Econwatch
March 25, 2009 9:51 AM

"Betrayed" AIG Exec Offers Public Resignation

(AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
In a sometimes scathing, sometimes somber letter to AIG CEO Edward Liddy, an executive working in the company's scandal-plagued Financial Products division resigned his post, expressing frustration at being "betrayed" by those he tried to help.

In the letter, which ran as an op-ed piece in Tuesday's New York Times, executive vice president Jake DeSantis said he was leaving the company because "we in the financial products unit have been betrayed by A.I.G. and are being unfairly persecuted by elected officials."

Liddy appeared before Congress last week to answer for the $165 million in bonus money going to executives of the Financial Products division – the part of the company widely blamed for AIG's near collapse. Those payments, and their recipients, have been blasted by lawmakers and, notably, the attorneys general of New York and Connecticut, who have sought the release of their names.

DeSantis insists he was not involved in the credit default swaps that are at the root of AIG's problems, noting that most of those responsible "have left the company and have conspicuously escaped the public outrage."

But being painted with the same brush as those alleged culprits by Congress has left DeSantis feeling "let down."

"I take this action after 11 years of dedicated, honorable service to A.I.G. I can no longer effectively perform my duties in this dysfunctional environment, nor am I being paid to do so. Like you, I was asked to work for an annual salary of $1, and I agreed out of a sense of duty to the company and to the public officials who have come to its aid. Having now been let down by both, I can no longer justify spending 10, 12, 14 hours a day away from my family for the benefit of those who have let me down."

DeSantis criticized Liddy for not defending workers in the "face of untrue and unfair accusations" from lawmakers and "baseless and reckless comments" from the attorneys general of New York and Connecticut, Andrew Cuomo and Richard Blumenthal, respectively.

He said the decision to ask for the bonus payments back was a "breach of trust" and only came because Liddy faced political pressure. DeSantis said the promise of the bonuses was the only reason for some workers to stay on at AIG and try to manage its crisis.

"We have worked 12 long months under these contracts and now deserve to be paid as promised. None of us should be cheated of our payments any more than a plumber should be cheated after he has fixed the pipes but a careless electrician causes a fire that burns down the house," he wrote.

DeSantis said he received a $742,006.40 bonus in March and would not return it. Rather, he plans to donate the after-tax sum to various charities, saying he did not "want to see them disappear back into the obscurity of A.I.G.’s or the federal government’s budget."
Tags:
AIG ,
edward liddy ,
jake desantis ,
ny times
Topics:
AIG
Add a Comment See all 157 Comments
by HonestAbe17 March 26, 2009 8:21 PM EDT
Jack was a dedicated employee who had nothing to do with the exotic derivatives, it was a small group of other AIG employees. You know what, you all are AIG employees and unfortunately,suffer the reprecussions of the few renegades. If AIG went bust, your 'retention" bonus would be worth zilch, so stop crying & do whats right for 'your' company or get out of the way & let someone else do your job. There are many,many qualified unemployed people ready to step in. Make sacrifices for your company & country. WAKE UP!!!!
Reply to this comment
by nanakim3 March 26, 2009 8:19 AM EDT
Give this guy a break - at least he finally DID THE RIGHT THING AND GOT OUT OF AIG. The Gov't is just another Mafia - sad but true
Reply to this comment
by hancul6 March 25, 2009 10:52 PM EDT
This is why we are in the economic problems today. SELFESHNESS, GREED, PRIDE. Does this man not realize that he was part of a entity. You don't separate one section from another and say I am not part of the failure or success. Besides that no one would be arguing this point if the company didn't exist. Or, would they still have gotten bonuses let alone a paycheck if we had let them fold? Realizing the company had contractual obligations is one thing, but there wouldn't be a company if they weren't bailed out. Oh, but we had to keep this one alive or it would have been devastating for everyone. But this was a bail out, a hand out, a desperate situation that our whole country and the rest of the free world is in. Where is the selflessness, where is the "I am satisfied just to be able to keep my job and have a paycheck to feed my family and do some good for this country". Selfish, greed, pride...then comes the fall.

