MSE News: Bank charges fighting on: a new legal argument

pingchris

natweststaffmember wrote: »

You aren't looking at the positives that the bank charges campaign has had. Lower charges is one, higher media coverage of the issue and even a test case and the story continues.

yep your right of course,i should look more at the positives and there are many,sometimes though it seems an uphill battle against a world dominant banking force,if i live to 70 and still have no charges refunded,im still fighting them,by the way i think its funny that the rbs board are spitting there dummies out over bonuses,now they know what its like to be told "go away your not getting any money"

natweststaffmember

pingchris wrote: »

yep your right of course,i should look more at the positives and there are many,sometimes though it seems an uphill battle against a world dominant banking force,if i live to 70 and still have no charges refunded,im still fighting them,by the way i think its funny that the rbs board are spitting there dummies out over bonuses,now they know what its like to be told "go away your not getting any money"

And as I have said elsewhere, I agree with the RBS Board in what they have said since if the HMT want a return for their investment, having no real incentives doesn't help performance in my honest opinion. However, if HMT want their money back over a longer period of time then so be it on their heads.

pingchris

natweststaffmember wrote: »

And as I have said elsewhere, I agree with the RBS Board in what they have said since if the HMT want a return for their investment, having no real incentives doesn't help performance in my honest opinion. However, if HMT want their money back over a longer period of time then so be it on their heads.

performance related pay i have no problem with.

Chrysalis

natweststaffmember wrote: »

And as I have said elsewhere, I agree with the RBS Board in what they have said since if the HMT want a return for their investment, having no real incentives doesn't help performance in my honest opinion. However, if HMT want their money back over a longer period of time then so be it on their heads.

Its another scaremonger situation, the RBS board appear to be saying if we dont pay these bonuses then all our talented staff will leave and work for a bank that will pay the bonuses.

Of course lets think about the flaws.

1 - these staff are so talented that the RBS bank would be insolvent by now if it was not for the taxpayer bailout, in other words their great talent sent RBS on the way to been broke.
2 - the profit this year was on the back of abnormal conditions, government brought bonds etc. Under normal conditions this bank is still in a lot of trouble.
3 - there is every chance these people if leaving the bank calling their bluff will not find employment elsewhere, they are very hyped up in themselves thinking they all that but maybe they not.
4 - who is to say replacement employees still cant do the job as well, there is millions unemployed. There is bodies to replace them.

natweststaffmember

Chrysalis wrote: »

Its another scaremonger situation, the RBS board appear to be saying if we dont pay these bonuses then all our talented staff will leave and work for a bank that will pay the bonuses.

Of course lets think about the flaws.

1 - these staff are so talented that the RBS bank would be insolvent by now if it was not for the taxpayer bailout, in other words their great talent sent RBS on the way to been broke.
Based on decisions taken by the old board ie ABN AMRO(approved by shareholders as well). Steven Hester has got rid of old driectors.
2 - the profit this year was on the back of abnormal conditions, government brought bonds etc. Under normal conditions this bank is still in a lot of trouble.
Not all areas of RBS Group are making losses and I don't agree with bonuses for losses.
3 - there is every chance these people if leaving the bank calling their bluff will not find employment elsewhere, they are very hyped up in themselves thinking they all that but maybe they not.
These are directors saying they will quit so yes they will find work elsewhere but if there is no bonus incentive to attract staff, then why work with RBS Group when HSBC, Barclays etc,etc, will pay that? None whatsoever.
4 - who is to say replacement employees still cant do the job as well, there is millions unemployed. There is bodies to replace them.

There are bodies but how long do you want US(that's me and you) to have our money used for them rather than them making profits and therefore allowing us to sell our shares and claw back some of the money we have paid out?
I am not a fan of bonuses per se, but to be honest, no bonuses leaves no incentive to work for that company.

peter100_2

all I can say is tough. luck nobody has to go in the red without permission,you ask for an overdraft,they say yes or no and give you an amount ,you read the agreement and if you go over that amount you pay a fine,simples.
why the hell should the majority who are carefull pay for the ones who are not.:rolleyes:
you say you pay £600 a year so we can have ours free,no you dont you pay, becouse you cant manage your money,and think if I want it I must have it,:mad: :rolleyes:

Centium5000

natweststaffmember wrote: »

I am not a fan of bonuses per se, but to be honest, no bonuses leaves no incentive to work for that company.

I agree, and many bonuses will be paid to ordinary joe workers who will rely on those funds coming through.

Regardless of my legal and moral view of the bank's behaviour, people doing their best under a contract of employment should get what they were promised.

In addition to the incentive and contractual arguments for the bonuses, there's also reward. Reward for loyalty, having stayed with their employer through some pretty tough times, having to work harder because of it and having less job security.

Might not be a popular view Natty, but a fair one I think.

salar15

I agree, Centium. Like it or not, the finance industry relies on bonuses to recruit the best employees, and like it or not, the City of London is heavily dependent on that very same finance industry.

Without bonuses, those employees will go elsewhere - most of them are from other European countries in any case, so they are naturally inclined towards mobility. Calling their bluff is unlikely to help the UK economy in either the short or long-term. It is important that the London markets remain competitive on a global scale, for the sake of every UK citizen, banker or not.

To add to that, there is the argument from the bankers' point of view that they worked and trained (incredibly hard) with the promise of rewards in the form of bonus payouts. To go against that now would be undermining contractual expectations. Government intervention to limit the amount paid out by businesses to its employees sounds remarkably like a certain Russian doctrine.

pingchris

this is my argument as i see it,they screwed all of us,how dare they not give back to the people that gave them breath again,the people saved them from drowning but they just walk away and say screw you mr and mrs mug. :mad:

this is a very serious situation so they best handle it right or 8 million + people will be turning ther backs on government and banks.

great for the economy aye mr banker, mr brown, mr cameron, mr mandelsson etc etc etc etc.

the government gave 250 billion pounds ish to the banks and not one penny has fallen to our table,they cant even give back the money they stole from claimants,thats what we are dealing with,bankers who just dont give a !!!!.

natweststaffmember

pingchris wrote: »

this is my argument as i see it,they screwed all of us,how dare they not give back to the people that gave them breath again,the people saved them from drowning but they just walk away and say screw you mr and mrs mug. :mad:
Bonuses are performance related, ie if you do not hit targets then you get no bonus. Why doesn't the government put pressure on RBS Group to raise the level in which a maximum bonus can be achieved rather than saying that they do not believe people are entitled to one(for which they also pay tax on)?
this is a very serious situation so they best handle it right or 8 million + people will be turning ther backs on government and banks.
They won't/
great for the economy aye mr banker, mr brown, mr cameron, mr mandelsson etc etc etc etc.

the government gave 250 billion pounds ish to the banks and not one penny has fallen to our table,they cant even give back the money they stole from claimants,thats what we are dealing with,bankers who just dont give a !!!!.

The banks' contribution to the Exchequer prior to the crash was over 42 billion pounds in tax. The better the banks do the more money the Exchequer gets in cash Furthermore, where did the £250 billion pounds figure come from?