Wolfowitz to Board, I made a mess, you clean it up, I go on vacation.

Comments from various readers re-pasted below following site transition. Alex

Wolfowitz to Board, I made a mess, you clean it up, I go on vacation. Here’s a letter that Wolfowitz sent to the Board today. Some choice bits: “I may make a farewell trip to Africa at the request of a number of leaders…”; “I do not plan to continue routine briefings on policy issues”; “the most important assignment I feel I have ahead is to take the time to meet individually with staff who have been so loyal and effective in fulfilling the Bank’s mission” (meaning time to pay out the bribes I’ve promised, I suppose). If he’s not going to do anything, why does he have to stick around? Must be that $400k 2 year bonus.

Dear Members of the Board:

Regardless of the emotions that most of us are probably feeling right now, I believe we must move forward in a spirit of forgiveness, both for the sake of each of us as individuals and for the sake of Bank Group’s mission to serve the world’s poor. I assure you that it is in this spirit that I will proceed over the next six weeks. To that end after speaking with the Dean and Co-Dean, let me suggest the following transition plans which I hope you will find reassuring.

I have looked at the May-June Board schedule as well as international commitments and requests for meetings with the Office of the President. While the Board schedule is very busy, I am confident that the sessions can be handled well by the Managing Director (MD) with the relevant portfolio. If the Board so desires, I am happy to assist on the few pending strategic issues, such as the 2008 budget where I was deeply involved in decision making and might be helpful, but otherwise I would plan to leave the day-to-day work of Board meeting to the MDs.

Similarly, I believe they can manage most requests for outside meetings. There may be exceptions where relations with the Bank could be strengthened by my agreeing to meet with someone with whom I have had previous interactions, but will take the advice of the relevant vice president in doing so. As you might imagine, I have been flooded with phone calls from the exceptional people I have met over the past two years who have offered their support, many of whom want to see me before my departure. I intend to accommodate those requests but obviously, should policy matters arise, I would defer to the appropriate MD or vice president. I may make a farewell trip to Africa at the request of a number of leaders, but would consult with you prior to making any plans.

I do not plan to continue routine briefings on policy issues and would expect that the appropriate MD will make any required policy decisions in consultation with their senior management colleagues and the Board. I believe all country manager and director personnel have been completed for the Spring, so I have no expectation of being involved in these or any other personnel actions.

While there is administrative paper work and archiving to carry out, the most important assignment I feel I have ahead is to take the time to meet individually with staff who have been so loyal and effective in fulfilling the Bank’s mission. I owe them my personal thanks and appreciation.

If there are issues which arise which are not envisioned in this letter, I would consult the Board through the Dean and Co-Dean to seek guidance.

After reaching a difficult consensus yesterday, it is vitally important that we work together to restore calm and confidence and encourage the staff to focus on their important work. Please let me know if I can be of further help in fulfilling these goals or clarifying my thoughts on my transitions plans.

Sincerely,
Paul Wolfowitz

Sameer Dossani ~ May 18, 2007

Comments

Is anyone questioning the appropriateness of him earning 6 weeks of income, not to mention another year’s worth of compensation, just to allow him to say good-bye to supporters and take an all-expense paid trip to Africa? This is not a corporation; it is an international tax-payer funded organization whose objective is to help the poor! Having him take some of that money for doing what he proposes in his letter seems immoral to me.

Someone in DC ~ May 18, 2007, 09:04 PM

OK, come on, everyone… what is the latest gossip on Robin Cleveland, Suzanne Folsom, and the entire gang?

Are they jumping overboard? Or are they seeking lateral transfers to IMF? Or what?

How is Robin liking her new office? Maybe she can move into PW’s suite while it is vacant the next 2 months?

clean ~ May 18, 2007, 09:05 PM

What he’s saying is he plans to let all the others do the work while he goes on vacation. The passage that made me barf though was the one that started with “As you may imagine…” and then goes on to say ‘I’ve been flooded with fan mail from my many many many friends and admirers, who because of their admiration of me, are all extraordinary people and I must pay them tribute….’ or whatever it was.

Yeah, we can imagine all right. We can just imagine.

none ~ May 18, 2007, 09:12 PM

Beware. Remember his statement:” in testimony by one key witness Mr Wolfowitz declares: “If they fuck with me or Shaha, I have enough on them to fuck them too.” ”
His war against WB is not over.

jane one smith ~ May 18, 2007, 09:28 PM

Where is the evidence for this “$400k 2 year bonus” deal? His contract explicitly stipulates that he will be paid a full-year’s pay in severance irregardless of the circumstances of his departure (even if had completed his term). I don’t see anything in there about him pulling in $400k for working one month. Please either explain or stop spreading baseless rumors. Thanks.

