> for retention packages that make sure the lights stay on.
even you admit that people doing any work in a bankrupting company needs a retention package to continue working - why should the CEO (just another worker in a company) be any different? Why is their retention package somehow less important than the retention package that you proposed for the "keep the lights on" workers?
even you admit that people doing any work in a bankrupting company needs a retention package to continue working - why should the CEO (just another worker in a company) be any different? Why is their retention package somehow less important than the retention package that you proposed for the "keep the lights on" workers?