Cash-strapped TransLink eyes big executive bonuses

What a total crock of shit, all these *holes are doing is taking the money out of my pocket and putting it directly into their's.

Maybe Crispie Clark has a point about being able to find 30 mil in efficiencies in Translink. Just another out of control Frankenorganization set up by the Liberals. If BC Ferries can have big bonuses, why not Translink.

And funny how bonuses never help improve worker performance, just the execs.

I always thought the improved performance came first, followed by the bonus.

My motivation to do a good job is getting to keep my job... maybe they should try that with executives.

Am I wrong, or shouldn't bonuses be earned? You know, like running the company in a profitable and efficient manner?

But, But, But, we need to give out large unearned bonuses and big fat salaries to get the best and brightest people possible.

What a load of shit. My guess is there are thousands if not millions of high quality executives running around without employement who'd be more than happy to come and take the place of the fat cat asshats who run translink for a lot less than we're paying these pigs at the trough.

Well you all know how I feel about excessive executive pay.

BUT to be fair, I think some ppl might not understand how executive compensation works. Im not defending Translink or the amounts that exexs earn, just want to poit out that "bonus" has a different meaning when it comes to key employee compensarion.

Most of us think of a bonus as an extra amount over and above your fixed salary, and unlike salary, you may or may not receive a bonus, depending on how exceptional your performance is. But for execs, a bonus is more like the part of their core compensation that the eployer can adjust up or down at its discretion according to the performance of the business and individual. A regular employee might only get a bonus if they are exceptionally proficient and maybe only if the company is making profit. By contrast, an exec would likely always get a bonus unless they are being terminated for poor performance.

So if a company wants to pay someone "about" 400k a year to fill an important role, instead of paying an exec a 400k salary, they pay him a 200k base salary and a discretionary 200k bonus instead, so that up to half the execs income can be increased or decreased at the company's discretion.

Doubt it. Private sector execs earn far far more than public sector and execs are rarely out of work long enough to consider take major pay cuts anyway. Besides nobody values their self-worth according to their pay and bonuses the way execs do, its their only way of showing others how talented they are, since their competence is based on so many intangibles.

There should be a direct Ratio in Pay between Executives and the Janitor. Srsly.

Doubt it. Private sector execs earn far far more than public sector and execs are rarely out of work long enough to consider take major pay cuts anyway. Besides nobody values their self-worth according to their pay and bonuses the way execs do, its their only way of showing others how talented they are, since their competence is based on so many intangibles.


Here's a link of Translinks exec's and their claims to fame.

http://www.translink.ca/en/About-Us/Cor ... tives.aspx

After reading this it appears they're life long bureaucrats promoted through previous incarnations of Translink, Coast Mountain Bus lines or various other sundry jobs with the GVRD transportation conglomerate. So to consider them high end Executives is a stretch since anyone worth their salt wouldn't be with a company like Translink that pays that badly.

So IMO they're just doing their job and don't deserve anymore of a big bonus than any other employee especially considering their greatest claim to fame is the ability to get governments to enact taxes, levees and tolls to pay for those bonuses.

Certainly sounds like an old boys club, I did see a former COO of Canadian Airlines and another senior exec from the forestry industry.

I dodnt have a problem in theory with a base and bonus pay structure, the bonus is supposed to go down when company peformance goes down...thats alot better than a salary which gets paid regardless. The problems, IMO are that:

1) the dollar amounts for execs are simply too high these days. I just dont think any one person is that valuable and irreplaceable.

2) The bonus payments often dont go down when they should...its too easy for execs to blow smoke up the ass of the shareholders and say they did the best they could given circumstances beyond their control. In other cases, the bonus is effectively paid in full as a professional courtesy and in effect becomes fixed salary.

I second both points.

Some say, those guys would make more money in the private sector. OK, let them go there. There should be no problem finding a replacement, to work for $100k or less.

I second both points.

Some say, those guys would make more money in the private sector. OK, let them go there. There should be no problem finding a replacement, to work for $100k or less.

The problem is I think there would be. I dont see how you could convince someone to do an executive job without executive pay. Simply accepting the job would suggest that they lack the judgement required for the job. The only around that would be to dissolve the stand-alone corporation entirely and move the function to a line department within the bureaucracy proper and have it managed as govt program run by professional bureaucrats.