Gay ~ May 18, 2007, 09:41 PM

The rumor didn’t start with me. http://www.worldbankpresident.org/archives/000736.php

And the fact that he used a lot of political capital to stay on an extra six weeks essentially doing nothing certainly lends some credibility to that rumor. Unless you have another theory?

Sameer Dossani ~ May 18, 2007, 09:59 PM

His letter is a superb sample of a scoundrel’s mind pinnacle. Only a crook like him can think that staying for another six weeks at the Bank doing nothing is justifiable. This is another example of his way of reasoning that has characterized him throughout the Bank Ad Hoc Group investigation.

Only a mind of this caliber can find “normal” to stay in an institution and continue receiving his salary (around $34,000 monthly) with the clear objective to be able to get the premium of almost $500,000 for two years of service (that will be accomplished in June). Something his “poor oriented mind” managed to include in his contract that he negotiated at entrance.

Incognito ~ May 18, 2007, 10:01 PM

Never have we come across such a shameless character! In comparison, Nixon was an angel!

Washingtonian ~ May 18, 2007, 10:42 PM

Wolfowitz’s letter is just a set of vague statements to do nothing for six weeks, from a man who has lied so many times he does not know the truth. while it can be interpreted narrowly if he gets out of line, he has not promised to let INT loose on his enemies. If he’s waiting for calls from African leaders he’s made promises to, that’s not a good idea. And it’s about time he meets with staff, not that any of us will wish to meet with him. He should go, and take his cronies with him.

shocked ~ May 18, 2007, 10:50 PM

Please encourage the media to contact me on the harassment victim in Brazil was told not to complain because it would not be worth her while; and on the harassment victim who filed a case in 2005 against a senior World Bank official – he lost his job last year but the Bank has done nothing about her professional and financial damage. I know about these and several other outrageous cases.

Emily ~ May 18, 2007, 11:39 PM

Regarding this $400/500k bonus figure that is being bandied about . . . I asked Sameer for a source and he directs me to a post on this site from Alex Wilks, who notes a “400,000 dollar bonus that Wolfowitz is said to be entitled to if he stays in office for two years from his start date”. Alex also notes that “no paper” is reporting this, a fact which apparently seems to imply some sort of media conspiracy. I have an alternate hypothesis: maybe it just doesn’t exist? I see nothing in Wolfie’s contract that stipulates he would get such a bonus if he stays on for an extra six weeks or whatever and the only evidence that is being offered to attest to such is Alex’ claim that someone/something has said so. Come on, people . . . I’m trying not to be too critical because I like this site a lot, but when you bandy around unsubstantiated rumours that originate from this very site, this very site does not look very credible. Oh, and why else would he stay around until June 30? Well, if you actually read Wolfowitz’ contract, you will note that it says that, in the event of his resignation, he is required to give reasonable notice before his departure. He was thus contractually obligated not to leave immediately, something I don’t doubt he pointed out to the Board. Moreover, June 30 is the final day of the fiscal year around which the Bank is slavishly organised. No doubt it makes the accounting a lot neater to have Wolfowitz end his appointment at the end of the fiscal year. At the end of the day, conspiracies are fun, but the truth is often a lot more boring.

Gary ~ May 19, 2007, 12:34 AM

Salary / compensation figures: I too am struck by the fact that other posts on this blog are often referred to as evidence.

George ~ May 19, 2007, 01:11 AM

Paul: welcome; come stay with us permanently!

Nigerian scam artists’ guild ~ May 19, 2007, 02:09 AM

And no one has spoken the S word yet?

Is the idea of a bank staff STRIKE so far-fetched? Maybe Bush & friends, The Alien, and the Board are now all rolling in cushy mutual appreciation, satisfaction and relief, but the latter bodys’ disregard of the dignity, work and concerns of staff comes as a great shock. The staff should organize some meaningful gesture of protest. Perhaps a walkout of a day or two, until at least the demands layed out in the latest Staff Association Update are taken into consideration by the Board.

The EDs’ statement of May 17 is shameless, despicable. What were their respective Ministries thinking, for crying out loud? Thus, the whole world is still hostage to a feeble-minded Texan whose impact on our times has been nothing if catastrophic. Lately, even some of his sycophantic retainers have declared his nakedness in alta voce. So why? Please, someone tell me why.

