As rumours fly around the Net about a possible Sun acquisition by IBM, one of the questions that probably comes to a few people's mind is what it will mean for the upper echelons of Sun management. The bigwigs may stay on for a bit and the bulk of middle management will probably part ways -- who knows? What is almost certain though, as is always the case in such high profile acquisitions, is that hefty incentives and bonuses will most certainly be showered upon the Sun leadership team.
But is now the time to reward any executive team? As hundreds of thousands of jobs are shed throughout the U.S. economy, and many millions more worldwide, there has been much public fury over lofty bonus payouts in general. While the A.I.G. case is clearly an example of public bailout money being misused, and perhaps not directly related to the possible acquisition, it still raises the question -- how much should executive teams really be rewarded during an economic downturn? Should there be a "bonus cap" imposed on all incentive payouts, including those made after an acquisition?
Yes -- the instruments of capitalism are at work here and it is probably not the job of the government, nor public distaste, to interfere with/affect such private dealings. Yet many others would beg to differ.
We'd love to hear your thoughts on the matter...