Bankers

[scothunter 12,609]

So due to the recent chairman not accepting his bonus, It got me thinking. Now when a chairman signs a contract ie banker or guy who runs tesco he does so with the understanding that if his targets are met or goes over, he gets a bonus. Just the same as anyone who signs a contract with those clauses in it. Let's say he gets a bonus if his targets exceed a set figure.now surely he is entitled to take that bonus. I'm pretty sure if the target isn't met, he loses his job. So if a chairman makes obscene profits for a company and he gets a substantial few quid for meeting those targets then the goverment should not have a say or should he bow to public pressure. Don't see many mps or euro mps handing back thier Salaries and lets face it, what do they actually do or achieve to justify thier wages. Not a lot for what I can see. He should have kept the cash IMO

[dymented 2,220]

Not when the government own a lot of the shares

[PlasticJock 539]

So due to the recent chairman not accepting his bonus, It got me thinking. Now when a chairman signs a contract ie banker or guy who runs tesco he does so with the understanding that if his targets are met or goes over, he gets a bonus. Just the same as anyone who signs a contract with those clauses in it. Let's say he gets a bonus if his targets exceed a set figure.now surely he is entitled to take that bonus. I'm pretty sure if the target isn't met, he loses his job. So if a chairman makes obscene profits for a company and he gets a substantial few quid for meeting those targets then the goverment should not have a say or should he bow to public pressure. Don't see many mps or euro mps handing back thier Salaries and lets face it, what do they actually do or achieve to justify thier wages. Not a lot for what I can see. He should have kept the cash IMO

 

Much as I fukin hate the banks, I agree with you.

If I was him I would have taken it, it was in the contract and anyone who says they wouldn't have is either lying or a fool.

The government bailed them out, but obviously did nothing at the time to put a clause in limiting bonuses, even if only for a few years until we (taxpayers) start getting something back.

 

Also, anyone taking on that job is putting their necks on the line never mind how much they earn - if he's meeting targets and putting something back into the pot then why not?

[undisputed 1,664]

Aye makes perfect sense while everyone else has their wages frozen and people lose their jobs left right &centre,why not reward the pricks that put the country down the toilet. How is a bankers job anymore better than a nurse fireman etc...I've yet to hear of any of them picking up a bonus.

[staffs riffraff 1,068]

did the bank make a profit though? did its share price go up? this is one thing i dont agree on with you mate

[TOMO 26,745]

Aye makes perfect sense while everyone else has their wages frozen and people lose their jobs left right &centre,why not reward the pricks that put the country down the toilet. How is a bankers job anymore better than a nurse fireman etc...I've yet to hear of any of them picking up a bonus.

 

i agree, with ya mate...........even though you talk like a comunist up the revalution .... fecking bankers

[scothunter 12,609]

I'm not saying bankers are more special than anyone else, that's not my point. Plastic jock is thinking the same as me.after the collapse and the bail out,the goverment should have got in there legal team to go back over the contracts with the people who they were written for and either change the contract with the said persons agreement and if they didn't agree then terminate the contract. Yes it would mean having to compensate that person, but it would have let the public know that they were taking a stance on the issue.however I suspect it was quite the opposite of what I described, more the case of hoping no one would kick up a stink about it.also I bet it stuck in Cameron's throat having to publicly condem the bonuses to the very people whos circles he moves in. Bonuses are there as an incentive to make money for thier employers and yes at time they seem rather generous, but you got to ask yourself they must have made vast amounts of cash to recieve such hefty reward. I know it's a touchy subject and I'm not saying right in what I think, all I'm saying he entered a contract and if it were me and I suspect a lot more would take thier cash which they are legally entitled to. I would also say the recession might not have hit us all hard if those that govern us didn't waste so much of public cash on ridiculous schemes and handouts to those who really ought not to have got it,and there scamming of expenses.wasnt just banks who put us in the position we are in. Now yet again the ordinary person is paying the price this guy handing back his bonus is just a token gesture IMO

[Nik_B 3,790]

I agree

 

What most don't realise is how dependant the UK is on banking. Yes they're greedy swines but if it wasn't for the financial sector we'd not be able to afford the luxuries like the NHS etc

[Richie10 345]

Problems were nothing to do with labour spending all the money then, paying out and creating our massive deficit. We would have been in a better position if we wasn't in such debt. The NHS etc are paid for by the money the country makes, you have to ask yourself, what industries make money for the country?

