The very first paragraph talks about a signing bonus. It is very common practice to claw back signing bonuses if you don't stay a predetermined amount of time. From the article:
> Signing bonuses aren’t unusual in the mortgage industry, and they were particularly big during the recent boom. Neither are attempts to get them back, especially in the current bust.
The objectable part is that the employees were fired right before the clawback period ended. Depending on the legal jurisdiction, there may be a strong case that the employees should keep at least part of the bonus.
It was most likely spelled out in the bonus terms and conditions. It sucks for the fired employee, but the lenders are probably doing something they are allowed to do.
They're certainly allowed to ask. Now whether they are likely to enforce the terms in court, and whether the court would side with them, and whether they would recoup more than the cost of pursuing the claim, well, that's a different matter. [edit] Not to mention the risk of negative PR, and the consequences for their recruitment pipeline.
I suspect if you just said "nope" a bunch, they would come back to you and accept a compromise. They're going to get pennies on the dollar if they send the account to collections.
If this were me I'd probably start by saying "I'll give you back 33% if you sign a document disclaiming your interest in the remaining 67%" and kick off the negotiation there. IANAL of course, lol, and this kind of thing I'd want to run by a professional. This is just my gut instinct.
It was probably written in the contact that if they were fired for cause, they'd have to return the signing bonus. That is pretty typical for most signing bonuses, so that the employer is covered from employees trying to get the signing bonus and then not following through on their work obligations, and also for the employee to be covered that they won't be fired right before collecting and then denied the bonus. They're basically trying to reframe a large layoff to save money as a bunch of individual employees being fired for cause.
When the market took a downward turn, the companies likely tried to introduce new 'cause' to fire them and attempt to legally claw back the bonus. Like this example of setting unrealistic performance goals given the market turn:
"Siegel, the former banker at a Guaranteed Rate affiliate in New Jersey, said when business slowed down last year, the company introduced monthly performance goals. They hadn’t been part of the signing bonus agreement.
He emailed his boss multiple times offering to leave the company and return a prorated share of the signing bonus, but it went nowhere, he said.
In October 2022, and then again in December, he received letters saying he wasn’t meeting the performance goals, he said, and that he was at risk of termination and having his bonus clawed back."
Unfortunately US worker protections are not great (IMO), so the employees in question will likely have to face a legal battle if they want to argue for keeping their bonuses. Mortgage companies also likely have a strong in house legal team, meaning their ex-employees will have to pay out of pocket for a good lawyer if they want a chance of winning in court.
Most places in the US are also "at will employment", meaning you can be terminated at any time without warning for any reason, and that makes it much harder to argue that you were unfairly terminated. There might be a chance you could argue that the company is obviously facing financial issues and so you were let go as more of a "layoff" type termination (and then you have some more rights to things like unemployment) but it's likely to be an expensive argument that some may not be able to fund, and even then you're definitely not guaranteed to win.
--
I personally was laid off a few months into a position where I had been given a signing bonus, but they were laying off the entire office and did not ask me to repay it. It was a pretty small bonus and they probably forgot about it anyways, but given that it was a large layoff they probably would have a hard time arguing that I was fired with cause. They also tried to then rehire me at a lower rate in a different region, but I didn't want to relocate so I declined.
If you read the story it would tell you. Performance goals which were unreachable were added and used to fire people 1 month short of a 24 month window during which you'd have to pay it back. The timing sure seems suspect and arbitrary and although I agree with you that the bonus terms probably say "we can fire you if you don't perform", moving the goal posts with a month left is a concern.
A good lesson for employees with these kinds of deals to have the signing bonus agreement reviewed by their own counsel to point out these potential scenarios. Something like "fired if you don't perform" should be spelled out unambiguously in the contract and not be subject to being defined later.
Any contract for $100k is probably worth a few hours of a lawyer's time to review it.
The lawyer would probably tell you the risk but I would guess most people would still sign it. In 2021 very few mortgage brokers would have guessed at 8% 30 year rates.
"for cause" in the US usually implies a reason that is above and beyond bad performance, such as egregious or criminal actions (theft, fraud, abuse, sexual harassment, criminal negligence, etc.).
not showing up on time enough, or being kinda crappy at your job generally would not qualify
I get it on iOS exclusively, but turning on a VPN resolves for some reason. I’ve tried different browsers, different DNS providers, and WiFi or cellular, and none have helped. Not sure why a VPN would make a difference. Same country of origin.
