Should bankers receive bonuses?

Thrugelmir

Yes, in full, otherwise all the talent will scarper to better paid jobs elsewhere.

Simple answer is yes. The employees that have worked to achieve their targets should be paid their contractual entitlements.

In the longer term the "high flyers" should be rewarded with shares that cannot be traded for a period of time.

Personally I find this whipped storm just another diversionary tactic from the Government to deflect away from other issues.

demotw

No, the !!!!!!!s messed up our economy and should count themselves glad they have a job at all.

depends, i find the rbs bonus scheme personally a joke, and i work in banking. I agree frontline staff have worked hard so probably do deserve a bonus, but how much of that 1billion will actually seen by the branches and how much by the bosses which allowed them to get into that mess.
Curious to see how the other banks will announce their bonuses, obviously i know what barclays are doing, but thats about it so far.

SGE1

What about another option, where directors don't get paid bonuses, but 'normal' staff do?

Desperate_Housewife_2-2

No, the !!!!!!!s messed up our economy and should count themselves glad they have a job at all.

how about signing up to John Prescot's petition?
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/giveupthebonus/

savemoney

No, the !!!!!!!s messed up our economy and should count themselves glad they have a job at all.

I vote no they should be thankful for a job. Part of the problem is bonuses encourage some to take risks for bigger bonuses.

Why should they get a bonus for doing a job. I never done a job neither do many other where you get a bonus, you lucky to get a Christmas bonus let alone a reward for risk taking

StevieJ

Yes, in full, otherwise all the talent will scarper to better paid jobs elsewhere.

What only about bonuses and no pay, i.e. totally variable

piggeh

No, the !!!!!!!s messed up our economy and should count themselves glad they have a job at all.

savemoney wrote: »

I vote no they should be thankful for a job. Part of the problem is bonuses encourage some to take risks for bigger bonuses

Agree with you there, the targets and bonuses in banking has led to too many people taking risks to try and outperform others.

innovate

Yes, but only paid retrospectively, once long-term gains are realised.

Generali wrote: »

Does that include the teller at your local bank branch or just the Fat Cats?

Why should a teller get a bonus at all? Tellers should all be working to certain standards and get a decent salary for what they do. But surely there is nothing a teller can substantially do to improve the overall profitability, and the worth to the customer, of the bank?

I could potentially support a bonus system where

1. the potential recipients risk a certain amount of their salary (e.g. only get a guaranteed 60% of their salary, the rest needs to be earned based on the bank's overall performance [not the performance of the individual]. For tkaing the risk on 40% of their salary, they should be entitled to rewards above 100%, but with a cap at, say, 140%)
2. overall performance should not only be assessed based on financial performance of the bank but should also include the results of regular customer satisfaction surveys. If minimum satisfaction ratings are not met, the proportion of the bonus relating to customer satisfaction should be scrapped. For banks in which taxpayers own more than 50%, the customer satisfaction survey should be carried out by an independent body, not the bank themselves.
3. any bonus awards should be made in share options rather than cash, and there should be a cap on the maximum value of the share options awarded (value on the day of award)

Such a scheme would encourage a long-term view, take into account what customers think, and ensure that no massive payouts are being made when the share prices of the banks are in the doldrums.

I do realise that some bank employees currently have contracts that entitle them to bonus payments. These contracts should urgently be reviewed and modified, at least for taxpayer-owned banks. These people would be unemployed now if it had not been for taxpayer bailout, and therefore it is totally obscene that bonus payments are being made. Especially at a time when savers get the most miserable interest rates ever.

As to whether we would lose "talent" if bonus payments were stopped now:

• looking back at who got the bonuses in the past, I don't think it would be an awfully big loss if they all exited tomorrow, The sooner they go, the better
• the UK isn't the only country where there is public outrage over the bonus payments. The US and France have already put positive actions in place to limit the bonuses, other countries are following suit. So there isn't really anywhere for the bonus rats to hide
• it isn't actually so damned difficult to learn how to become a responsible banker

innovate

Yes, but only paid retrospectively, once long-term gains are realised.

Desperate_Housewife wrote: »

how about signing up to John Prescot's petition?
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/giveupthebonus/

There's a petition on the No 10 website too
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/bank-greed/

Andy_L

innovate wrote: »

Why should a teller get a bonus at all? Tellers should all be working to certain standards and get a decent salary for what they do. But surely there is nothing a teller can substantially do to improve the overall profitability, and the worth to the customer, of the bank?

They can convince someone to come in for a "personal financial review" which lead to a sale