And when I say bitches, I’m looking at all of you. Work for a bank that took a little bit of TARP money? Work for a bank that took a lot a bit of TARP money? Work for a bank that took no TARP money? Senior hire? Low man on totem pole? I’m calling the money shots on all your asses.

The Obama administration has begun serious talks about how it can change compensation practices across the financial-services industry, including at companies that did not receive federal bailout money, according to people familiar with the matter.
The initiative, which is in its early stages, is part of an ambitious and likely controversial effort to broadly address the way financial companies pay employees and executives, including an attempt to more closely align pay with long-term performance.
[...]
During a recent congressional hearing, Chairman Ben Bernanke said the Fed was working on rules that will “ask or tell banks to structure their compensation, not just at the very top level but down much further, in a way that is consistent with safety and soundness — which means that payments, bonuses and so on should be tied to performance and should not induce excessive risk.”

US Eyes Bank Pay Overhaul [WSJ]

Sign up for the Dealbreaker newsletter

Subscribe to our free daily email and get breaking news, financial headlines, commentary, and analysis from Dealbreaker.

— Advertisement —

Comments (66)

  1. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 1:36 AM

    Blah blah blah…whole lot of nothing. Ain’t gonna happen.

  2. Posted by Lowly Assistant | May 13, 2009 at 2:05 AM

    AP – “Leaks from the White House have confirmed a recent story regarding excessive $20 bonuses to cleaning ladies around the holidays. A recent study that suggested overpaying, or supplying a minor incentive (see: gift), to your cleaning lady around the holiday season encourages him/her to clean with many more chemical solutions. Due to the adverse effects of supplying someone with an incentive to use more substances containing carcinogens in order to improve your personal abode, the HoR has created legislature which would provide a regulatory arm of the federal government to oversee cleaning practices and the payouts that carry with such work. The bill is set to reach the senate on Monday, May 18, 2009, but may be turned down, before hand, in part due to representatives presiding in areas of the United States which manufacture and house said cancer-causing cleaning chemicals. Representatives of Fantastik and OxyClean were unable for comment at time of print.”

  3. Posted by sugardaddy | May 13, 2009 at 2:57 AM

    My initial thought was demote me, I like more pay for less work. But then I realized, since I was evil and went into finance instead of rainbow manufacturing, the entry level salary will probably be capped around $6/hour.

  4. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 3:25 AM

    yeah Obama, you communist pig!

  5. Posted by PacificGatePost | May 13, 2009 at 3:28 AM

    PERCEPTION IS EVERYTHING, it seems, and the Obama White House has mastered the art of affecting consciousness in presenting itself, and particularly the “budget cuts.”
    http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2009/05/obamas-aggressive-budget-cuts.html
    Obama is completely squandering an opportunity for reform.

  6. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 5:12 AM

    1:33 Bess? I guess ass pounding no longer does it for you.
    @4 – You elected him, simpleton.

  7. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 5:38 AM

    @6
    I voted for Bush in ’08

  8. Posted by american bandersnatch | May 13, 2009 at 6:28 AM

    A bridge too far.

  9. Posted by sugardaddy | May 13, 2009 at 7:42 AM

    I don’t believe they will be able to pass any laws that requires a private company to cap their pay. That said, it would not surprise me to see more regulations that target firms that do not comply with such rules. I just want to know how they are going to have any jurisdiction and how it will apply. For instance, nevermind foreign banks, but tell me how the US would try and cap Nestle’s pay becasue they deal in the futures market?

  10. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 7:44 AM

    I am SO glad I voted for Obama. He is FINALLY fixing this fucked up industry. Finance should be like the utilities – highly regulated and boring.

  11. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 7:44 AM

    Well I’m sure for guaranteed campaign contributions waivers would be available.

  12. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 7:46 AM

    Damn Bess you’re at it early

  13. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 7:51 AM

    They don’t have to pass any new laws, they can use the incentives, taxes, and laws we’ve already got on the books.
    As noted hooker-fucker Eliot Spitzer says, “[government] could pursue a different strategy, one that doesn’t involve Congress and isn’t likely to provoke a storm of opposition” related to structures government already has in place – access to tax free bonds, for example.