Are you using Firefox with DoH turned on? That routes your dns (via https) to Cloudflare by default which archive.is doesn't like. Even if your OS has a different DNS server configured.
If you are using Cloudflare DNS, that's why. This comes up frequently, CloudFlare always comes along and gives a vaguely dishonest answer as to why they won't fix it. Stop using 1.1.1.1; if you are using private relay (which implicitly uses cloudFlare) that's why this is happening.
Civil court litigation. The dollar amounts in question are well over small claims court amounts (6-7 figures). Guaranteed Rate is arguing those with signing bonuses did not meet their contractual obligations, while employees are indicating the terms were changed unilaterally while employed.
Not an attorney, but depending on state and other situations, I’d expect some folks to shed this claim in bankruptcy if necessary (if the amount owed is hundreds of thousands of dollars, they can’t get relief, the mortgage industry is dead for another 2-3 years based on the Fed effective rate, etc) or otherwise leverage state statute. Florida has very strong protections against creditors, for example.
You’re usually eligible for credit immediately after going bankrupt because you can’t go bankrupt again for several years. Nuclear option, but an option.
The amounts matter for the lenders in aggregate, but standard lender employees probably only had $5k - $40k signing bonuses. They're going to spend non-existent resources to litigate against the ~20% that don't pay?
These mortgage brokers are the same vultures that pushed crappy ARMs before 2008 because they made a bigger commission than a fixed 30 year.
Reading the article they seem like used car salesman. I love the guy who admits the business is "feast or famine" but now laments he's "been unable to sell his 7,700-square-foot house at the $3 million he is seeking".
Every sign-on bonus I've gotten only makes me pay it back if I choose to leave before a certain time. Fired for cause? I keep it.
Sounds like these employees didn't read their contracts. I love the guy who is choosing to leave early and is mad they won't pro-rate it.
These are the same snakes that would sell their own mother a mortgage she couldn't afford.
> We are not going to be apologetic about exercising our legal rights to recover our money.
Well…I guess coming right out and not hiding your douchebaggery is ever so slightly preferable than offering the sterilized and fake words of regret via press release that you might see from many other companies.
I would argue that offering your employees a massive loan that you might forgive but it depends if they like you, is incredibly predatory. Terrifying in fact. I guess less bad that giving $100k in cash and asking for it back out of nowhere. But only because it's in the contract.
Wait, so the fact that banks offer loans to people, which they don't have to take is predatory then? The 0% APR for 2 years offers I get in the mail are predatory? This indeed must be terrifying for you, since those terrifying zero-interest offers of credit are in every store you go to, every bank you go to, and omg even in your own mailbox.
So again just to be clear what you're saying. A loan with interest is ok. A loan with zero interest where you might get a chance to have it forgiven if you are a top performer at work, is "incredibly predatory and terrifying?"
And by the way, for a guy selling his house for $3mil, having to give back $100k that he knew he might have to give back, after using it free for almost 2 years, is not "a massive loan." My wife and I spent $80k on refugee aid last year, and I don't have a $3mil house. It was an unplanned expense, but it changed our other spending or lifestyle in zero ways. It just means last year we didn't save as much for retirement as the year before.
Why? It's literally free money. Stick it into an low risk investment account or even a money market account, give it back at the end and keep the interest.
People should be held accountable for their own stupidity, and it's not like the company did anything deceptive AFAIU. If an adult doesn't understand what a loan is then that's on them (or their education, but that doesn't absolve their responsibility).
Calling something a "bonus" when it's actually a loan is indeed douchebaggery.
If the company touted "free food", but somewhere deep in the fine print it said that the company has the right to retroactively charge you $500 per meal if they decide they don't like you two years down the road, that would also be douchebaggery.
Just because something is legal doesn't make it not-douchebaggery.
ah yes, a predatory loan is a a loan where you pay no interest, have a chance to have it forgiven, and at worst just return the original amount almost 2 years later, gaining the inflation amount.
so any bonus that is not just cash in your pocket is not a bonus? what is the correct word for a really good freebie that a company gives you? you know, a great minimum reward, a possible much bigger reward if you are one of the top performers, so you have an incentive to perform.
Let's say you pay $5 for a lottery ticket, where you're guaranteed to win $5 but can win $100. Is it predatory and unethical to you if you don't win the $100?
There is a thing that we all by convention understand: additional compensation. It is frequently tied to performance. Once given and cleared into a bank account it cannot be taken back.
We call this a bonus.
A loan, which must be paid back might be called a squirrel on mars but here on earth we don’t call it a bonus.