And Ms. Riza gets to keep it all…or maybe the Board will also see fit to extend apologies, along with money to compensate for the moral prejudice and psychological suffering inflicted to her ? Sure, dear Board, go ahead, why not. Why don’t you just take whatever amount this lady (of “considerable” qualities and qualifications) thinks suitable, out of payroll while you’re at it?

The whole story is obscene. Good luck with your work, bank staff!

Chucha ~ May 19, 2007, 02:37 AM

One particular successor rumour is back

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article1811001.ece

P O’Neill ~ May 19, 2007, 02:38 AM

Does anybody know where to find the full statement that Alison Cave gave the BBC or other media yesterday? Thanks!

anonimette ~ May 19, 2007, 02:50 AM

I had a look on Ladbrokes page and couldn’t find anything about these “odds” supposedly being offered on the WBP selection. Can anyone else find it?

Gary ~ May 19, 2007, 03:28 AM

hi, gary and george. (i thought you might be tommie and glenn.) i think the term “bonus” is wrong, too. i thnk that by reaching the 180 day rule, PW is entitled to a termination grant. (i’d have to check his salary info, which i’m not allowed to do.) usually, under the “old plan” that would be 2.5 weeks for each year of service, up to 48 weeks. that would be net of US taxes, lump sum at end of service regardless of circumstances except in terminations due to ethic violations. perhaps the president of the bank is entitled to a 48 week termination grant at end of service? wouldn’t be unreasonable. there are no stock options or other types of bonus tools available to the bank. on the otherhand, the end of fiscal year might mean that he has a fully vested pay out of his pension amount if he is covered as a net plan participant. (just went to the retirement seminar.)

wbstaffer ~ May 19, 2007, 04:14 AM

On the subject of looking ahead, but not forgetting that the past/current remains to be cleaned up, would love to hear in this string from WB staff in-the-know about what is being done to run those Cronies out. In aggregate, their salaries and benefits are a large multiple of Chutzpahwitz’s, and their poison will continue to cripple the WB in its recovery from that putznik who hired and enabled them.

So, what’s the latest?

The Mahdi ~ May 19, 2007, 04:17 AM

to anonimette: look in the BBC web site, check for quotes and you will find it there

Incognito ~ May 19, 2007, 04:25 AM

The $400 K severance pay is not a rumor or baseless gossip. PW is entitled to the amount only if he completes two years of service. If he leaves prior to June ’07, legally he is not entitled to the amount. As there has never been a precedent to this $400 K pay-out for someone who has served only two years (no Bank President who is in good health has had to leave the Bank in two years), it becomes fodder for more rumors. As an insider, I know that “golden” handshakes are the norm rather than the exception at the Bank for those who are fired or asked to leave or whatever. It used to be upto a total of 22 months of salary (one month for each year of service) plus six months administrative leave. Later it was reduced to 18 months of pay (all paid in lump sum), and I understand it is being reduced further under new benefit “reforms.” It all depends on who your HR person is. If you are on “his” good side, he could give you the maximum. If you are honest and outspoken or question any of the managers, you are likely to get nothing as severance! In addition, there is also something known as the “separation grant” (for staff who joined the Bank prior to 1998) which I am not sure PW is entitled to.

WB insider ~ May 19, 2007, 04:29 AM

Paul hopes that the board will find his words, “REASSURING”? If this isn’t total gall, I don’t know what is. Amazing. But then when you look at it, he’s saying he hopes the board finds it reassuring that he’s already quit his job–except for his vacation and paycheck.

This has been a great story, and I’ve very much enjoyed following it. I didn’t have any good idea of what the World Bank was until very recently–until April. I knew Paul was prez, but that’s about it–no idea about what it actually did.

And there are other things about the World Bank than Paul that seem to need to be straightened out–only Paul was most definitely not the guy to do that.

But when you look at the number of employees compared with the amount of money that is doled out–something is very, very disproportionate. And this is a crackpot, dyed in the wool lib talking.

I have very, very much disliked Paul Wolfowitz for years, and believe he is an evil man. I know the employees at the World Bank don’t like Paul any more than I do. But if I were made president of the World Bank, the employees of the World Bank might end up thinking Paul is a real nice guy compared to me.

CowDad ~ May 19, 2007, 04:47 AM

From the author of the Wolfowitz Prayer and other things:

Many years ago, defending a Doctoral Dissertation (on economic development), I was asked, “What advice you would give the World Bank?”

My 2 word answer that almost guaranteed me a future on the comedian circuit:

“Fly Coach”

None ~ May 19, 2007, 05:27 AM

O………..kay……….