  14. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 7:51 AM

    I can’t believe that you tools don’t know already. Bess Levin is a pen name for The Bald. What the fuck do you think Hank to the P has been doing for the past year. Jesus.

  15. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 7:58 AM

    @10 – Been reading some Krugman, I assume?

  16. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 7:59 AM

    @15- not brushing up on sarcasm, I assume?

  17. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 8:08 AM

    chillax, y’all. lest our union brethren be affected!
    “Fiat plans to bypass U.S. exec pay limits”
    http://www.freep.com/article/20090513/BUSINESS01/905130318

  18. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 8:15 AM

    Gotta be a futures trader. The CME is from Chicago, y’know, just like Barry, and remember they’re regulated by an agency of the USDA (that’s A as in Agriculture). Those NY City boys will get ass whupped, but grains traders will be home free.

  19. Posted by sugardaddy | May 13, 2009 at 8:24 AM

    Perhaps you did not see Barry’s plan to increase the tax on the grains traders.
    I know it is from that devil Carney but…
    http://www.businessinsider.com/obamas-budget-hits-commodities-and-options-dealers-with-surprise-tax-hike-2009-5

  20. Posted by Investorcluzo | May 13, 2009 at 8:47 AM

    all those hedge funds and BSD that gave BO money need to put their lobbyists to work, because this just doesn’t pass the smell test…should clinton really be charging $250k+ to give a 45 minute speech? is that excessive? how much should a guy get paid to play basketball? slippery slope…

  21. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 8:56 AM

    @19- and those dealers should pay less taxes than anyone else because why, exactly?

  22. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 8:59 AM

    Does Rahm deserve his $15million from Wasserstien?

  23. Posted by sugardaddy | May 13, 2009 at 9:00 AM

    @21 that was in response to 18′s comment that Obama was looking out for the Chicago traders.

  24. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:04 AM

    Bess, you should know better. This is far beyond the gov’t “calling the money shots on all your asses.” It’s much more like “giving you the money shot in the face”

  25. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:07 AM

    For all of you that voted for Obama:
    HAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA…

  26. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:09 AM

    Can we please play a sad trombone for bonuses?

  27. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:09 AM

    AAAAAALLLLLLLL ABOARD…next stop Socialism

  28. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:11 AM

    Hahahahahahaha. How many arrogant NY bankers do you know who supported the Obama/Biden/Pelosi disaster just because they hated Bush and everything not NY/CA? (Palin’s from Alaska! She hunt’s moose! hahaha)
    Welcome to Venezuela. You get what you deserve.
    ex-banker

  29. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:14 AM

    @3/Sugardaddy – Where the hell have you been? Entry pay for investment banking has always been below minimum wage, if you calculate it on an hourly basis. Hello.

  30. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:20 AM

    @19/@22. I don’t think Barry gives a flying pig about Chicago traders — but I’ve not met a politician that can beat the USDA in its home turf.

  31. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:20 AM

    @29 – “Hunt’s moose”? Is that sort of like “Hearts moose”? Please explain. We arrogant NY bankers don’t understand flyover country dialect. Thanks!

  32. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:22 AM

    Call me skeptical, or Betty, but I doubt Schumer or anyone who is in a district that gets tax dollars from bonuses will go along with this.
    A little posturing to appease the masses, then business as usual via lax enforcement of yet more rules, which they will effectively ignore for anyone who is a major donor.

  33. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:36 AM

    @32 – I think you arrogant NY bankers also don’t understand geography. Alaska is only “flyover country” if you are headed to Korea or Japan.

  34. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:37 AM

    this will never happen.

  35. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:40 AM

    Just remember your 2nd amendment rights under the Constitution, and all will be well.
    ~the Muleskinner~

  36. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:41 AM

    nice headline

  37. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:42 AM

    Obama should worry about the $400,000 photo-op in NYC of his fake Air Force 1 plane.

  38. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:43 AM

    @21 Glad to hear your on the flat tax bandwagon.