A “benefit”? Maybe. Health insurance may retroactively renege on their promised coverage. 401ks are frequently embezzled. When these things happen it’s usually a pitiful, or illegal act worthy of derision. Like a predatory loan.
You know what, I don’t think this is a benefit either. Let’s just call it a squirrel.
>There is a thing that we all by convention understand
yes, and by we all you are including people who don't deal with sales bonuses, presales bonuses, or sign-on bonuses. the takeaway here is if you don't understand something, don't start talking like an expert and correcting people about it.
what do you call the most common type of sign-on bonus - stock options that you lose if you don't work there for a couple of years? is that a "benefit?"
Benefits come with the job. A one-time benefit based on some criteria is called a bonus. Yes, a chunk of cash is also a bonus. A Cash bonus. This was not a cash bonus. It was the most common type of sign-on bonus that exists - one that is only fully realized if you stay with the company for a certain time. And you're free to not take it. But you can't take it and complain it's somehow a scam.
repeat after me - loans at 0% that you may even get forgiven after 2 years, are not predatory. they are The best loan you are able to ever get - the opposite of predatory. and someone giving you the ability to take this great type of loan, for the event of signing on, is giving you a bonus. Put that 100k in a 5% HSA for 2 years, give it back, and you just got 10k in cash. Predatory loan. You people will twist and turn reality just to double-down.
After reading this thread, you have got to be trying real hard to wash this in your head.
They give people a massive chunk of money as a """bonus""" and then shitcan them right before the 2 year mark so they can get the money back, call it a loan in the paperwork to make this arrangement legally enforceable. You think this is an honest, perfectly reasonable arrangement? Do you hear yourself?
Yes, a company sign-on bonus being dependent on staying with the company for a set time, is not only a reasonable arrangement - it is the most common type of sign-on bonus. Any 2-year interest-free loan is a great loan, and you can turn that into about 10-20k just by putting it into a treasury bond or an HSA. Have you ever, in your life, received a sign-on bonus?
They call it a loan, because it is a loan. Just like PPP was called a loan, and forgiven on a predefined condition.
I hear myself fine. I hear myself observing some people who I believe have not had a professional job in sales or presales, never had a sign-on bonus, never received stock options, and are calling a great thing bad, and being outraged on behalf of some rich asshole playing victim. I hear myself laughing at some people who have no clue about the subject matter, but like to create fake anger and outrage online, so they could feel superior by painting "evil" all around them to avoid dealing with the actual reason for their own failings - themselves.
Yeah you are talking to a lot of people who are not salesmen by trade; this is an engineer heavy community. Many of the people here have received stock options, it's part of the status quo with regard to engineering compensation. They do it differently though, you get vested after a time and then you get your compensation.
This bonus you're talking about, it isn't free money like you frame it, you're framing it simultaneously as "free money" and a loan so as to avoid addressing what is actually going on here. It's a way to get people with money problems stuck in servitude and willing to eat any shit you want them to just to avoid the debt they'll incur if they don't. And that's predatory, but that's not the end of it. They then get laid off and still owe the money back. I'm not surprised you're avoiding mentioning these facts about the case we are discussing.
How is you getting $100k for 2 years, putting it into a 5% APY high yield savings account, then returning it in 2 years and pocketing $10k, "stuck in servitude."
>people with money problems
yes yes, a bunch of you "not salesmen by trade" engineers here, who came over from the teenage antiwork subreddit, are on this thread making up fake facts about this case, and calling a guy with a $3mil house "people with money problems." As someone who spent half of my career as a presales engineer designing and rolling out data storage networks, I fully understand your point, and your reasoning. You want to be angry at someone instead of yourself, so you'll make up victims and double-down on your stance till it kills you.
They owe money back, because they were given an interest free loan. They got laid off, because when the market shrinks, it's not the responsibility of a company to keep paying you for doing nothing. I have mentioned "these facts" fifty times already in this thread. But I would not expect you to change the way you look at them no matter what anyone says. It's similar to a guy I saw while working at a hospital a while ago, the summer when everyone I know got a vaccine. He was cough-screaming that covid was a big pharma hoax as they put him on the ventilator. He never woke up, but he did die thinking he was right. Reality didn't care what he thought, reality just is.
Yes, the interest-free loan with possibility of it becoming a grant is a bonus. At a job, a bonus is an extra benefit outside of base compensationn.
But that's not what you're arguing here, is it. Since there is no actual argument you can make here, you're making up added details that make you right, then attacking those made up details.