After reading PW’s statement, I’m left with conflicting emotions. Do I laugh? Cry? Vomit? Shower?

Joe Mama ~ May 19, 2007, 07:36 AM

WB Insider: Thanks for your response, but you’re wrong. Wolfowitz’ contract is on the WB website in plain English for all to see. Section 8 reads as follows:

“At the end of your term, or if your service is terminated by the Executive Directors, or if you resign or die in Bank service after having served for at least one year under this agreement, the Bank will pay a termination allowance.”

Not that it says one year, not two. I don’t understand why, if you are indeed an “insider”, you couldn’t have just looked it up. So can we put this rumor to bed now please?

Gary ~ May 19, 2007, 07:41 AM

Joe:

After reading PW’s statement, if you are observant, it is advised that you wash 7 times with sand.

Likewise, the same should be done with everything PW touched, his office, etc. before it is used.

Got to keep kosher or halal.

None ~ May 19, 2007, 11:51 AM

WB staffer:

What you are saying is for general staff. Remember the President of the Bank did negotiate his contract that may not reflect the same T&Cs like the commoners.
The same applies in the private sector: the CEO and other “C”levels don’t have the same compensation or benefits like the ordinary employees.

yul ~ May 19, 2007, 02:04 PM

Just to clarify, I was referring to the comments thread in the earlier post, where this debate had already happened and there was mention of a “side letter” (not part of the contract on the web) that would guarantee him an _extra_ year’s salary if he completes two years. Until this final negotiation, I put little faith in that rumor. But the fact that he stays on until the end of June (the reasons about sufficient notice are completely unconvincing when he’s in effect doing nothing) and the fact that sources inside the institution will not categorically deny this rumor make me very suspicious.

On the other hand, he could be staying on to ensure that there’s no gap in WB presidents and to give the White House a month to find his successor. Equally scandalous, if that’s the case.

Sameer Dossani ~ May 19, 2007, 07:08 PM

I think he’s staying on so he can get free plane travel and do his last schmoozing with all the african and other leaders he intends to milk for benefit later. Gotta seal those alliances now, before it’s too late.

Whatever the reason, the only sure thing is that it’s self-centered. There’ll be something in it for him or he won’t do it.

anon ~ May 19, 2007, 07:11 PM

Howdy Cow Dad!

You think that now you know so much more about the bank (after exposure to a month’s worth of media coverage), or that whatever you know has that much value? Mmmm, maybe not.

OK, Mr. lesson-giver, how many staff does the USAID have? What are their median salaries? How many of the world’s poor has that Agency made rich, how many countries has it brought prosperity and eternal bliss to? At least the WB hasn’t served as a cover for the preparation, support or remote-control of bloody coups and horrific repressions as has the USAID in Chile, for starters…

If it were just a metter of ego, you might have what it takes to be a bank President. But I bet your knowledge and competence bagage would bring you no further than the organization’s Mail Room, if that far.

Enough with the arrogant, cowboyish, John Bolton-esque “I-know-all-and-I’m-gonna-bring-order-and-kick–some-spoiled-foreign-butts attitude, will you? It’s become booooooring, not to mention passé.

Pffff ~ May 19, 2007, 08:56 PM

Anon

may be he can do the following:
Although he indicated at the start that he planned to limit his travel, Wolfowitz spent much time on the road. One senior bank official expressed horror at Wolfowitz’s suggestion, when logistics for an Africa trip seemed troublesome, that he would simply hop on a Defense Department plane.
“Several of us said: ‘Uh, we don’t think so. Actually, this is an international institution,’ ” the official recalled. “It was a kind of odd blindness that took people aback.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/17/AR2007051702376_pf.html

Yul ~ May 19, 2007, 10:53 PM

PW has approximately 40 days to do as quoted “If they f*@# with me or Shaha, I have enough on them to f*@# them too.” He still has Folsom – INT to hunt down all who got him in the hot water, Cleveland, Daboub, and Palacio who are “still ” loyal to PW and who could still do damage to the WB. STOP him and his puppets while there is still time. Let us pray for the WB staff who believe in the institution’s purpose and pray for the staff who suffered due to PW and his puppets wrong doings.

jane one smith ~ May 20, 2007, 02:13 AM

Pfff: The one great benefit of this PW dust-up has been to bring to light the self-inflated vanity of WB bureaucrats.

Pfff Puff ~ May 22, 2007, 03:24 PM

One thought on “Wolfowitz to Board, I made a mess, you clean it up, I go on vacation.”