[scothunter 12,609]

Problems were nothing to do with labour spending all the money then, paying out and creating our massive deficit. We would have been in a better position if we wasn't in such debt. The NHS etc are paid for by the money the country makes, you have to ask yourself, what industries make money for the country?

yup labour squandered cash as has every goverment through out the world. I'm not a labour man btw look at the cost of the Olympics must be depressing for folk who are struggling and losing benefits or disability cash cause we are in dire straits, yet we throw money at a load of games. And let's be honest it's a London thing. I would have called them up and said were skint it's cancelled.

[ginga john 268]

The fella who now runs RBS was brought in to sort out the complete bollocks that Fred the shred left for the government

He is a supposed good guy and was given a contract based on keeping the bank going as opposed to falling off the perch

BUT to get him to do the job they (Gordon and the rest of muppets) gave him a "traditional contract" that included bonus payments in the form of shares

So as part of his remuneration package Mr Stephen Hester is due shares to value of around a million pounds

What a pay day we all say but he does a job that not a single man amongst us could do and in the grand schemes of major corporate banking he is paid a less than average amount, the overal issue is that the whole of big business and banking has had it so good for so long thats its now seen as normal to take extaordinary amounts in bonus payments, local authorities do the same and so does the NHS and Education department

It was all gilded by the last Labour government and the trough was dived into by all and sundry and lets be fair we would do the same

The strength of the argument is purely based on the rest of us poor to average earners who dream of winning the Lotto to ever get near that sort of money

and dont understand how someone can be worth that sort of cash / share package

Well RBS is still going, the unwanted bits are being sold / closed, the bank as whole is being "rationalised" which is business speak for getting rid of as many people as possible whilst still keeping the doors open

Stephen Hester is probably the only man for the job and was only man with the balls to take on what could have been a career ending job, the fellas a very wealthy man and really didnt need the job, he has been quoted as stating that he felt a responsibility for what had happened and took the job as a chance to put things right

I think that we should have more people like him who are willing to put their arse on the line and do some good ( and he has stated this morning that he will forgo the shares)

If the people who still have jobs at RBS are working instead of claming job seekers allowance then the fella deserves a pat on the back, in the long term it may prove a shrewd investment as the 45 Billion pounds of tax payers money that was used to keep the bank going was in the form of a shareholder loan then we are due a return on our money

[poacher3161 1,766]

FFS this bonus offer was obscene its not like the fekers are scrimping and scrapeing by on minimun wage is it.

[FightTheBan 1,147]

If he can afford to turn down a million quid just because he would look bad for accepting it.

 

1. It is obscene.

2. It shows how much he actually makes.

3. He felt he didnt deserve it.

4. He must have felt a certain amount of guilt or shame.

 

Feck him.

 

FTB

[FightTheBan 1,147]

If he can afford to turn down a million quid just because he would look bad for accepting it.

 

1. It is obscene.

2. It shows how much he actually makes.

3. He felt he didnt deserve it.

4. He must have felt a certain amount of guilt or shame.

 

Feck him.

 

Although I would rather he took his bonus which he is entitled to than hear about all the MP's bleeding the system dry for as much as they can possible get away with. Absolute parasites.

 

FTB

[Malt 379]

I'm not against the idea of bonuses in principle, but is a bonus worth nearly 100% of anyone's salary really justified, especially if your starting wage is just over a million quid per annum?

 

..plus the bank in question is mostly in public ownership, that almost makes the person in question a public servant in my eyes..