"but somewhere deep in the fine print" - there is Zero chance the bonus recipient had no idea that this loan is only forgiven is he keeps his employment. Zero. Companies give bonuses - more commonly as stock options - that can only be cashed in if you keep your employment for a certain length. Literally every C-corp does this. In fact, the bonus described here is more common than the "here's some cash, even if you're no longer working here tomorrow."
"If the company touted "free food" - and again with the making stuff up. There was no free food. In your example, the company offered you $500 in cash to use as you please, said you'll have to pay it back if you get fired within two years, and you said thanks and took the money. Then you got fired.
Douchebaggery is making stuff up about a scenario because you have no actual argument in the scenario presented. Watch a lot of newsmax by chance?
I don’t call it douchebaggery for anything that I’ve made up. They fired people right before the forgiveness date so the bonuses wouldn’t become effectively cash bonuses. That’s douchebaggery.
This isn't a $100k loan. The employee received a fraction of the $100k (due to taxes and tax withholding), but now may need to borrow money to cover their debt.
> To save money, Walsh wants to downsize. But he has been unable to sell his 7,700-square-foot house at the $3 million he is seeking.
> “We got the rug-pull of our lives, everyone did,” he said. “Rates are not supposed to be here.”
Huh? Why are the rates 'not supposed to be here'?
And also how or why is it a rug pull to hike interest rates to tame high inflation which affects low income folks the most? The consequences of runaway or hyperinflation will be far worse.
The higher rates are due to inflation expectations. Perhaps he was foolish enough to believe Treasury Secretary Yellen who assured that inflation would be “a transitory thing, not something that's associated with a buildup in wage—in wage pressures”?
In 2020 the Fed explicitly adopted a long-run avg. inflation target of 2%. Since we’ve moved so much productive capacity offshore, the old policy lets rival nations fuck with the dollar by shutting down factories and pipelines temporarily. Abandoned that policy is the rug pull.
I've heard of needing to stay for X years after Company pays for tuition.
I've heard of signing bonuses of $1-10k that only pay out if you stay for X years (dumb name, that's a "thank you for staying for 2 years" bonus, not a signing bonus).
I've heard of vesting schedules where the company helps you fund a 401k and annually increases the percentage you could take if you quit up to 100% after X years.
I have never heard of something as predatory as immediately approving your employees for a $100k loan at 0% APR that's only forgiven if they stay for 2 years.
I don't care how pretty the bow on the box is, it's still a box of poop.
If it were "if you decide to stay for 2 years" bonus, I don't think there'd be an issue
The issue is that it's really a "if we decide to keep you longer than 2 years" bonus, improperly named a "signing bonus."
It is paired with a real "bonus" or perk of sorts, but it's just a weird 2 year 0% APR loan that must be repaid in full at the end of the term, which works out to maybe $10k in risk free returns.
I've been apart of many a board room where clawing back bonuses has been brought up. Ever single instance, it's almost instantly shrugged off as a "PR nightmare". Seems like we got it right.
66 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 122 ms ] thread> Signing bonuses aren’t unusual in the mortgage industry, and they were particularly big during the recent boom. Neither are attempts to get them back, especially in the current bust.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_faith_(law)
Any signing bonus stipulates a period of time (often a year) you need to stay in order to keep the bonus.
Firing without cause before that period ends...not sure what the common practice is for that.
tbh it's probably quite rare, as you would only offer hiring bonuses in a tight labor market.
I suspect if you just said "nope" a bunch, they would come back to you and accept a compromise. They're going to get pennies on the dollar if they send the account to collections.
If this were me I'd probably start by saying "I'll give you back 33% if you sign a document disclaiming your interest in the remaining 67%" and kick off the negotiation there. IANAL of course, lol, and this kind of thing I'd want to run by a professional. This is just my gut instinct.
Collections fees are not that much FWIW. Especially since the debtor often pays fees.
Also, don't forget about your credit score.
When the market took a downward turn, the companies likely tried to introduce new 'cause' to fire them and attempt to legally claw back the bonus. Like this example of setting unrealistic performance goals given the market turn:
"Siegel, the former banker at a Guaranteed Rate affiliate in New Jersey, said when business slowed down last year, the company introduced monthly performance goals. They hadn’t been part of the signing bonus agreement.
He emailed his boss multiple times offering to leave the company and return a prorated share of the signing bonus, but it went nowhere, he said.
In October 2022, and then again in December, he received letters saying he wasn’t meeting the performance goals, he said, and that he was at risk of termination and having his bonus clawed back."