Alex Wilks on May 30, 2007 at 11:13 said:

Comments from various readers re-pasted below following site transition. Alex

Wolfowitz to Board, I made a mess, you clean it up, I go on vacation. Here’s a letter that Wolfowitz sent to the Board today. Some choice bits: “I may make a farewell trip to Africa at the request of a number of leaders…”; “I do not plan to continue routine briefings on policy issues”; “the most important assignment I feel I have ahead is to take the time to meet individually with staff who have been so loyal and effective in fulfilling the Bank’s mission” (meaning time to pay out the bribes I’ve promised, I suppose). If he’s not going to do anything, why does he have to stick around? Must be that $400k 2 year bonus.

Dear Members of the Board:

Regardless of the emotions that most of us are probably feeling right now, I believe we must move forward in a spirit of forgiveness, both for the sake of each of us as individuals and for the sake of Bank Group’s mission to serve the world’s poor. I assure you that it is in this spirit that I will proceed over the next six weeks. To that end after speaking with the Dean and Co-Dean, let me suggest the following transition plans which I hope you will find reassuring.

I have looked at the May-June Board schedule as well as international commitments and requests for meetings with the Office of the President. While the Board schedule is very busy, I am confident that the sessions can be handled well by the Managing Director (MD) with the relevant portfolio. If the Board so desires, I am happy to assist on the few pending strategic issues, such as the 2008 budget where I was deeply involved in decision making and might be helpful, but otherwise I would plan to leave the day-to-day work of Board meeting to the MDs.

Similarly, I believe they can manage most requests for outside meetings. There may be exceptions where relations with the Bank could be strengthened by my agreeing to meet with someone with whom I have had previous interactions, but will take the advice of the relevant vice president in doing so. As you might imagine, I have been flooded with phone calls from the exceptional people I have met over the past two years who have offered their support, many of whom want to see me before my departure. I intend to accommodate those requests but obviously, should policy matters arise, I would defer to the appropriate MD or vice president. I may make a farewell trip to Africa at the request of a number of leaders, but would consult with you prior to making any plans.

I do not plan to continue routine briefings on policy issues and would expect that the appropriate MD will make any required policy decisions in consultation with their senior management colleagues and the Board. I believe all country manager and director personnel have been completed for the Spring, so I have no expectation of being involved in these or any other personnel actions.

While there is administrative paper work and archiving to carry out, the most important assignment I feel I have ahead is to take the time to meet individually with staff who have been so loyal and effective in fulfilling the Bank’s mission. I owe them my personal thanks and appreciation.

If there are issues which arise which are not envisioned in this letter, I would consult the Board through the Dean and Co-Dean to seek guidance.

After reaching a difficult consensus yesterday, it is vitally important that we work together to restore calm and confidence and encourage the staff to focus on their important work. Please let me know if I can be of further help in fulfilling these goals or clarifying my thoughts on my transitions plans.

Sincerely,
Paul Wolfowitz

Sameer Dossani ~ May 18, 2007

Comments

Is anyone questioning the appropriateness of him earning 6 weeks of income, not to mention another year’s worth of compensation, just to allow him to say good-bye to supporters and take an all-expense paid trip to Africa? This is not a corporation; it is an international tax-payer funded organization whose objective is to help the poor! Having him take some of that money for doing what he proposes in his letter seems immoral to me.

Someone in DC ~ May 18, 2007, 09:04 PM

OK, come on, everyone… what is the latest gossip on Robin Cleveland, Suzanne Folsom, and the entire gang?

Are they jumping overboard? Or are they seeking lateral transfers to IMF? Or what?

How is Robin liking her new office? Maybe she can move into PW’s suite while it is vacant the next 2 months?

clean ~ May 18, 2007, 09:05 PM

What he’s saying is he plans to let all the others do the work while he goes on vacation. The passage that made me barf though was the one that started with “As you may imagine…” and then goes on to say ‘I’ve been flooded with fan mail from my many many many friends and admirers, who because of their admiration of me, are all extraordinary people and I must pay them tribute….’ or whatever it was.

Yeah, we can imagine all right. We can just imagine.

none ~ May 18, 2007, 09:12 PM

Beware. Remember his statement:” in testimony by one key witness Mr Wolfowitz declares: “If they fuck with me or Shaha, I have enough on them to fuck them too.” ”
His war against WB is not over.

jane one smith ~ May 18, 2007, 09:28 PM

Where is the evidence for this “$400k 2 year bonus” deal? His contract explicitly stipulates that he will be paid a full-year’s pay in severance irregardless of the circumstances of his departure (even if had completed his term). I don’t see anything in there about him pulling in $400k for working one month. Please either explain or stop spreading baseless rumors. Thanks.

