Scenario - a really good candidate has the coice of 2 jobs. One at an institution that received bailout money, one that didn't. Said another way, one where your pay will be capped at 500K, and one that won't be capped.
So this is going to make it much harder for those places to hire established executives.
Sure, if the execs are the cause of the problem and they don't like earning ONLY 500K, don't the the door hit you on the way out. But the honestly good execs aren't exempt from this. Companies that did not get bailout money are now going to find it much easier to hire established talent.
The more I hear, the more I'm sure no one learned any lessons from Japan. In their crisis in the 90s, they put onerous conditions their bailout money. That resulted in no banks wanting to take the money, so the credit crunch dragged on and on until the government loosened up.
This type of move sounds good. I understand the motivation. It makes good press. But it is counter-productive.
__________________
"The problem with any ideology is that it gives the answer before you look at the evidence."
—Bill Clinton
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance--it is the illusion of knowledge."
—Daniel J. Boorstin, historian, former Librarian of Congress
"But the Senator, while insisting he was not intoxicated, could not explain his nudity"
—WKRP in Cincinatti
|