  39. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:46 AM

    There goes the money me and my family were planning on using for reparations…your loss Barry.

  40. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:49 AM

    @21 Because they’re better, bigger, men than you with better, bigger, balls than you, and that’s why we get paid better, bigger bucks.

  41. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 9:58 AM

    Supreme court where are you?

  42. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 10:12 AM

    @34 you’re so stupid it hurts

  43. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 10:26 AM

    OK, so I’m not a banker, but minimum wage is 6.55/hour; 7.15/hour in NY. 365*24(‘cuz you guys never stop woking)*7.15 = $62,634… If you don’t get paid for sleeping you’re down to $41,756
    and entry level bankers make less than minimum wage???
    Cripes, now I feel sorry for you guys.

  44. Posted by Anal_yst | May 13, 2009 at 10:28 AM

    Fine, take it to the extreme, set rigid pay guidelines in Financial Services (or any other industry). Everyone’ll effectively be on the Gov’t pay scale with union benes and pensions and the entire incentive structure will be even more f*cked than it already is.

  45. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 10:30 AM

    happened before, could happen again
    http://www.econreview.com/events/wageprice1971b.htm

  46. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 10:58 AM

    @43 enjoy your new Obamawages jackass!

  47. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 11:09 AM

    Analysts of the world, unite…?

  48. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 11:25 AM

    @44 – Only a non-banker would factor in 8 hos a night for sleep… Maybe you would feel sorry for a banker that sleeps 4-5 hours a night and averages pay of $8.00/hr.
    How much do you get paid as a public service employee? how much revenue do you actually produce?

  49. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 11:28 AM

    49 here – posting comments on this board sucks

  50. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 11:29 AM

    Hamptons Summer 09 Babay!

  51. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 12:57 PM

    Oh wow, imagine someone with a reasonable take on this. Shocking:
    http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NakedCapitalism/~3/BY8nZFoV53s/obama-administration-considering.html

  52. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 1:04 PM

    “consistent with safety and soundness — which means that payments, bonuses and so on should be tied to performance and should not induce excessive risk.”
    Actually, TGFD likes the “not induce excessive” part of “should not induce excessive risk”. I think the “induce excessive” part is what got us into trouble in the first place.
    The Guy from Delaware

  53. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 1:32 PM

    @49 4 hours of sleep a night and 8.00/hr? you’re delusional. I’m a banker and while the hours are bad and $/hr are not that great when you break it down, it is not 8.00/hr. assuming your 4 hours of sleep (which isn’t true), and assuming 6 days a week (while everyone has worked a 7 day week it’s not a regular thing). that’s 120hrs/wk, which mean at 8/hr he would make 960/wk *52wks…is 49920. In reality it’s more like $12-15/hr. for a first year analyst. Which is still very low considering Union workers make A LOT more than that. So I’m not arguing against your principal.

  54. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 2:01 PM

    This is all for naught as the dollar’s inevitable collapse will ensure that we all will be working alot more hour for alot less pay.

  55. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 2:30 PM

    @54 120 hours/week. You’re dreaming out of your Whazoo! I have never seen people exaggerate their hours like bankers do! What a joke! They sit around and drink coffee all morning, bang around the afternoon a bit and then go drinking with the boss until 10pm. That isn’t work my friends! You’re lucky if you put in a 30 hour week if you take away the BS, you might be kicking around 70 hours on a really bad week, but there aren’t many of those, are there?
    What a bunch of Pussies!

  56. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 2:31 PM

    @54 120 hours/week. You’re dreaming out of your Whazoo! I have never seen people exaggerate their hours like bankers do! What a joke! They sit around and drink coffee all morning, bang around the afternoon a bit and then go drinking with the boss until 10pm. That isn’t work my friends! You’re lucky if you put in a 30 hour week if you take away the BS, you might be kicking around 70 hours on a really bad week, but there aren’t many of those, are there?
    What a bunch of Pussies!

  57. Posted by PaulAllen | May 13, 2009 at 3:05 PM

    Wh-wh-what?!? I can’t count my hours spent at Dorsia..?? Damn you!!

