Fat bonus wrong ?

[technodup]

By all means, let the private sector pretty much self-regulate, there - but this isn't the private sector - these banks are largely nationalised. The public do have a right to say, make comment - and en masse, be listened to.

Afer all, the public has had to pay a very big price.

Five of us on here can't agree, what chance the public at large? I just don't see how it's workable unless there's some committee and yet more bureaucracy under or alongside the board.

It really is a no win situation though, even if we buy the bank for £xbn and sell it for double later I can't see Osborne, Brown or Hester getting cheers on Question Time. No matter the result it's too tainted in the public's mind. Even if that eventual result is much better than the bank failing, being bought for peanuts and savers getting 3p in the £.

IMO, though, the worse thing the (bailed-out) banking and financial sector could do, at the moment, is treat the taxpaying public with contempt and arrogance, ignoring how they managed to survive at a considerable cost to public finances.

Oh I agree totally. If he were to turn down the bonus as a gesture of goodwill I don't think anyone would be complaining. However I dare say it's quite difficult to do- knock back a million quid. Especially when he would say (rightly) he wasn't at fault in the first place.

Now if Goodwin was to hand back his knighthood... I won't hold my breath though. I used to work with his brother and it's fair to say being a cnut runs in the family.

 

[greenstiles]

Technodup i disagree with respect of course, but it looks like the little man IE THE SHAREHOLDERS will be having a say and soon if recent government reports are to be believed. I hope it happens sooner than later, because this in a runaway train that needs to be stopped.

 

[technodup]

So the incentive isn't to build the bank int a secure national asset, it's not to totally bollox it up. I wonder why all bonus schemes don't work like that? :roll:

No, he's a top banker. His package at Northern Rock was £7m+

You're thinking defeatist about not fncking up, he'll be trying to raise the share price so the bonus is £2m or £3m or £4m rather than £1m. And so he should, that way we all benefit. Which is probably why he's doing it and we're here talking about it.

 

[technodup]

Technodup i disagree with respect of course, but it looks like the little man IE THE SHAREHOLDERS will be having a say and soon if recent government reports are to be believed. I hope it happens sooner than later, because this in a runaway train that needs to be stopped.

Except we won't. If anything it'll be some fudge which does little and represents us even less.

 

[greenstiles]

I can see your previous point if it was private, but it's state. But your fighting your case well, and yes it could just be a fudge smoke screen that we get at the end of the day and no real say will be granted.

 

[dyna-ti]

Still grates that the industry that put the country into this depression is handing out such huge bonuses.
Job cuts,public spending slashed to the bone, not to mention the personal tragedy these cuts are likely to cause

But hey,heres £963,000 so fcuk you all

the little man IE THE SHAREHOLDERS

The little man isnt little
Sure there are some actual people that own 0.0002% and can go to a meeting in a hotel where they'll get mediocre wine.The majorits of shares held are held by larger companies
Mainly in the insurance industry :shock:

 

[greenstiles]

Yes i'm forgetting,it's greedy bankers and stupid lending etc that's caused all this crap that's going on...............offf with his head :twisted:

 

[JeRkY]

I know the RBS fella wasn't there when they got greedy and screwed-up their bank, but he hasn't fixed it yet, and the bank hasn't yet paid back the taxpayer the money it has taken.

And he hasn't got his bonus yet. As shares it's essentially deferred until he does succeed or it'll not be worth much.

Ummm, well, if he accepts the bonus, he will have been paid, even if he can't turn the shares into cash for another few years. So (assuming he accepts the shares) he gets his bonus of about a million unless he totally screws up! So the incentive isn't to build the bank int a secure national asset, it's not to totally bollox it up. I wonder why all bonus schemes don't work like that? :roll:

if the shares go down his bonus goes down. That is exactly the incentive.

I don't know the full details of the guys deal but when I have had share options in the past they have been linked to both a time delay before they could be exercised and a clause that I still had to hold employment with the firm at the time of them being able to be exercised.

Now *if* this is fairly standard practice then should he Fk it up and leave prior to the point that the share options mature, he walks away with no bonus. It wouldn't surprise me if this were the case but it doesn't suite the media shitstorm approach to actually mention it.

 

[dbmtb]

£963k is a drop in the ocean in the world of banking, equate that to being the equivalent of a month or two's pay for a premiership footballer and it really isn't that out of the ordinary in 'big business'

So that makes it OK then does it?

Just asking....

 

[dbmtb]

usually a greedy monkey that doesn't give a fig about their workers ...

You're paying them for sacrificing any conscience they might once have had.

That seems to be how it usually works.