Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
if they dont get it one way
they do a pr exercise
and get it another way
well spotted alexander
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
....................Hester...............£ 35,500,000...................and counting.
...........the £ 1,000,000 is just loose change...............next year................£ 3,300,000...........
and his long term incentive plan is worth.................£ 27,000,000........
..............paramedics,fireman....many others..............wages frozen............
.............we`er all in this together,says PM,Really,Mr Cameron?
...................Is this the way to run a Dance Hall?
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the press seem mainly united in their condemnation and opinion polls show that people at all income levels are very concerned at the apparent "them and us situation".
most also felt that a million quid a year was enough to get by on without any extras.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
That's what I've been pointing out, them others have private assets such as £35.5 million, and still want to grab every year bonuses and shares worth millions.
No top salary worth hundreds of thousands a year could have accumulated into a £35.5 million sum, it's mainly through helping themselves with the extras.
Every year many billions of pounds disappear from UK share-holding companies in the form of bonuses into the pockets of these anti-social individuals who help themselves.
Surely this is theft in big scale.
As far as I'm concerned they must pay it back, and this means confiscating it off them.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
alexander
I do realise the need to reward those that do well.
but as howard says the wages they get without the bonus's is quite big enough
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
That's what almost all of us have been saying, Keith.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Victory!
Public uproar has prevailed! Mr. Hester has decided to waive the £1 million bonus, and not to accept the £3.6 million shares either.
Mr. Miliband of Labour had promised to use Parliament to block the bonus, which goes to show that Labour is no longer that what T. Blair had turned it into, namely a super-capitalist party.
The tide is turning, the fight must go on, we cannot stop here.
Sky News has announced that, according to public surveys, the vast majority of Brits say that the FTSE 100 directors should not earn more than £1 million a year, bonuses and pension contributions included. Only 1% of people believe that the present average income of 4 million pounds a year that FTSE bosses earn is justified.
Public forums and online news sites are important for expressing public opinion, views and comments are read, what we write is made known up above, and they are taking head of what is being said and written.
I say these shameless chief executives should pay back all the past bonuses they have taken.
The drums must continue to rattle. We want justice and honesty!
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
Ahhh, the politics of envy eh?
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Absolutely right Philip. Also the lowest common denominator, of short term blinkered thinking.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
not the politics of envy at all, the british principle of fair play.
a tiny minority are going against the will of the vast majority.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
But 'dictatorship by the majority' is not always right Howard. In fact if majority will was regarded as that important we would still have smacking in schools and capital punishment, two things I wholeheartedly support. This is a case where cheap simplistic populism is simply wrong and counter productive.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
The worst of it is that a conservative government, a conservative government (thanks Neil) is playing into this game. Focus group politics at it's worst. Populism pure and simple and a major distraction to other more important issues.
Cameron hoped he might be seen as some sort of neo Thatcher figure standing up for high minded principles and setting the agenda that others would follow.
However, the reverse is true and he is following sheepishly in the footsteps of space cadet Miliband.
It's playing out like a daily mirror campaign which, ironically, happens to be officially recognised as the worst newspaper outlet in the Northern hemisphere. Worse even than the Express which used to be a great newspaper many years ago.
It has to be said that people forget that it was a labour government, a labour government (thanks again Neil) who nationalised RBS and set the salary and bonus structure in the first place. Now they're whining about it all hoping (and succeeding) that people forget that fact.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Philip - no it isn't a Conservative government, it is a coalition...
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
I agree Barry but instead of letting Nick Clegg perform predictably like a circus seal which everyone expects it's the Conservative front bench shouting as loud if not louder. Hague, for example, in the vanguard on today's radio round heralding his belief that something will be done.
Even Guido seems to be giving up on Cameron.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
don't see it as party political philip, all sides are aware of the public furore over the bonus and speaking accordingly.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,888
I am sure that at some time these ridiculous bonuses will be knocked on the head. Why on earth is someone getting a million pounds plus just for doing the job they are actually paid for, it is not as if their pay packet is small in the first place. If they absolutely must be patted on the head give them a maximum of £100,000 which is still more than most people earn in a year.
I am not envious of them before that old remark is bandied about. I just tend to think that if that amount of money is going spare why is it not used to boost the housing market for example which in turn benefits so many other businesses.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
The public have been proved to be very fickle, Howard. Frankly I'm not surprised by the uproar considering that the reality tv season is over and there is is a gulf between now and the next X-factor.
Give it a while and this outburst will die down and people get down to the serious business of voting for their favourite "singer" or drunken, bellowing has-been.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Jan - the simple fact is that those who are in a significant influencing function regarding how a business performs a remuneration link to that performance or the meeting of certain corporate targets and objectives make simple sense.
If the market for a particular job requires a salary of, say £2m, then it would be sensible for at least half of that to depend on that person doing their job well. It is even better if, as in Heston's case, that part of the remuneration is linked to shares in the business because that gives added incentive to make that business profitable as soon as possible and if he fails to get RBS ready for re-privatisation and obtain a return for shareholders (including the taxpayer) in a reasonable time then he personally will be affected. Like I said previously, its a win-win for him and shareholders. Sadly that is not to be the case and there is a risk now that shareholders might lose out.
In addition may I add, this row has shown up the risk premium that can be justifiably be included in remuneration packages for such a politically sensitive job. Imagine this scenario - Hester decides to quit, after all he can most likely afford to retire or take another high paying position elsewhere and what will RBS be left with? Going to the market to look for a new Chief Exec and they will find that they have to pay out an awful lot more dosh, as a risk premium, to get someone with the abilities needed. Who on earth in their right minds would take on such a job after the slagging off Heston got? The cost will be a lot more than that paltry sub £1m bonus - yes paltry, £1m believe it or not is actually not a lot of dosh for someone in that position.
I made the point earlier that for certain roles there is a limited pool of people with the requisite experience and skills and who are able and willing to take on such roles and that influences the remuneration.
Performance related remuneration is important and this is true for people at many levels and all sizes of business, even for me well over 60% of what I earn is directly related to how well investments perform.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Barry and Philip, it's clear that all parties are aware of the need of change, that we must be in this society together, and currently an evolution is taking place in Parliament spurred on by the crowds.
Ya-boo politics about "Labour did this", the "Libs said that", the "Tories didn't say..." is of no significance now.
As I see it, Labour, led by Ed Miliband, is spurring the Coalition on to greater efforts. About time Labour woke up from lethargy.
However, the RBS case, which is 89% public owned, should not be too technical and restricted, as the tide of renovation must reach all UK banks and share-holding companies, whose shares, money and infrastructure are owned by the share-holders, not the chief executives.
Hopefully we are heading into a British era of democratic and social renovation, where Parliament does the right thing, cheered on by the throngs.
Paul Watkins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 9 Nov 2011
- Posts: 2,226
As I see it Alexander, common sense prevailed & no govt. action was required.
That is the best solution.
Don't interfere.
Knee jerk politics is nearly always of short term benefit to achieve a headline.
Not a way to run a country.
Watty