to drain the company is simply another indication of why WorldCom went down.

      The fact that you would actually WANT to retain any manager at WorldCom is not something that can be at all taken for granted.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  28. Read the Article. by Troy+H+Parker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the $25Mil is for the "Sales and service" teams, the "employees" not the Pigs at the top. You need to provide an incentive to good workers to keep rowing while the ship is sinking.

    1. Re:Read the Article. by rovingeyes · · Score: 1
      Ok as you pointed out it is for the employees, fine. But consider this - 25 million divided evenly between all the 325 employees would be approximately $76000. That is more than the average anual salary of an employee at WorldCom. And I thought it was bankrupt. And finally, as we all know, all the money will never go evenly to these guys. So where does the rest go. It is anybody's guess.

    2. Re:Read the Article. by TheCrazyFinn · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Sales & Service team at WorldCom Canada alone is 200 people.

      Your numbers are way off, there are several thousand people in Sales & Service at WorldCom.

      --
      "You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
    3. Re:Read the Article. by koadic · · Score: 1

      I did read the article. It says the cash goes to "mostly" sales and service people, which means a few others (a good guess: top executives) get to dip into the pot. It does not say how much goes to the sales and service people, and how much to the unnamed others.

    4. Re:Read the Article. by Parsec · · Score: 2

      Yeah, it's probably more like 300 people splitting 5 mil and 25 executives plundering^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hsplitting the rest.

    5. Re:Read the Article. by Troy+H+Parker · · Score: 1

      > It says the cash goes to "mostly" sales and
      > service people,

      We will call your words above [exhibit A]

      > which means a few others (a
      > good guess: top executives) get to dip into
      > the pot. It does not say how much goes to the
      > sales and service people

      see [exhibit A].

  29. not the same people by bskin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    judging from the comments here, people don't seem to be getting this.

    these *aren't* the people who committed the fraud. those people are gone. these are people who have come in afterwards and are trying to save the company. these are people who more than likely could easily go somewhere else and get more money. they're trying to give them incentive to stay and do the work that needs done. if you think the damage done to investors and employees is bad now, just see how bad they'd be screwed if the company completely liquidated.

    --
    hot foreign sheep.
    1. Re:not the same people by toddhisattva · · Score: 2, Insightful
      these *aren't* the people who committed the fraud. those people are gone.

      Wow! A few token arrests and some people think the problem is solved.

      I watched MCI burn for a year. Every single manager was "in" on it. I doubt the Clubs Fed have room for all of the truly guilty. I know there aren't enough honest people left at WorldCom for the company to function.

      But as long as simplistic idiots are impressed by a handful of perp walks, most of the guilty can get even more money. Hope you like it that way.

    2. Re:not the same people by stevedc2000 · · Score: 1

      You believe that corporate-sponsored bullshit? The fact is that no-one... and I mean NO_ONE in this company deserves a bonus. If these so-called key people are unhappy, let them give their 'two weeks notice' like the rest of us and **** off. And for Worldcom to clam that the passing of this would "Improve employee Morale" is such bullshit... yeah it'll improve the morale of 325 poeple... so the other 65675 can just go home now... Unbelieveable - immoral...a total outrage...

  30. Know where it's coming from? by symbolic · · Score: 3, Interesting


    I noticed the other day when I looked at my phone bill, that MCI(Worldcomm) was so gracious to raise the minimum account billing to $10.00 per month, up 50% from the previous $5 per month. Funny thing is, I've NEVER made a long distance call using MCI as a carrier. What a load.

    1. Re:Know where it's coming from? by Kenshiro · · Score: 1

      > raise the minimum account billing to $10.00 per month, up 50% from the previous $5 per month

      Come again?

    2. Re:Know where it's coming from? by offpath3 · · Score: 2

      I know it's nitpickey, but that's up 100%. Increase and decrease are measured from the original amount.

    3. Re:Know where it's coming from? by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      Depends on how you read it.

      "$10.00 per month, up 50% from the previous $5 per month"

      Could read as

      "$10 per month compared to last month which was 50% of this bill."