Steve - Hawaii, Washington, now Texas
Reply to this comment
by philabias March 25, 2009 10:34 PM EDT
someone tell me why this guy isnt in jail his company failed under his sterwtship HANG THE BUM FROM THE FLAGPOLE.
Reply to this comment
by EatCake March 25, 2009 8:42 PM EDT
Mr. Desantis would not stay at AIG without the promise of a $742,006.40 bonus and is now not staying even WITH the bonus!

If the bonus was a part of a contract to stay with AIG and he got the bonus, what about the contract to stay with AIG or forfeit the bonus? How is he now leaving with the bonus? If the bonus was to get him to stay until he recieved the bonus, but AIG had no money before being bailed out, to pay the bonus, how does a bail out intended to deliver on AIG's liabilites, (creditors and people who paid AIG money for goods and services AIG could not deliver on) not its optional and discretionary salary or operating expenses, now go to pay bonuses any bankruptcy judge would nix in a minute?

Slight of hand anyone?

Is this guy really expecting people to believe that he does not need such a bonus and while now donate it all to various charities? If he doesn't need it, why not give it back to the people that made it possible?

The con artists will ply their trade as long as they can get away with it and we continue to let them get away with it.
Reply to this comment
by EatCake March 25, 2009 8:17 PM EDT
Posted by citizen4honor at 3:04 PM : Mar 25, 2009

"A bunch of people (Mr. & Mrs. Unqualified) took out mortgages they could not afford - mostly on variable rate mortgages."

----------------------------------------

If Mr. and Mrs. Unqualified applied for a loan, who lent to unqualified people and would consider such "safe and sound lending practices"?

People who made commissions on sales?

No people to qualify for loans, no loans made, no loans made, no commissions on loans or no loans to trade, no loans to trade, no commissions on trades.

Motivation to lend to Mr. and Mrs. Unqualified? You guessed it!

No one was under any obligation to make bad loans and do things that were not safe and sound practices.

Are Americans going to continue to buy into the continued con of the greedy? The greedy don't want their gravy train to stop. While they can't tell you how they take advantage of the gravy train, because that would make you want to throw them in jail even more than you do now, They will try to obfuscate and throw the blame back onto those they are ripping off.

Unqualified people who got loans merely applied for them, the lender had the control with the words, yes or no.

Unqualified people are not blameless as no doubt some fudged and stretched their credibility and were lent money based on what looked to be safe and sound reliable and qualified buyers. Many were greedy too, hoping to get something they and the lenders knew they couldn't afford.

Unfortunately it's not just about lending or not lending, but keeping a finger on the pulse of the market. Real estate is boom and bust, boom and bust and generally even people who do all the right things are left holding the proverbial bag because they pressed their luck and in many as a result of their greed. This time it looks like greed infected everyone and caution and safe and sound procedures were tossed to the wind for the almighty buck.

Some people now know, if they didn't before, why greed and vanity have generally been considered sins, not virtues.
Reply to this comment
by EatCake March 25, 2009 7:45 PM EDT
If people are ruined because you can't pay out on a policy they have already paid for, how can you then use the money they have paid you for that policy to pay yourself before you deliver to them what they paid you for?
Reply to this comment
by spider1989 March 25, 2009 7:27 PM EDT
Jack DeSantis, if government didn't bail out AIG in the first place. You ass should out looking for job now. So is the rest of AIG employees. Who ever involved in the credit default swaps that are at the root of AIG's problems should put in jail for life.
Reply to this comment
by spider1989 March 25, 2009 7:20 PM EDT
Jack, I don't F......K care you took $1 salary or 1 cent salary. AIG employees should not deserve any bonuses at this point. Besides, your contract was written before the collapse of AIG. under the old CEO (that bump ass) anywat,Tax payers money are ONLY USE TO BAIL AIG, NOT TO give away to people like you. If you decided to keep the money and give that amount of money to charity. Make sure to show us your receipt.
Reply to this comment
by buzongtang March 25, 2009 7:20 PM EDT
And for people like dwath, who believe "companies should be left along to sink or swim," that is the mentality we had during the worst economic downturn in American history, the Great Depression years. When businesses and banks started tanking in the 1930's, the prevailing economic philosophy was exactly what dwath proposes: let them sink or swim so the economy can right itself. See how far that got us. The economic conditions in the world only grew worse. Until, that is, World War II came along. And guess what happened in World War II? Massive government stimulus spending into the economy. The war kick started the American economy because finally, money was being invested in the economy again. That is a demonstration of Keynesian economics, which is the mode of thinking behind Obama's government stimulus.

