Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#21
Howard - no, this is nothing to do with politics. What it is about are employments contracts, what staff and what positions they hold are entitled to the bonuses, what targets were set to spark off the bonus, individual bonus levels relative to performance targets... etc etc etc.
I would suggest that no-one reading this forum will have a fraction of the detail needed to be able to judge whether the bonuses are good or bad. I don't and it is not my business, it is what the management teams at RBS are responsible for at various levels in the company.
A pointless and silly question from Keith based on assumptions and ignorance to provoke an ignorant response.... please note, once again I use ignorance is its true sense before anyone start getting all uppity.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#22
looks like the whole countrys got in wrong then,
interesting viewpoint
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#23
When will you ever see the difference between a view and fact? I doubt that you ever will Keith.
Those who have it wrong are those who get their views from tabloid headline and have no idea about how remuneration packages get structured.
Thankfully ignorance is not allowed to determine these things as there are people who do have a grasp of such matters.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#24
as a union negotiator at the top level yep have some experience of it,
the question is;
in todays climate is it right?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#25
But Keith - what do you know about the RBS arrangements? That is the point. If you were a Union negotiator what would you be saying to people wanting to stop your staff getting the bonuses agreed and for which they worked and qualified?
Also what has the 'climate' got to do with it? Should I have not paid my administrator his bonus because times are tough? In fact I would suggest that in this current climate and for a company that is working hard to get back to profitability it is essential to get staff on-side and to reward performance based on their agreed targets.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#26
baz;
dear dear guv, it's fine your supporting such bonus's a grand view.
whether or not R.B.S. and/or Lloyds get out of this is yet to be seen.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#27
You have no answer to the points raised then Keith. Not unusual.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#28
Bankers' bonuses are only of relevance to a union negotiator if the bankers in question are union members. Otherwise he should keep his nose out and not seek to get involved in matters which are none of his business. In practice nowadays hardly any revenue-generating bank staff belong to unions, so when union leaders start pontificating about investment bankers' packages it is just political interference. Unions have many important roles but shouting about non-members' remuneration is not one of them.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#29
barryw;
reg has posted some number of posts asking for an answer so please dont attempt to discredit me.
peter;
at last the true colours starting to come through
will wait for a few posts there is a bigger picture on your ant views on trade unions
but watch this space,,,,,,,,,,
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#30
Keith since when did non-members business concern union reps?
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#31
I would not try to Keith. I have merely responded to your posts and raised some pertinent questions relative to what you have said.
By being unable to respond to the specific points and to still pursue your vendetta on something you clearly know nothing about merely means that you are discrediting yourself.
Then you try hiding behind Reg again, truly the blind leading the even blinder (is that a word? - mmm))
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#32
Very hard to argue with people who think debt, equity and revenues are all the same thing; and who seem to have difficulty getting their heads round the principle of contract law.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#33
True Peter.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#34
ha ha
must stop reading your posts peter/barryw
my sides are splitting
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#35
no barry i think you will find it is blue peter.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#36
HOWARD;
That was naughty(lol) you know peter has told us he has no links in that direction
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#37
The Blue Peter flag is flying next to the bull's red rag
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#38
howard
always thought it was ablue peter badge
you bring a new meaning to words blue peter
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#39
Keith, bankers' bonuses should be scrapped. No top salary should be bonused, only taxed.
But these tricksters give themselves bonuses that by far exceed what they pay on tax, so effectively they pay no tax at all on their top salaries, but get many-fold more on bonuses.
Keith, it is also nonsense when they suggest that, if we stop them ripping us off (by introducing a good law in Parliament), they will up and go to another country and will immediately be employed for a top salary and bonuses galore.
They are just jesting. No-one will employ them abroad. There are soooo many bankers, hundreds of thousands, in the world, and sooo many other people who have studied economics and wot not all and are just waiting to scale the ladder and become a banker.
Most bankers actually work in the Jobcentre, because there are so many who have studied economics and have worked in the finance sector, and not enough jobs to go round, so they get a job elsewhere.
Various people working for the Jobcentre have told me this.
So if one of these top bankers had his annual bonus taken away, he would NOT go to another country, but would buckle down and behave and be happy with his top salary.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#40
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