      As in 50% of 10$ not 5$, which is true or

      "$10 per month which is 50% of 5$ higher"

      which is not true.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    4. Re:Know where it's coming from? by cheebie · · Score: 1

      MCI has a wonderful policy of charging you at least $5 (now $10) no matter
      how much you used them during the month. I switched carriers a while back and
      MCI refused to believe it. For a time I was paying MCI $5/month to do NOTHING.
      I had to get the other company to send them a letter telling them to knock it
      off.

    5. Re:Know where it's coming from? by Captain+Gingersnaps · · Score: 1

      They're still doing this to me, after 2 years, and multiple attempts at cancellation.

      I'm now working on requesting a refund of the erroneous billing. Any bets?

    6. Re:Know where it's coming from? by symbolic · · Score: 2


      Oh do I feel stupid. : )

    7. Re:Know where it's coming from? by symbolic · · Score: 2

      I thought all you had to do was contact your primary carrier and tell them to remove MCI as your long distance service. Of course, one might ask why I've neglected to do this. Answer: I don't know.

  31. So let me make sure I have this clear... by tlambert · · Score: 3, Funny

    So let me make sure I have this clear...

    This is to guarantee that the bankruptcy doesn't interfere with them calling to ask me to "please switch your long distance service to our bankrupt company" during dinner, while I'm in the shower, or in the middle of having sex.

    With all that going for it, who could possibly criticize the bonus plan...

    -- Terry

    1. Re: So let me make sure I have this clear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know you don't HAVE to answer the phone. I don't understand why most people regard a ringing phone as an order to drop whatever they are doing. It should be regarded as a request for your attention, not an order, and I don't answer for anyone under certain conditions, such as when having sex. That's what the answering machine is for.

      NickA

    2. Re:So let me make sure I have this clear... by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      I call your bluff. A /. reader who has SEX? Come on!

  32. Ahh CEOss.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    CEOs of big companies are like little babies. You need to give them their little candy, or else it will hurt their self estime, they could become criminals

  33. Breakdown of 325 Employees by panaceaa · · Score: 5, Funny
    Here's the breakdown of the 325 affected employees:
    • 10 Ugly People for MCI Neighborhood commercials
    • 1 WorldCom Guy to ride around office on mini-scooter
    • 1 Michael Jordan to continue MCI 5-cent Sunday commercials with Donald Duck
    • 10 UUNet people to help spammers contribute to Usenet
    • 303 Telemarketers
    Without these key positions, how could WorldCom possibly go on as a going concern?!
  34. let's do some calculations by hdparm · · Score: 1
    $25mil/325=$76923.1 per person. I'm not familiar with bankruptcy lows in US but have a feeling that this may amount to the average yearly salary of $40-45K for those 325 people.

    If this enables WorldCom to pull out of bankruptcy, amount doesn't seem to be so huge.

    1. Re:let's do some calculations by hdparm · · Score: 1
      I so hate replying to myself but that should have been bankruptcy laws.

      However, may have even sounded appropriate...

    2. Re:let's do some calculations by surprise_audit · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, if this money is to be evenly distributed between the folks (out of the 325) that stay, it becomes an "encourage your peers to leave" bonus.

  35. Shananagens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (I hope I spelled that right), I bet the judge is part of that 25M bonus round up, and if not I don't think the people who are getting it deserve it I mean it was their job in the first place to make sure this didnt' happen but... oh its ok you messed up guys but uhh here is 25 million in fuck up bonus ??? when I fuck up I get hit, fined, or dumped but these guys get money hell where do I sign up???

  36. disband WorldCom - Not good by pipsqueak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    > I don't see huge amounts of money being given to
    > individuals who royally fuck their finances and
    > claim "accounding errors" for huge debts. That's
    > fraud, my friend. If WorldCom were a person,
    > they'd be doing time.

    You have no idea who the bonuses are being paid to and whether they had anything to do with the past Fraud so don't assume because a company was previusly run by crooks the people left are the same.

    The board members responsible are already currently enjoying the hospitality of the FBI... probably with a view to getting some juicy info on Bernie Ebbers himself.

    > They should be disbanded with all speed. And if
    > not, then businesses are liable for less than a
    > human.

    Please... there are 60,000 people left working for WorldCom. All normal people with families, homes and lives they don't want turned upside down. Do you really want to see all those lives ruined because some greedy &*%£ higher up decided to commit fraud and run a company into the ground for their own benefit.