Unfortunately US worker protections are not great (IMO), so the employees in question will likely have to face a legal battle if they want to argue for keeping their bonuses. Mortgage companies also likely have a strong in house legal team, meaning their ex-employees will have to pay out of pocket for a good lawyer if they want a chance of winning in court.
Most places in the US are also "at will employment", meaning you can be terminated at any time without warning for any reason, and that makes it much harder to argue that you were unfairly terminated. There might be a chance you could argue that the company is obviously facing financial issues and so you were let go as more of a "layoff" type termination (and then you have some more rights to things like unemployment) but it's likely to be an expensive argument that some may not be able to fund, and even then you're definitely not guaranteed to win.
--
I personally was laid off a few months into a position where I had been given a signing bonus, but they were laying off the entire office and did not ask me to repay it. It was a pretty small bonus and they probably forgot about it anyways, but given that it was a large layoff they probably would have a hard time arguing that I was fired with cause. They also tried to then rehire me at a lower rate in a different region, but I didn't want to relocate so I declined.
Any contract for $100k is probably worth a few hours of a lawyer's time to review it.
You're probably right that most people would be optimists and accept the agreement. At least they couldn't say they didn't understand the risks.
not showing up on time enough, or being kinda crappy at your job generally would not qualify
see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19870415
Not an attorney, but depending on state and other situations, I’d expect some folks to shed this claim in bankruptcy if necessary (if the amount owed is hundreds of thousands of dollars, they can’t get relief, the mortgage industry is dead for another 2-3 years based on the Fed effective rate, etc) or otherwise leverage state statute. Florida has very strong protections against creditors, for example.
Reading the article they seem like used car salesman. I love the guy who admits the business is "feast or famine" but now laments he's "been unable to sell his 7,700-square-foot house at the $3 million he is seeking".
Every sign-on bonus I've gotten only makes me pay it back if I choose to leave before a certain time. Fired for cause? I keep it.
Sounds like these employees didn't read their contracts. I love the guy who is choosing to leave early and is mad they won't pro-rate it.
These are the same snakes that would sell their own mother a mortgage she couldn't afford.
Well…I guess coming right out and not hiding your douchebaggery is ever so slightly preferable than offering the sterilized and fake words of regret via press release that you might see from many other companies.
So again just to be clear what you're saying. A loan with interest is ok. A loan with zero interest where you might get a chance to have it forgiven if you are a top performer at work, is "incredibly predatory and terrifying?"
And by the way, for a guy selling his house for $3mil, having to give back $100k that he knew he might have to give back, after using it free for almost 2 years, is not "a massive loan." My wife and I spent $80k on refugee aid last year, and I don't have a $3mil house. It was an unplanned expense, but it changed our other spending or lifestyle in zero ways. It just means last year we didn't save as much for retirement as the year before.
People should be held accountable for their own stupidity, and it's not like the company did anything deceptive AFAIU. If an adult doesn't understand what a loan is then that's on them (or their education, but that doesn't absolve their responsibility).
If the company touted "free food", but somewhere deep in the fine print it said that the company has the right to retroactively charge you $500 per meal if they decide they don't like you two years down the road, that would also be douchebaggery.
Just because something is legal doesn't make it not-douchebaggery.
so any bonus that is not just cash in your pocket is not a bonus? what is the correct word for a really good freebie that a company gives you? you know, a great minimum reward, a possible much bigger reward if you are one of the top performers, so you have an incentive to perform.
Let's say you pay $5 for a lottery ticket, where you're guaranteed to win $5 but can win $100. Is it predatory and unethical to you if you don't win the $100?
We call this a bonus.
A loan, which must be paid back might be called a squirrel on mars but here on earth we don’t call it a bonus.
A “benefit”? Maybe. Health insurance may retroactively renege on their promised coverage. 401ks are frequently embezzled. When these things happen it’s usually a pitiful, or illegal act worthy of derision. Like a predatory loan.
You know what, I don’t think this is a benefit either. Let’s just call it a squirrel.
yes, and by we all you are including people who don't deal with sales bonuses, presales bonuses, or sign-on bonuses. the takeaway here is if you don't understand something, don't start talking like an expert and correcting people about it.
what do you call the most common type of sign-on bonus - stock options that you lose if you don't work there for a couple of years? is that a "benefit?"