  58. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 3:10 PM

    @49 & 54, every profession has to eat shit for a couple years… Ever seen a physician coming off a 36-hour shift? Making less than union wages for a couple years at the beginning of your career isn’t justification for a salary that only goes up… The whole excuse for those ridiculous salaries was that bankers’ pay is linked to performance… Fire everybody who won’t/can’t work more or less for free for a couple years, and replace them with some of the younger schmucks who have been laid off and are hungry enough to work for cheap.
    Working for ‘minimum wage’ on Wall Street is an opportunity lots of people would take up in a heartbeat, as you’ve pointed out yourselves…
    Let the bankers go… the forces of inertia will still drive customers into the arms of too-big-to-fail banks…

  59. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 3:13 PM

    Again with this if-you-look-at-the-hours-i-put-in-i-get-paid-nothing BS. 1) the truth is that those hours are mostly face time and 2)even if they were truly devoted to adding value, the idea is that you’re investing in your future. Taking on pain now in the hope that its going to pay off in truly spectacular beyond belief money rewards later. So stop crying you little snots.

  60. Posted by guest | May 13, 2009 at 3:25 PM

    @56/57 If you noticed the sarcasm intermixed I was saying that his numbers were completely ridiculous and even at obnoxiously overexagerated hours you still couldn’t come to $8/hr. 70hrs a week is common among first-third year analysts, 5 days a week only though, with an occasional weekend.
    @59 I agree…that is why bankers put in the crazy hours at the beginning of their careers for what amounts peanuts per (relative)…for the payout down the road. No sane banker will argue that it’s unreasonable for them to have to do that. They will still complain about it…but they either accept it for the later payoff or leave the business.

  61. Posted by guest | May 14, 2009 at 10:37 PM

    I can’t believe some of you people. I don’t care what everyone else is making. I spent over 100k on my freakin’ graduate education, and DO work 6 days a week. I do it because I believe hard work and dedication will be rewarded. And not rewarded like the C-level guys, but still more than 40k a year. Isn’t that what the American dream is about? The more you put in, the more you should get out.
    My family came here, and I’m proud to be here, because I have the ability to move beyond the socioeconomic strata I was born into. If you fucking want socialism, move out of the USA you moron! You don’t belong here and we don’t want you here.

  62. Posted by guest | May 16, 2009 at 7:53 AM

    Do you not see the USA is now socialist. You have a Marxist president and their are many bankers who only have a job because the state is keeping your unproductive industry alive at great cost to the rest of society.
    Why is socialism that does not benefit you bad and socialism that does benefit you good? Your industry is morally, intellectually and financially bankrupt. We are just waiting to you to take the rest of the nation with you.
    You know – until you started stealing peoples money via the government most people could not have given a toss what you are paid. When the government steps in and prevents the market giving you your just deserts by throwing other peoples money at you then eventually people get very angry. No one has sympathy for you people.

  63. Posted by guest | May 17, 2009 at 9:34 PM

    If you develop a new block buster drug, your compensation is not tied to the sales and the drug company owns it since you developed it on their dime and their time. If you develop an new hot doll (bratz) while working for a toy company, the toy company owns your work – you were an employee. Only on wall street do employees feel entitled to return due to owner while not taking any personal risk.

  64. Posted by guest | May 18, 2009 at 3:17 PM

    hello socialism… is that you?!

  65. Posted by guest | May 18, 2009 at 3:27 PM

    62 No one is disputing the fact that you go into the office six days a week. Its the idea that you’re actually there producing which a lot of us find hard to swallow. Its likely that you’re either 1) putting in face time, thereby feeding your ego by impressing your roommates and girlfriend with your importance or 2) compensating for the fact that the team wasn’t sufficently organized on M-F to get the crap you’re producing out the door. Could even be both.

  66. Posted by cheap oem software | May 1, 2012 at 11:51 PM

    wRtOAI Im obliged for the article post.Much thanks again. Fantastic.

Leave a comment

You can log in with your account or comment as a guest below.