    The bankruptcy protection process is designed to weed out the unprofitable parts of a business, re-organise the employees to support the profitable bits thereby protecting the jobs of those who stay and maximizing the return for the previous creditor, which you hope is the best result for all.

    > Therefore, if a human is more responsible
    > for their acts, then a human should therefore
    > be also offered more protection under the law
    > against such entities with such limited
    > liability and unlimited lifespan. My $.02.

    Now... this I do agree with. Compare some European countries where governments will pay healthy redundancy money or have very strict workers councils that mean you can only make employees redundant when absolutely necessary.. against the situation in the US where you can be made redundant on some execs whim at a moments notice. That's not good for the poor US employees.

    That said, Europe doesn't have a bankruptcy protection process for companies like the US. If you ruin your company in Europe, the bits get sold to the highest bidder and everyone loses their job. Look at poor KPNQwest.

    1. Re:disband WorldCom - Not good by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually we do - we call it 'administration' where the receivers take over and try to make the company run at a profit. Failing that they try to sell it as a going concern (there is legal protection that says if you buy a running business you can't sack everyone w/o paying their redundancy). Only then is the company wound up.

      This happened with KPNQwest. The problem was the whole telecoms market is in depression due to a glut of bandwidth and nobody wanted to buy it whole - I'm not even sure after they gave up and broke it up that all the pieces were sold.

    2. Re:disband WorldCom - Not good by John+Hasler · · Score: 2

      > Please... there are 60,000 people left working
      > for WorldCom. All normal people with families,
      > homes and lives they don't want turned upside
      > down.

      Disbanding a conglomerate means selling off the divisions, not firing all the employees and auction ing the assets. No one needs to lose a job (except the executives).

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  37. Re:This was funny the first time it happened by solman · · Score: 5, Informative

    [Serious response to what may or may not have been intended as a funny comment].

    Bonuses like this are standard practice when an organization files under chapter 11. Enron was definitely not the first time it happened.

    HOWEVER, it is interesting to note that many aspects of Enron's retention strategy were modified. Many of the bonuses were reduced during negotiations with their creditors, and the proposed contract for Enron's CEO during the reorganization was rejected by the Judge overseeing the reorganization.

    BTW, bankruptcy judges are empowered to (and do) reverse bonus awards made by companies in the weeks leading up to bankruptcy. [I think they can go back up to one year but IANAL].

  38. Only makes sense! by EzInKy · · Score: 1

    It'd be a shame if WorldCom lost any of those highly trained, extremely creative accountants they've been grooming all these years now, wouldn't it?

    --
    Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
  39. Ow! My brain!!! by NeuroManson · · Score: 4, Funny

    First Slashdot say Worldcom bad, then Worldcom good, then Worldcom bad! Frankenstein's head hurt! Slashdot BAD!!!

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
    1. Re:Ow! My brain!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry bout what Slashdot says... Don't worry bout what anyone says...

      Corporate greed is out of control and Those In Power(tm) are just puppets for American corporations: especially the Republican Party, who accepts over 80% of corporate donations. The same party, who -- and this is way beyond my comprehension -- has ingeniously earned the votes of Aryan Nation racists, Klansmen, gun-toting bigots, religious nuts, homophobes, big businessmen, and young professionals who aspire to be rich.

      So piss your vote away on a single issue -- something like abortion, your stupid assault rifle, or prayer in school, while these elitist thieves rape you out of every penny of taxes that you paid in for the year. Check that pay stub. Corporate welfare is not cheap. The only people benefitting from your vote are the ones on that board of directors, and trust me -- they don't give a crap about your piddly $100g salary. They have cars that cost three times that much, and they buy a new one twice each year. Don't you wanna be like them? Maybe your vote will get you one step closer.

      I say, if you're going to tax me, at least give it to someone less fortunate, in hopes that their lifestyle improves and they can purchase my products. Consumers like these are what drives the economy -- consumer confidence is measured by the goods purchased by these people -- and without buying power, the economy tanks every time. Trickle-down economics hasn't worked yet, and there are many models of failure in other countries for us to learn from.

  40. Fucker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Fuck you you uncle fucker!

    Stop widening the pages! What the hell are you trying to achieve? Are you Taco widening the pages so that people would stop reading at -1 and he could censor the posts at will.