Gay ~ May 18, 2007, 09:41 PM

The rumor didn’t start with me. http://www.worldbankpresident.org/archives/000736.php

And the fact that he used a lot of political capital to stay on an extra six weeks essentially doing nothing certainly lends some credibility to that rumor. Unless you have another theory?

Sameer Dossani ~ May 18, 2007, 09:59 PM

His letter is a superb sample of a scoundrel’s mind pinnacle. Only a crook like him can think that staying for another six weeks at the Bank doing nothing is justifiable. This is another example of his way of reasoning that has characterized him throughout the Bank Ad Hoc Group investigation.

Only a mind of this caliber can find “normal” to stay in an institution and continue receiving his salary (around $34,000 monthly) with the clear objective to be able to get the premium of almost $500,000 for two years of service (that will be accomplished in June). Something his “poor oriented mind” managed to include in his contract that he negotiated at entrance.

Incognito ~ May 18, 2007, 10:01 PM

Never have we come across such a shameless character! In comparison, Nixon was an angel!

Washingtonian ~ May 18, 2007, 10:42 PM

Wolfowitz’s letter is just a set of vague statements to do nothing for six weeks, from a man who has lied so many times he does not know the truth. while it can be interpreted narrowly if he gets out of line, he has not promised to let INT loose on his enemies. If he’s waiting for calls from African leaders he’s made promises to, that’s not a good idea. And it’s about time he meets with staff, not that any of us will wish to meet with him. He should go, and take his cronies with him.

shocked ~ May 18, 2007, 10:50 PM

Please encourage the media to contact me on the harassment victim in Brazil was told not to complain because it would not be worth her while; and on the harassment victim who filed a case in 2005 against a senior World Bank official – he lost his job last year but the Bank has done nothing about her professional and financial damage. I know about these and several other outrageous cases.

Emily ~ May 18, 2007, 11:39 PM

Regarding this $400/500k bonus figure that is being bandied about . . . I asked Sameer for a source and he directs me to a post on this site from Alex Wilks, who notes a “400,000 dollar bonus that Wolfowitz is said to be entitled to if he stays in office for two years from his start date”. Alex also notes that “no paper” is reporting this, a fact which apparently seems to imply some sort of media conspiracy. I have an alternate hypothesis: maybe it just doesn’t exist? I see nothing in Wolfie’s contract that stipulates he would get such a bonus if he stays on for an extra six weeks or whatever and the only evidence that is being offered to attest to such is Alex’ claim that someone/something has said so. Come on, people . . . I’m trying not to be too critical because I like this site a lot, but when you bandy around unsubstantiated rumours that originate from this very site, this very site does not look very credible. Oh, and why else would he stay around until June 30? Well, if you actually read Wolfowitz’ contract, you will note that it says that, in the event of his resignation, he is required to give reasonable notice before his departure. He was thus contractually obligated not to leave immediately, something I don’t doubt he pointed out to the Board. Moreover, June 30 is the final day of the fiscal year around which the Bank is slavishly organised. No doubt it makes the accounting a lot neater to have Wolfowitz end his appointment at the end of the fiscal year. At the end of the day, conspiracies are fun, but the truth is often a lot more boring.

Gary ~ May 19, 2007, 12:34 AM

Salary / compensation figures: I too am struck by the fact that other posts on this blog are often referred to as evidence.

George ~ May 19, 2007, 01:11 AM

Paul: welcome; come stay with us permanently!

Nigerian scam artists’ guild ~ May 19, 2007, 02:09 AM

And no one has spoken the S word yet?

Is the idea of a bank staff STRIKE so far-fetched? Maybe Bush & friends, The Alien, and the Board are now all rolling in cushy mutual appreciation, satisfaction and relief, but the latter bodys’ disregard of the dignity, work and concerns of staff comes as a great shock. The staff should organize some meaningful gesture of protest. Perhaps a walkout of a day or two, until at least the demands layed out in the latest Staff Association Update are taken into consideration by the Board.

The EDs’ statement of May 17 is shameless, despicable. What were their respective Ministries thinking, for crying out loud? Thus, the whole world is still hostage to a feeble-minded Texan whose impact on our times has been nothing if catastrophic. Lately, even some of his sycophantic retainers have declared his nakedness in alta voce. So why? Please, someone tell me why.

