Sort By:
May 4, 2011
Helmeet are you saying that an executive who fixes the problem in time to increase profits enough to cover a considerable loss should not get rewarded for his work. And what about an executive in charge o a department that makes record profits but is unable to cover everything the executive that screwed up a seperate department lost. Should he go unrewarded for his hard work because of mistakes by someone else.
May 4, 2011
OMG. I have been *so* convinced for years that this is standard practice in many industries. All I know is that over the last 15 years or so, the number of "Whoops, My Bad" situtations in the businesses I deal with has increased exponentially. Well beyond the limits of chance.

And did anyone else ever notice that these "honest mistakes" are never in the consumers' favor?
May 4, 2011
It does not work like that, two mistakes don't make a right and a lesser evil doesn't make it good. Maybe an accountant can see that billion they don't lose as a positive income, but in real life they are still losing an enormous amoun of money and no, the CEO don't deserve a bonus because there are no profits; at most, he deserves a pat in the pabk and a "good try, boy"
That little play with numbers is what made economy a fantasy world and finally fubared it; profits are profits and losses are losses, if you call an apple a tomato it doesn't turn in a tomato, no matter how hard you try.
-8 Rank Up Rank Down
May 4, 2011
If a company is projected to loose 3 billion dollars and if a new CEO comes in and reduces the loss to 1 billion, he/she gets $200 Million as bonus. What is wrong with that? From outside, it looks like company is still at loss and CEOs are getting bonus..but the devil is in the detail.
May 4, 2011
This is uncanny. I have been dealing with a series of "errors" from my wife's health insurance company that is so long since the beginning of 2009 that I have concluded that they must be intentional. There have been 17 instances in which they classified a health care provider as "out of network" when the provider is in fact "in network." (Note that the "network" is their own "network" of approved health care providers which patients are encouraged to use to reduce costs.) In one instance the insurance company corrected their "error" in classifying an item as "out of network" when it was actually "in network" and made the same "error" by classifying the same health care provider as "out of network" on another item in the very same statement. Many of their "errors" undoubtedly go undetected, especially by older and less educated persons. I actually overlooked the first two "errors" and didn't discover this scheme until my wife had major shoulder surgery and the number of "errors" became staggering. If the error is undetected the patient pays a bill (or a portion of a bill) that should have been paid by his or her insurance company. Even if an "error" is detected, it extends the period of time during which the insurance company holds the premium before having to pay the health care provider. Our health insurance premiums are being used to compensate the company and its employees for making these intentional "errors" and to pay bonuses to the executives who hatched this scheme. It is not possible that the employees of the health insurance company are simply hopelessly incompetent. Even randomly assigning claims to "in network" and "out of network" would not result in so many mistakes. In addition, the same company processes Medicare claims in our state and it has not made a single mistake on any of my Medicare claims in the same period. Don't tell me that we don't need the President's health care reform. I can attest to the hours I have spent correcting intentional "errors" made by my wife's health insurance company.
Get the new Dilbert app!