    1. Re:Fucker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how about using a browser that isnt a piece of crap?
      Mozilla doesnt get bugged at all by that bug Ie does bwecause it is a total piece of crap....

      only losers use IE...

      what are you using?

  41. Genius of Capitalism, my arse by ph1ll · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I thought the "genius of capitalism" was that people were free to fail. The idea being that those who are no good leave the stage.

    If these executives destroyed the company, why are they being asked to stay?

    --
    --- "We've always been at war with Eastasia."
    1. Re:Genius of Capitalism, my arse by Overzeetop · · Score: 3

      Well, capitalism is a good theory and does work well, but like all systems the flaws are found in the implementation.

      First, it does not work well - long term - in industries with large barriers to market entry (national telecom, shipping and distribution, utilities). In these cases, governement regulation is required to either a) define a monopoly and limit pricing or b) prevent the merger of competing entities into a de facto monopoly. Once a monopoly exists, the barriers to entry (money, infrstructure, personnel) can rarely be overcome.

      Second, the theory works great when everybody is above board and decisions are made logically - as in an efficient investment market. The late 90s were not an efficient market. The 90s were not a banner time for corporate financial honesty.

      While I would generally agree with the "let 'em fail" attitude, the problem is there is no personal accountability. The CEO, CFO, etc. are not left penniless and destitute. The CFPs and investment councellors who recommended the corporations are not penniless and destitute. The losses are, one might say, born by the unwashed masses. Yes, perhaps the masses shouldn't have been investing when they didn't know any better, but everybody in finance and gov't has been harping on the need to invest for your retirement. I don't see them coughing up the dough and saying "oops, I was wrong."

      The other problem with national/global capitalism is the size of the companies which fail, and the domino effect if left to take its own course. Prior to the modern era, it was not uncommon for a large, leveraged corporation's failure to cause the collapse of a bank, causing the loss of depositors (sometimes other corporations) savings, causing further collapses. This domino effect, extended to the multi-national firms we're talking about could cause a serious global collapse.

      The only way out of this is personal liability. As a former co-worker used to say - you must have "one ass to kick." Meaning, simply, there must be a responsible person for each decision, and they must be liable for that decision. If anything goes wrong - you've got to have someone to pin it on. I'm for requiring the liquidation of officer's and, perhaps, board of director's assets to pay the creditors, and leans put against future earnings (less a stipend amount equal to, say 2087 hours at minimum wage) for the full amount of the debt, payable jointly and separably by the lot. I won't hold my breath for this legislation to pass, though.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  42. What about the expression by k98sven · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "You got us into this mess, you get us out!"

    The company does well, the bosses get bonuses.
    The company does poorly, the bosses get bonuses.
    The company -files for bankruptcy- the bosses get
    even bigger bonuses..

    Why do they even call it a bonus?

  43. No one by handybundler · · Score: 0

    and I repeat NO ONE needs to make that kind of mokney a year. World Com...FUCK OFF!

    --


    a/s/l here. Sorry, adding domain tags to your s
    1. Re:No one by DirkDaring · · Score: 1

      What kind of monkey should they make a year?

    2. Re:No one by Thud457 · · Score: 1

      Give me 76,000 monkeys and I could rule the sevegram!

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  44. Fire & Hire by Cheese+Cracker · · Score: 2

    They should fire the incompetent leadership (no severance package) and use the $25 million
    to hire people who knows how to run a company without becoming greedy.

    1. Re:Fire & Hire by Angry+Toad · · Score: 2

      What, and admit that MBAs from an expensive school plus really really nice suits are not the same thing as business sense? Good grief, that would rattle the whole system to the core. I mean, if actual business success is what you're after there's probably a thousand 25 year oid MacDonald's managers out there who could run the company just as well as some Harvard MBA.

      Business Administration is not, and never will be, an academic discipline.

    2. Re:Fire & Hire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      Great point!!
      The corporate system does not understand that pretty much everybody on the business management side is easily replaceable.
      I love it when a big shot where I work leaves, and then they go out on a search to find another person to pay $2Mil a year, not realizing that the 25 year old new hire being payed $50G who worked under him is doing as good a job as the big shot in the interim.

