• Sharebar


The good news– as James Gorman promised, you get to keep your jobs! The bad news– you’re quite possibly getting nada at bonus time. Nada not as in “shitty compared to Goldman,” nada as in zilch, zero dollars.

While Morgan Stanley is sticking to Gorman’s promise not to make any redundancies, it appears the axe may be hovering not above jobs but bonuses, specifically those of new recruits who have failed to deliver.
If you’re wondering if Morgan Stanley is trying to send a message by not paying you, or if you’re just being paranoid, the answer is yes, they’re sending a message and hoping you’ll take the hint.

“There’s a lot of disappointment at Morgan Stanley with some of the hires that were made,” alleged the headhunter. “Some people are going to get zero bonuses in the hope that they clear out and make way for upgrading in 2011.” (Fact: Zero bonuses are often nicknamed ‘doughnuts”).

Morgan Stanley’s still underweight in a lot of areas,” said another fixed income headhunter. “But there will be clear signs this year to the people there who are not up to par. You’re going to see a lot of zeros.”

Comments (9)

  • Frieds's picture

    It sucks to be them, but you know what, no bonus is better than no job.

    I'd rather be happy I have a job despite poor performance and no bonus than I would out on my ass with bonus in hand. Bonuses are incentives to perform, not a guarented payout. Meet your goals and get paid for doing what you said you would instead of getting paid and not delivering on what you set out to do.

  • Entendu's picture

    It's my understanding that this isn't exactly a new practice, at MS or other banks. Although I think typically it's a somewhat subtle message that you should probably just quit, so maybe there's a change in the underlying message.