Benefits come with the job. A one-time benefit based on some criteria is called a bonus. Yes, a chunk of cash is also a bonus. A Cash bonus. This was not a cash bonus. It was the most common type of sign-on bonus that exists - one that is only fully realized if you stay with the company for a certain time. And you're free to not take it. But you can't take it and complain it's somehow a scam.
repeat after me - loans at 0% that you may even get forgiven after 2 years, are not predatory. they are The best loan you are able to ever get - the opposite of predatory. and someone giving you the ability to take this great type of loan, for the event of signing on, is giving you a bonus. Put that 100k in a 5% HSA for 2 years, give it back, and you just got 10k in cash. Predatory loan. You people will twist and turn reality just to double-down.
They give people a massive chunk of money as a """bonus""" and then shitcan them right before the 2 year mark so they can get the money back, call it a loan in the paperwork to make this arrangement legally enforceable. You think this is an honest, perfectly reasonable arrangement? Do you hear yourself?
They call it a loan, because it is a loan. Just like PPP was called a loan, and forgiven on a predefined condition.
I hear myself fine. I hear myself observing some people who I believe have not had a professional job in sales or presales, never had a sign-on bonus, never received stock options, and are calling a great thing bad, and being outraged on behalf of some rich asshole playing victim. I hear myself laughing at some people who have no clue about the subject matter, but like to create fake anger and outrage online, so they could feel superior by painting "evil" all around them to avoid dealing with the actual reason for their own failings - themselves.
Does that answer your question?
This bonus you're talking about, it isn't free money like you frame it, you're framing it simultaneously as "free money" and a loan so as to avoid addressing what is actually going on here. It's a way to get people with money problems stuck in servitude and willing to eat any shit you want them to just to avoid the debt they'll incur if they don't. And that's predatory, but that's not the end of it. They then get laid off and still owe the money back. I'm not surprised you're avoiding mentioning these facts about the case we are discussing.
>people with money problems
yes yes, a bunch of you "not salesmen by trade" engineers here, who came over from the teenage antiwork subreddit, are on this thread making up fake facts about this case, and calling a guy with a $3mil house "people with money problems." As someone who spent half of my career as a presales engineer designing and rolling out data storage networks, I fully understand your point, and your reasoning. You want to be angry at someone instead of yourself, so you'll make up victims and double-down on your stance till it kills you.
They owe money back, because they were given an interest free loan. They got laid off, because when the market shrinks, it's not the responsibility of a company to keep paying you for doing nothing. I have mentioned "these facts" fifty times already in this thread. But I would not expect you to change the way you look at them no matter what anyone says. It's similar to a guy I saw while working at a hospital a while ago, the summer when everyone I know got a vaccine. He was cough-screaming that covid was a big pharma hoax as they put him on the ventilator. He never woke up, but he did die thinking he was right. Reality didn't care what he thought, reality just is.
But that's not what you're arguing here, is it. Since there is no actual argument you can make here, you're making up added details that make you right, then attacking those made up details.
"but somewhere deep in the fine print" - there is Zero chance the bonus recipient had no idea that this loan is only forgiven is he keeps his employment. Zero. Companies give bonuses - more commonly as stock options - that can only be cashed in if you keep your employment for a certain length. Literally every C-corp does this. In fact, the bonus described here is more common than the "here's some cash, even if you're no longer working here tomorrow."
"If the company touted "free food" - and again with the making stuff up. There was no free food. In your example, the company offered you $500 in cash to use as you please, said you'll have to pay it back if you get fired within two years, and you said thanks and took the money. Then you got fired.
Douchebaggery is making stuff up about a scenario because you have no actual argument in the scenario presented. Watch a lot of newsmax by chance?
https://www.crowe.com/insights/crowe-financial-services-tax-...
If it was me, I'd have to pay an accountant to help me too.
> “We got the rug-pull of our lives, everyone did,” he said. “Rates are not supposed to be here.”
Huh? Why are the rates 'not supposed to be here'?
And also how or why is it a rug pull to hike interest rates to tame high inflation which affects low income folks the most? The consequences of runaway or hyperinflation will be far worse.
I have never heard of something as predatory as immediately approving your employees for a $100k loan at 0% APR that's only forgiven if they stay for 2 years.
I don't care how pretty the bow on the box is, it's still a box of poop.
If it were "if you decide to stay for 2 years" bonus, I don't think there'd be an issue
The issue is that it's really a "if we decide to keep you longer than 2 years" bonus, improperly named a "signing bonus."
It is paired with a real "bonus" or perk of sorts, but it's just a weird 2 year 0% APR loan that must be repaid in full at the end of the term, which works out to maybe $10k in risk free returns.