      For $2Mil a year, I would expect an employee to really be physic...

  45. Do you understand the concepts... by MosesJones · · Score: 3, Informative

    Chapter 11 means that all the people they owe money to can't ask for it. Therefore they are paying this cash from that.

    Taxes don't come into it.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    1. Re:Do you understand the concepts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Taxes don't come into it.

      uh..keep digging grasshopper

  46. Maths pedant... by MosesJones · · Score: 2

    5->10 is a 100% increase, 10->5 is a 50% reduction, 50% on 5 is 7.5.

    Are you actually a geek or do you really have a liberal arts degree ?

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    1. Re:Maths pedant... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might want to lay off the liberal arts degrees. We are much better at math than geeks are at spelling (to name just one thing).

  47. thats nice.... by night_flyer · · Score: 2

    but what about the shareholders? are they just going to cancel the stock (Like williams communication did) ?

    --


    Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
    Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
    1. Re:thats nice.... by The+Magic+Yak · · Score: 1

      The money being paid is to people who are preventing the destruction of the company. Once the company emerges from Chapter 11, it would hopefully trade again. It still is traded now, but only on pink sheets. I would expect to see them listed on Nasdaq if they pull through and are not bought out.

      --
      Bill, can you factor this prime number for me?
  48. fucked up by freeefalln · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    its the same story. the rich, white men commit crimes and then get rewarded. the poor commit crimes like pot possession, and go to prison for 10 years. there is something severely wrong with that. and with Wellstone gone, the balance of power will shift to the right and we'll all be fucked.

  49. I see they learned from thier mistake. by SphynxSR · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This time they let a judge ok over spending.

    --

    I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
  50. 76K per person by z_gringo · · Score: 2


    WorldCom will use the money for incentives to retain 325 employees, mostly sales and service people in its MCI and network and products services units.

    That comes to around 76K per person. It seems like they might could spread that a bit thinner, and keep some more people, especially the ones at and below Manager level. But How much do you want to bet that every penny of that is going to VP's and Directors?

    --
    -- -- Warning. Do not stare directly at the sun.
  51. Actually K-Mart did it. by dnoyeb · · Score: 2

    K-Mart won a similar request of the courts. However, to K-Mart this did not include average worker, but executive management level only.

  52. Why Should Sales by nyc_paladin · · Score: 1

    people get bonuses when they already make enough money from commisions. All they need to do is convince companies to stay with them. $25 million dollar bonuses for people who should have done their job right in the first place is just stupid. You reward people for doing good work not running a company to the ground.

    --
    All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. --Edmund Burke
  53. key employees? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ya, Okay I can understand that you need to retain some 'key employees' but who wants to bet that not one of those so called 'key employees' would be able to fix their firewall if it goes down... Or even better, how many of them would be able to installk a new copy of Office on their PC's

    If you want to really rebuild the company spend some money of the low level people that actually help keep the company working...

  54. What I read by macdaddy · · Score: 2
    Hopefully this will help them retain important members of their sales and service teams.

    What I interpreted that to mean was that they were fleecing the pockets of the upper management before they totally rolled under rather than paying the hard-working grunts that make $$$ for the company. That was my take when I read that comment.

  55. Sure, but on their books by jmcwork · · Score: 4, Funny

    this shows up as a 1.7 billion dollar capital expenditure for "Snacks".

  56. make it go away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why save it? Let it go poof...

  57. They're going to start searching all the couches.. by TheConfusedOne · · Score: 1

    ...they figure that by searching all the couches at their various buildings they should be able to recover $1 or $2 billion in loose change.

    --
    --- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
  58. Which employess again... by nimr0d · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wonder if any of those Key Employees getting the bonuses were in the last edition of Playboy...

  59. Did ya read the article? by rovingeyes · · Score: 1

    This money is only for retaining 325 employees and I don't know which country's employees they are. But since the judgement was passed in US, I'm assuming the employees of USA.

    1. Re:Did ya read the article? by TheCrazyFinn · · Score: 1

      OK, my bad.

      Canada does normally fall under the US organization, so Canada is likely covered, if fact I can probably name a couple fo these 325 employees.

