Bank accounts where managers are paid the least bonuses?

mulledwine

Hi. As a matter of principle I want to move my Bank account to the company that is displaying most realisation that they have left the world in a terrible mess. Managers are obviously still being paid huge bonuses whether the company makes money or not. Quite simply I believe in a decent wage for a decent days work. If people are on bonuses they should have these removed when they do not perform. So simply - does anyone know which Banks are paying out least bonuses, particularly in cash. Is there a league table for this? :mad:

anselld

HSBC, First Direct and Barclays are at least not paying them with Tax Payers money.

opinions4u

So the Chief Execs of RBS and LBG both waived their bonus this year.

Barclays (probably) replaced some of its wholesale funding with loans (not capital) from the British Government yet, I believe, saw their top man collect his bonus.

HSBC were writing off / writing down $billions in the Household division long before anybody else got their hands burned, but seem to have been painted as the good guys of banking in the Credit Crunch.

Some employees of banks are paid on a sales commission structure of basic salary plus bonus. If they are successful they earn more. I see little wrong with the concept (although sometimes such incentivisiation has led to customer mis-selling, which is abhorent).

Some employees of banks earn small salaries topped up by a range of "perks" such as cheaper mortgages, shares and bonus. Many of these people have seen their net worth decimated by 90%+ falls in the value of their shares because of the failures of long-departed previous regimes at the top of their employer. Should they be penalised on principle, even though their individual performance may have been exceptional? Should the cashier who has faced customer abuse because of decisions taken by people paid 100 times more be denied a bonus when she's worked her tripe out for the last 12 months?

Most banks have seen their retail arms remain profitable. Is it wrong for staff on the retail side to receive a performance based bonus simply because a handful of corporate loans went bad, or a merger with some Dutch company that is nothing to do with the UK economic situation was allowed by a previous big cheese?

Principles are all well and good. But the true position is far from clear as to who is whiter than white.

It's not as straight forward as "all bonuses are bad and shouldn't be allowed".

If people are on bonuses they should have these removed when they do not perform. So simply - does anyone know which Banks are paying out least bonuses, particularly in cash

Paying out the least in bonuses may suggest being the least successful at turning the business round.

As for your point on paying bonus in cash .... I believe Andy Hornby took all his bonus payments at HBOS in shares. He believed in his business model and it crashed spectacularly. While I have little sympathy for the small fortune that the man has lost, it is clear that a payment of a bonus in shares does not lead to prudent lending decisions. In fact, it could be suggested that it actually encourages further risk taking.

Olipro

I realise we British have a long-standing hatred for our fellow man when it comes to perceptions on whether their income is deserved or not, but this is just utterly ridiculous, I think perhaps you should find better things to do than make impotent protests that nobody will notice or care about as a result of your percieved injustice of the level of remuneration given to individuals working in a sector I can wager you don't work in yourself. Not least because the majority of "unfairly paid" individuals tend to work in investment services rather than narrow banking.

However, to answer your question, I think the solution for you would be to forego the banks and join a Building Society since members get to decide the remunerations of the executives, however, if you need a current account then your only option is probably Nationwide... not that it's a bad thing, Nationwide are more competitive than most banks. (and if someone knows of other building societies offering current accounts, fire away)

apt

In practice it is the remuneration committee that decides executive pay in mutual societies and Nationwide is a prime example of how this has shot up over the past decade. Unless a bank does something unethical that you object to, it is best to choose the products that best suit your needs. Would you choose a doctor on the basis of how much he or she got paid?

JoseChungsDoomsday

co-op/smile did not receive any bailout money and in fact have a ethical policy meaning they can only lend money to certain companies.

noelphobic

Alliance and Leicester and Abbey (now Santander) have not been bailed out by the tax-payers either.

withnell

JoseChungsDoomsday wrote: »

co-op/smile did not receive any bailout money and in fact have a ethical policy meaning they can only lend money to certain companies.

They also pay quite low rates, even when you take the divi payment into account

scott_lithgows

noelphobic wrote: »

Alliance and Leicester and Abbey (now Santander) have not been bailed out by the tax-payers either.

There,s still time !

glider3560

Why not shop in the supermarket that pays their staff the lowest bonuses? Or go to the hospital that pays its staff the lowest bonuses?

I honestly don't get people's obsession with bank staff's bonuses?! We (the public) aren't paying the bonus, we paid for a share in these banks which I'm sure we will make profitable again one day (and therefore benefit the taxpayer).

noelphobic

scott_lithgows wrote: »

There,s still time !

I would think it was unlikely but never say never. Also Santander are Spanish which might also make it less likely.