And Ms. Riza gets to keep it all…or maybe the Board will also see fit to extend apologies, along with money to compensate for the moral prejudice and psychological suffering inflicted to her ? Sure, dear Board, go ahead, why not. Why don’t you just take whatever amount this lady (of “considerable” qualities and qualifications) thinks suitable, out of payroll while you’re at it?

The whole story is obscene. Good luck with your work, bank staff!

Chucha ~ May 19, 2007, 02:37 AM

One particular successor rumour is back

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article1811001.ece

P O’Neill ~ May 19, 2007, 02:38 AM

Does anybody know where to find the full statement that Alison Cave gave the BBC or other media yesterday? Thanks!

anonimette ~ May 19, 2007, 02:50 AM

I had a look on Ladbrokes page and couldn’t find anything about these “odds” supposedly being offered on the WBP selection. Can anyone else find it?

Gary ~ May 19, 2007, 03:28 AM

hi, gary and george. (i thought you might be tommie and glenn.) i think the term “bonus” is wrong, too. i thnk that by reaching the 180 day rule, PW is entitled to a termination grant. (i’d have to check his salary info, which i’m not allowed to do.) usually, under the “old plan” that would be 2.5 weeks for each year of service, up to 48 weeks. that would be net of US taxes, lump sum at end of service regardless of circumstances except in terminations due to ethic violations. perhaps the president of the bank is entitled to a 48 week termination grant at end of service? wouldn’t be unreasonable. there are no stock options or other types of bonus tools available to the bank. on the otherhand, the end of fiscal year might mean that he has a fully vested pay out of his pension amount if he is covered as a net plan participant. (just went to the retirement seminar.)

wbstaffer ~ May 19, 2007, 04:14 AM

On the subject of looking ahead, but not forgetting that the past/current remains to be cleaned up, would love to hear in this string from WB staff in-the-know about what is being done to run those Cronies out. In aggregate, their salaries and benefits are a large multiple of Chutzpahwitz’s, and their poison will continue to cripple the WB in its recovery from that putznik who hired and enabled them.

So, what’s the latest?

The Mahdi ~ May 19, 2007, 04:17 AM

to anonimette: look in the BBC web site, check for quotes and you will find it there

Incognito ~ May 19, 2007, 04:25 AM

The $400 K severance pay is not a rumor or baseless gossip. PW is entitled to the amount only if he completes two years of service. If he leaves prior to June ’07, legally he is not entitled to the amount. As there has never been a precedent to this $400 K pay-out for someone who has served only two years (no Bank President who is in good health has had to leave the Bank in two years), it becomes fodder for more rumors. As an insider, I know that “golden” handshakes are the norm rather than the exception at the Bank for those who are fired or asked to leave or whatever. It used to be upto a total of 22 months of salary (one month for each year of service) plus six months administrative leave. Later it was reduced to 18 months of pay (all paid in lump sum), and I understand it is being reduced further under new benefit “reforms.” It all depends on who your HR person is. If you are on “his” good side, he could give you the maximum. If you are honest and outspoken or question any of the managers, you are likely to get nothing as severance! In addition, there is also something known as the “separation grant” (for staff who joined the Bank prior to 1998) which I am not sure PW is entitled to.

WB insider ~ May 19, 2007, 04:29 AM

Paul hopes that the board will find his words, “REASSURING”? If this isn’t total gall, I don’t know what is. Amazing. But then when you look at it, he’s saying he hopes the board finds it reassuring that he’s already quit his job–except for his vacation and paycheck.

This has been a great story, and I’ve very much enjoyed following it. I didn’t have any good idea of what the World Bank was until very recently–until April. I knew Paul was prez, but that’s about it–no idea about what it actually did.

And there are other things about the World Bank than Paul that seem to need to be straightened out–only Paul was most definitely not the guy to do that.

But when you look at the number of employees compared with the amount of money that is doled out–something is very, very disproportionate. And this is a crackpot, dyed in the wool lib talking.

I have very, very much disliked Paul Wolfowitz for years, and believe he is an evil man. I know the employees at the World Bank don’t like Paul any more than I do. But if I were made president of the World Bank, the employees of the World Bank might end up thinking Paul is a real nice guy compared to me.

CowDad ~ May 19, 2007, 04:47 AM

From the author of the Wolfowitz Prayer and other things:

Many years ago, defending a Doctoral Dissertation (on economic development), I was asked, “What advice you would give the World Bank?”

