Please examine the disconnect here re: "Retention Awards"

[Coexist]

December 20, 2007, Morgan Stanley bailed out by Beijing after $9bn write-off.

September, 2008, Morgan Stanley asks, "Why should we be asked to help bailout companies who make bad investment decisions?"

December 17, 2008, Morgan Stanley posts $2.3 Bln Q4 loss

December, 2008, Morgan Stanley turns to Japan for bailout.

December, 2008, Morgan Stanley accepts TARP funds.

February 2, 2009, Morgan Stanley plans to cut 1,800 jobs.

February 11, 2009 Morgan Stanley Chief Executive, "If you gave me no bonus in the best of years, I'd still be here."

February 11, 2009 Morgan Stanley Executive announces 'very generous' retention award... 'don't call it a bonus'.






Because we're really stupid, and won't know the difference. And its really, really important to keep all those people who contributed to the past few stellar years for the firm - you know, to keep them from leaving for European companies. Because, they haven't completely finished destroying the economy here first.



But low level employees should be cleared out.






Ugh.

[Berry Cool]

1. Yeah. Because if low-level employees don't perform according to their managers' expectations,

THEY don't GET bonuses. In fact, they're lucky to even have jobs.

[Coexist]

2. yes... and the fact that FOR 2 YEARS, they were in trouble as a company