I wager if it were not for the Federal stimulus packets we would be in a fair degree more trouble right now.
Reply to this comment
by buzongtang March 25, 2009 7:11 PM EDT
It says in the article he was working on a $1 annual salary. For those of you who cannot read, that comes to a wopping sum of $1 dollar every year. Granted, this man probably has some investments with hearty dividends, among other assets. However, he probably has a lot of liabilities too. Either way, who wants to work for $1 a year? So, for all you gripers about how he is just being a whiny corporate pig, think about it like that. And then, why would you not quit a situation where both the government and your corporate superiors were shoveling blame on you while, at the same time, refusing to pay you even minimum wage for working 12-14 hour days?

Like I said, he probably has bills to pay too. And his dignity to worry about. I would lose patience if I were in his situation too. This man is within the bounds of sanity for quitting.

Furthermore, whether some people like to admit it or not, AIG is important to our economic survival. If the people who keep it running start jumping ship left and right, do you think that is going to do us good? If you give them a relatively paltry bonus and they stay on the job, how does that translate into a bad thing?

If you think a few million dollars in corporate bonuses is a waste of tax payer money, then you are not looking in the right places. The Federal government is the most efficient expert at wasting tax payer money and barely anyone bothers to complain year after year.
Reply to this comment
by citizen4honor March 25, 2009 6:04 PM EDT
I can't the ignorance of people that are asking what failed mortgages have to do with AIG? How many Americans are this stupid?

Let's see if you can follow this.

A bunch of people (Mr. & Mrs. Unqualified) took out mortgages they could not afford - mostly on variable rate mortgages. The Rate went up - and the payment went up - now they can not pay.
A bunch of these homes were taken over by the bank that lent them the money.

Now the banks have all these homes with no income coming in from them. So the banks started losing money.

AIG was into mortgage trading and took some very risky moves. 11 to 1 odds trading. As the mortgages failed so did the trades.

Also when the banks lose money, they go to their insurance company AIG.

So Mr. & Mrs. Unqualified that took out loans for mortgages they couldn't pay, caused the the banks to fail and AIG went down too.

Now in the idiots defence we have ACORN and congress who helped pushed people into buying homes they couldn't afford and forcing banks to lend Mr. & Mrs. Unqualified money so they are responsible too.

AIG gave money to Goldman Sacs, CIti Banks, State of California who also got bailout money from the Federal Gov't. There's some double dippin going on here too.

By the way, there was a person earlier who said they made $20,000/year and didn't want their tax dollars going to AIG, well it won't coz you don't make enough money to be paying any income taxes, only those making over $70,000/year should have a say in these, the rest of you aren't contributing to the bailout.
Reply to this comment
by cs4466 March 25, 2009 4:16 PM EDT
If you want socailism then follow Obama.

If you don't know who DIck Morris is, maybe you should look him up.
Posted by citizen4honor at 12:10 PM : Mar 25, 2009

If you don't know what socialism is, maybe you should look it up.
Reply to this comment
by Kaiwa747 March 25, 2009 3:49 PM EDT
Your president wear 3 top hats. Can any of you understand what is the 3 top hats is?
Reply to this comment
by EatCake March 25, 2009 3:42 PM EDT
You sell a product, those who buy it pay you for it, you in turn pay yourself and your operating expenses from what they pay you.

You sell a product, people have paid you for that product, but you are having trouble delivering that product to them. What do you do? Ignore the people that have paid you money and pay yourself your regular salary and maintain your same operating expenses?