My 2 word answer that almost guaranteed me a future on the comedian circuit:

“Fly Coach”

None ~ May 19, 2007, 05:27 AM

O………..kay……….

After reading PW’s statement, I’m left with conflicting emotions. Do I laugh? Cry? Vomit? Shower?

Joe Mama ~ May 19, 2007, 07:36 AM

WB Insider: Thanks for your response, but you’re wrong. Wolfowitz’ contract is on the WB website in plain English for all to see. Section 8 reads as follows:

“At the end of your term, or if your service is terminated by the Executive Directors, or if you resign or die in Bank service after having served for at least one year under this agreement, the Bank will pay a termination allowance.”

Not that it says one year, not two. I don’t understand why, if you are indeed an “insider”, you couldn’t have just looked it up. So can we put this rumor to bed now please?

Gary ~ May 19, 2007, 07:41 AM

Joe:

After reading PW’s statement, if you are observant, it is advised that you wash 7 times with sand.

Likewise, the same should be done with everything PW touched, his office, etc. before it is used.

Got to keep kosher or halal.

None ~ May 19, 2007, 11:51 AM

WB staffer:

What you are saying is for general staff. Remember the President of the Bank did negotiate his contract that may not reflect the same T&Cs like the commoners.
The same applies in the private sector: the CEO and other “C”levels don’t have the same compensation or benefits like the ordinary employees.

yul ~ May 19, 2007, 02:04 PM

Just to clarify, I was referring to the comments thread in the earlier post, where this debate had already happened and there was mention of a “side letter” (not part of the contract on the web) that would guarantee him an _extra_ year’s salary if he completes two years. Until this final negotiation, I put little faith in that rumor. But the fact that he stays on until the end of June (the reasons about sufficient notice are completely unconvincing when he’s in effect doing nothing) and the fact that sources inside the institution will not categorically deny this rumor make me very suspicious.

On the other hand, he could be staying on to ensure that there’s no gap in WB presidents and to give the White House a month to find his successor. Equally scandalous, if that’s the case.

Sameer Dossani ~ May 19, 2007, 07:08 PM

I think he’s staying on so he can get free plane travel and do his last schmoozing with all the african and other leaders he intends to milk for benefit later. Gotta seal those alliances now, before it’s too late.

Whatever the reason, the only sure thing is that it’s self-centered. There’ll be something in it for him or he won’t do it.

anon ~ May 19, 2007, 07:11 PM

Howdy Cow Dad!

You think that now you know so much more about the bank (after exposure to a month’s worth of media coverage), or that whatever you know has that much value? Mmmm, maybe not.

OK, Mr. lesson-giver, how many staff does the USAID have? What are their median salaries? How many of the world’s poor has that Agency made rich, how many countries has it brought prosperity and eternal bliss to? At least the WB hasn’t served as a cover for the preparation, support or remote-control of bloody coups and horrific repressions as has the USAID in Chile, for starters…

If it were just a metter of ego, you might have what it takes to be a bank President. But I bet your knowledge and competence bagage would bring you no further than the organization’s Mail Room, if that far.

Enough with the arrogant, cowboyish, John Bolton-esque “I-know-all-and-I’m-gonna-bring-order-and-kick–some-spoiled-foreign-butts attitude, will you? It’s become booooooring, not to mention passé.

Pffff ~ May 19, 2007, 08:56 PM

Anon

may be he can do the following:
Although he indicated at the start that he planned to limit his travel, Wolfowitz spent much time on the road. One senior bank official expressed horror at Wolfowitz’s suggestion, when logistics for an Africa trip seemed troublesome, that he would simply hop on a Defense Department plane.
“Several of us said: ‘Uh, we don’t think so. Actually, this is an international institution,’ ” the official recalled. “It was a kind of odd blindness that took people aback.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/17/AR2007051702376_pf.html

Yul ~ May 19, 2007, 10:53 PM

PW has approximately 40 days to do as quoted “If they f*@# with me or Shaha, I have enough on them to f*@# them too.” He still has Folsom – INT to hunt down all who got him in the hot water, Cleveland, Daboub, and Palacio who are “still ” loyal to PW and who could still do damage to the WB. STOP him and his puppets while there is still time. Let us pray for the WB staff who believe in the institution’s purpose and pray for the staff who suffered due to PW and his puppets wrong doings.

jane one smith ~ May 20, 2007, 02:13 AM

Pfff: The one great benefit of this PW dust-up has been to bring to light the self-inflated vanity of WB bureaucrats.

Pfff Puff ~ May 22, 2007, 03:24 PM

Comments are closed.