« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Suit Seeks To Block Whittle's Executive Pay
Mack Whittle is being sued by a shareholder of South Financial, who is trying to block his $18 million compensation package.
The shareholder, Vernon Mercier, said the suit was prompted by last week's announcement that South Financial would receive bailout funds, reports a South Carolina TV station.
A judge declined Mercier's request for an injunction blocking the payment, but delayed a decision on a motion to dismiss the suit.
A lawyer for Whittle, Billy Wilkins, told the court: "Mack Whittle and his family have given a lot to this community and it's a tough time for him. Particularly to be ridiculed as he has been in the press and accused of things that he didn't do: getting a golden parachute, taking advantage of the taxpayers. All of that stuff is absolutely not true."
Wilkins continued: "[Whittle's] retirement benefits are based solely on an employment contract that had been in existence for over two years when he retired. He's getting nothing more or less than that what he is legally entitled to."
Josh
Zachary
If he is entitled to get his golden parachute, then I as a taxpayer am entitled to decline that company's bailout monies which are in fact mine.
November 20, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hot Golden Lead for the gentleman.
November 20, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um..I'm confused. He is using the argument that he is entitled to the retirement money?
How about the multitude of employees entitled to pensions that disappear when the companies they work for go under, taking their pensions down with it? What are they entitled to?
November 20, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. Weren't the Enron employees entitled to their pensions? Hadn't they been made a promise in exchange for labor? Was there no estoppel argument to be made for them? Oh, I forgot, they weren't important donors to Paulson's political party.
November 21, 2008 12:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Whittle should be made to make a choice by the US govt., the 347 million of taxpayer dollars OR pay Whittle his $18 million compensation. The choice should be his. Lets see where his priorities lie pure and simple.
November 20, 2008 6:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the untrammeled free market works, then why would shareholders ever allow a contract to be signed where a CEO can walk out on a company facing bankruptcy with $18M he obviously could not have earned?
November 20, 2008 6:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's been trammeled, stomped and left beaten and dying by the side of the road.
Enjoy.
November 20, 2008 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
The markets don't work. Unless you are Mr Whittle or one of his poor suffering cohorts.
I'm not normally for vengeance, but these guys are begging for it.
November 20, 2008 10:28 PM | Reply | Permalink