The money you pay yourself with and that goes toward expenses comes from where, you? No, it comes from the customer who paid you money in exchange for a product you must deliver on or be held liable for the amount they paid you. How do you pay that liability or deliver what your customers paid for? By paying a bonus to yourself? By adding to your operating expense by paying bonuses to others?

Why does anyone believe AIG and a number of other huge corporations are in bad shape? Their executives are worried more about their pay and bonuses than sustaining the business that pays those salaries and bonuses. To sustain that business you need to make good on delivering what people paid you for before you pay yourself, since the money they paid you is not yours until you have delivered on your part of the bargain.
Reply to this comment
by Kaiwa747 March 25, 2009 3:41 PM EDT
Who own the federal reserve people? One things you don't own it. they control your government.
US taxpayers reserve? you own it. Now if you invest into your own country guess what. Who will control the government? HMMMMMMM go figure and educate yourself. Your president is reaching out to you people so WAKE UP!!!!!!
Reply to this comment
by omega39-2009 March 25, 2009 3:37 PM EDT
Wall street did not create this mess, Congress did. Our gov't did. People who took out loans they could not pay did.
Posted by citizen4honor at 12:10 PM :

Can you please explain what failed mortgages have to do with American Insurance Group?
Posted by dragonwagon5

A bunch of former AIG employees now have one.
Reply to this comment
by cheetah-man7 March 25, 2009 3:27 PM EDT
Despite the fact that I can certainly understand his anger at feeling betrayed, I can only limit my sympathy to that alone. The fact that this Bozo was pulling home 3/4 of a million a year does not tear at my heartstrings. He should just shut up and move on to a new job. This sort of news serves to only stir the pot of anger already felt by this nation!
Reply to this comment
by dwath March 25, 2009 3:12 PM EDT
Nothing in life is simple. This case is the same. What I earn a year is immaterial to what anyone else earns a year. It has to do w/ my skills and knowledge and responsibility. Likewise, is this gentleman worth 750k a year? I do not know. I neither curse nor bless; however, there are some general statements regarding the situation.
1. Clearly Congress and the administration have bungled things bandly. (Goes back to Bush admin Tarp as well.)
2. The companies are in large part to blame for where they are today. But, Congress, the Exexutive and probably legislative all have their parts to blame.
3. Let's not forget our individual greed which certainly has played a part in what goes on.
4. The screaming, especially from the Congress, is highly hypocritical. To every Senator or Congressman who voted for these bills w/o reading them, shut up! You KNOW you did not know what was in there, You did not care what was in there and you voted for it! Do not cry now.
5. Let's not forget the part of the media. Are these bonuses evil? Who knows? There has been zero reporting on who got them (positionally), how much they were individually, how deserved they were and what was the total package. An executive level salary of 750k per year is not a lot of money. If you only get paid by bonus, it is really not a bonus. 185 million in bonuses is a huge number, but, is it a lot or excess of money for the compensation of the work that was done? Again, who knows? CBS, FOX, ABC, and the great lefty NBC have all been very silent on exactly what was covered. They have not even asked the questions. They created the hysteria, but, do we know if the hysteria is warranted? Would we be mad if they said we have 500 000 employees and spent 200 million paying them (40k a year?) Again, bias in the news and manipulation of the news has much less to do with what is reported than with what is not reported.

Personally, I think most of these companies should be left along to sink or swim. We are going through a big reset and sometimes that is what is necessary.
Reply to this comment
by omega39-2009 March 25, 2009 3:11 PM EDT
I fear you are right on. I have heard Dick Morris' explanation and it fits too well with what we observe. Obama wants the baks to fail so his administration can take them over. Then, through the banks, he can manipulate whatever he wants. The Europeans see this (they have seen it before) and are beginning to talk that the Dollar should be replaced as the world currency standard.
Posted by McHineguy

I'm not sure where you've been over the last four years, but talk of America losing its reserve currency status has been bandied about since the United States reached the twin milestone of record debt and record trade deficits resulting in a diminishing dollar.
Reply to this comment
See all 157 Comments

About Econwatch

News and analysis on the state of the economy from CBS News.

E-Mail EconWatch

Add to your favorite news reader
google
yahoo
msn