Approximately 30 Audi managers organized the event, and it was supposed to be paid by the company. Unfortunately for the CEO and his colleagues, the event was not seen well by the Volkswagen Group, especially when the matter of the bill appeared on the table.
According to German media, the company refused to pay for the event, and Stadler and other partygoers were asked to fit the bill. Germany’s Bild Am Sonntag reports that Rupert Stadler had to pay approximately 12,500 euros, but only his part of the bill was disclosed.
The reports say the party took place at a hotel called Rothehof, located in Wolfsburg, and that it involved two music bands. Apparently, the event was first approved as a company sanctioned the gathering, but an internal revision reclassified the function as a private party.
Most likely, the bill of the event reached a hefty sum, which might have exceeded the original budget that was approved. The situation might also be linked to the Dieselgate scandal, which has brought significant expenses for the German corporation.
Considering that Volkswagen is under scrutiny because of questionable decisions in the past, the board of executives might have decided not to finance a party while the company is going through hard times concerning its image.
If news of the event had reached the media (Captain Obvious here - it did reach the news) and the German group would have paid for the entire event, the entire corporation’s image would have been damaged.
As recent history has shown, banking executives have done such deeds, in the form of parties and vacations paid with company funds, shortly after a bankruptcy. In the case of other enterprises in the insurance field, the AIG bonus payments controversy stands out.
In 2009, AIG wanted to pay bonuses to the employees of its financial services division, and it added up to a reported $218 million. At the time, the U.S. Government managed to levy a 90% tax on bonuses awarded by businesses that received over $5 billion in Treasury aid.
Volkswagen’s leadership council probably feared that the party planned by Rupert Stadler and his colleagues would lead to outrage, and that might have led to the decision to make the employees pay.
According to German media, the company refused to pay for the event, and Stadler and other partygoers were asked to fit the bill. Germany’s Bild Am Sonntag reports that Rupert Stadler had to pay approximately 12,500 euros, but only his part of the bill was disclosed.
The reports say the party took place at a hotel called Rothehof, located in Wolfsburg, and that it involved two music bands. Apparently, the event was first approved as a company sanctioned the gathering, but an internal revision reclassified the function as a private party.
Most likely, the bill of the event reached a hefty sum, which might have exceeded the original budget that was approved. The situation might also be linked to the Dieselgate scandal, which has brought significant expenses for the German corporation.
Considering that Volkswagen is under scrutiny because of questionable decisions in the past, the board of executives might have decided not to finance a party while the company is going through hard times concerning its image.
If news of the event had reached the media (Captain Obvious here - it did reach the news) and the German group would have paid for the entire event, the entire corporation’s image would have been damaged.
As recent history has shown, banking executives have done such deeds, in the form of parties and vacations paid with company funds, shortly after a bankruptcy. In the case of other enterprises in the insurance field, the AIG bonus payments controversy stands out.
In 2009, AIG wanted to pay bonuses to the employees of its financial services division, and it added up to a reported $218 million. At the time, the U.S. Government managed to levy a 90% tax on bonuses awarded by businesses that received over $5 billion in Treasury aid.
Volkswagen’s leadership council probably feared that the party planned by Rupert Stadler and his colleagues would lead to outrage, and that might have led to the decision to make the employees pay.