      --
      "You've got an invalid haircut" -Warren Zevon - Life'll Kill Ya
  60. $6.3e6 / 5 / yr?! by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    Sheeit... I'll work for half that, and I'll sign a agreement to not touch anything!
    It's a win-win situation, the company gets a bargain on an executive guarenteed not to fuck up anything, and I get a big ol' pile of cash to swim around in!

    If there are any boards interested in this deal, please contact me!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  61. Re:This was funny the first time it happened by DickBreath · · Score: 2

    Please clarify. Are the bonuses paid to the bankruptcy judges also reduced?

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  62. ReRead the Article. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    These are indeed high-level folks. Think about the math: $25,000,000 / 325 employees = almost $77,000 each.

    I worked there. I know.

  63. actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... a raise to $10 from $5 is a 100% increase. A *decrease* from $10 to $5 would be a 50% decrease.

  64. Re:This was funny the first time it happened by Anonymous+Cow+herd · · Score: 1

    Wait... you mean, if I bankrupt my company, they'll pay me more? Shit, and here I've been busting my ass all this time to keep us out of the red... those kooky business guys, what will they think of next?

    --
    Ita erat quando hic adveni.
  65. Even more simply: by VT_hawkeye · · Score: 1

    If

    v_intan0 > $25

    then pay the money and keep them.

    Higher-level concepts like maximizing return for shareholders and creditors are tough to get through to /.ers. It could be worse, though -- K5ers apparently don't believe in money.

  66. BZZZZTT... you are the weakest link... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The best strategic planning in the world won't help if the geeks can't deliver the goods

    Then upper management simply generates a strategy to allocate better compensation, benefits, and recruiters to get better geeks, and get rid of the old ones!!

    Some day you will figure it out.

    1. Re:BZZZZTT... you are the weakest link... by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      Actually, it is far more likely that those upper managers would surround themselves with clueless flunkies and go out of their way to drive away all the competent geeks they have. They would rather have nice yes men to stroke their egos rather than real professionals that might make a stand for best practices or even might might make the managers think they aren't all knowing.

      I've been there already. Perhaps some day YOU will figure it out.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  67. Not funny anymore by scoove · · Score: 2

    Hopefully this will help them retain important members of their sales and service teams.

    Yea, they're going to need it. Especially after hiking their rates across the board as an emotional retaliation and blame shift of their troubles to customers "not paying their fair share" according to this Worldcom executive memo.

    Hmm... shakey company (understatement), bankruptcy status with a high probability of failure, support people and engineers laid off, sales people too busy on monster.com to answer concerned customer calls, and they hike rates 10% across the board?

    We gave Worldcom our response and cancelled the two remaining T1's with them, switching them to Sprint (who gave us, gasp, an even greater discount).

    Still, there is fear that by discharging billions of debt in these creative bankruptcies, the real loser will be companies that don't cheat and play by the rules...

    *scoove*

    1. Re:Not funny anymore by solman · · Score: 2

      Worldcom is Bankrupt!

      This means that they have to either wind down unprofitable units or make them profitable by raising prices and cutting expenses.

      Of course they're going to lose some business. To the extent that its unprofitable business, its the right thing to do. Ultimately this will likely save jobs.

      Raising all of your prices, simplifying your price structure and implementing all the changes simultaneously is an example of best business practices for a company in Worldcom's position.

      Sprint can afford to acquire business this way (And what better way is there to gain market share than raiding the customer base of a bankrupt competitor). Worldcom is bankrupt and therefore in a fundamentally different position.

  68. "...you don't HAVE to answer the phone..." by tlambert · · Score: 2

    "...you don't HAVE to answer the phone..."

    What if it's the hospital calling to tell you one of your kids was hit by a bus?

    You only have the luxury of not answering the phone when it rings if you have no personal life.

    -- Terry

  69. The ratio to look at is 147.18/0.43 ~= 342.28 by kris_lang · · Score: 2

    hmmm... the math works out to the five JDS executives getting an average bonus of $147,180,000 each. That's HUGE even in Canadian dollars!

    So even though your ratio of 14 is correct for the ratio of compensation of 5 JDS executives vs. 120 non JDS executives, the more appropriate ratio is the one executive to one executive ratio.

    And that works out to the "average" JDS executive getting 342 times as much as the "average" non-JDS executive.