Barclays Boss gets £ 6,500,000.00 Bonus

Hereward

The_White_Horse wrote: »

yes, do the job that needs doing. stop being a jobsworth. when i worked for a firm, i had to work all the hours i needed to to get the job done. i couldn't say, "its home time"

if you arrest someone at the end of your shift - tough.

So you're willing to accept that anybody in any job should be forced to complete any number of additional shifts with out any additional remuneration?

I agree that you people should put in the hours required to deliver their required outputs (safer streets, x number of widgets, etc); however, if should be reasonable to achieve those outputs within the time contracted for the job. If you employer then wants a little bit more, they should be willing to pay for it.

lemonjelly

Posted on another thread, but relevant here:

lemonjelly wrote: »

Peston made an interesting comment on the beeb last night. If you invested £100 in Barclays shares 5 years ago, your £100 would now be worth £53. Compare that to the FTSE average, where £100 would now be worth £126.

And of course, the headline is that the Barclays geezer got a bonus of £6.5 million. That omits all the other add ons & cash ins he has had this year totalling above £20million.

So, given the value of the company as listed has almost halved in 5 years, how does this geezer deserve such a rich paypacket, & how is the reduction in value by 50% a resounding success?

shortchanged_2

Maybe Diamond could set up his own little bank on the side.

Lending some of his vast wealth to small businesses.

RJP33

smartn wrote: »

I'm all for giving the bonuses if they can prove they outperformed the market, and as long as they are prepared to accept the pain if they make losses. Trouble is they dont have the pain when they make losses. Because of banking failures plenty of hard working people have lost jobs outside of the banking industry, it isn't fair but I can't see much changing.

To be fair we should probably consider the fact that the government was running at a deficit before the banking crisis hit and had thus put nothing away from the boom, hence the drop in receipts hits harder than it otherwise would have.

At least partial blame would be with the government from 2005-08 for running a deficit by letting spending spiral out of control and the not having the balls to cut back from 2008-2010 for political reasons.

michaels

So Diamond has been in charge for 5 years? - I thought he only just took over?

Plus why is Peston comparing with the FTSE - surely Barclays performance compared to other banks is more relevant?

lemonjelly wrote: »

Posted on another thread, but relevant here:

bendix

michaels wrote: »

So Diamond has been in charge for 5 years? - I thought he only just took over?

Plus why is Peston comparing with the FTSE - surely Barclays performance compared to other banks is more relevant?

Of course it is. If Peston is the sage of economic reporting, I'm a banana. His opinions (if he even believes them, which I doubt) are primetime fodder for the unthinking masses.

Thrugelmir

michaels wrote: »

So Diamond has been in charge for 5 years? - I thought he only just took over?

Plus why is Peston comparing with the FTSE - surely Barclays performance compared to other banks is more relevant?

Been with Barclays since 1996. Obviously well respected in the US.

Bob Diamond was voted the 37th in New Statesman’s annual survey of the world's 50 most influential figures Who Matter 2010

Barclays share performance is dire over the longer term. This may explain the appointment of Diamond (an investment banker) to change the banks direction. Diamond was the mastermind behind the acquisition of Lehmans assets which elevated Barclays in the world of investment banking.

Entertainer

dunstonh wrote: »

If the shareholders are happy to pay those bonuses then its up to them. They own the company.

I'm not .

Tommyh

This is exactly were this country is going wrong...yet again the banks and bankers get away from the blame. They are the ones who created this current downturn in economy by being so damn greedy. They did things illegally or morally wrong which put profits, and as it turns out, the banks in jeopardy. There is nothing wrong with them getting bonuses if they are doing their jobs correctly, which some of them are. Barclays paid £113 MILLION in corperation tax this year when their profits were over £2 BILLION, not even 10%.
The general public are loosing jobs, having pay cuts or freezes, all because these people get in over their heads.
Did you know that Barclays paid more in bonuses this year, than Tower Hamlets have spent on Education in the past 100 years.

The_White_Horse wrote: »

there is no problem with this. the bank made profits, and the bonus comes out of those profits. they are theirs to do what they like with - provided the board/shareholders approve.

what is a national disgrace is the police overtime and bonuses for just doing their jobs. where does that bonus money come from????? what profits do the police make to cover this 1bn in bonus and overtime???

!!!!!!, if you join the police, you are told you will do X amount of shifts and your salary is Y. that is it.

There should be NO BONUSES EVER in the public sector. bonuses are paid out of profits when a company does well. no profits = no bonuses.

that is why i would have a problem with NR or HBOS getting bonuses, unless they have first repaid what they have taken.

ILW

Tommyh wrote: »

This is exactly were this country is going wrong...yet again the banks and bankers get away from the blame. They are the ones who created this current downturn in economy by being so damn greedy. They did things illegally or morally wrong which put profits, and as it turns out, the banks in jeopardy. There is nothing wrong with them getting bonuses if they are doing their jobs correctly, which some of them are. Barclays paid £113 MILLION in corperation tax this year when their profits were over £2 BILLION, not even 10%.
The general public are loosing jobs, having pay cuts or freezes, all because these people get in over their heads.
Did you know that Barclays paid more in bonuses this year, than Tower Hamlets have spent on Education in the past 100 years.

Probably got a better return on it as well.

Banks are not a charity or some sort of welfare service.
They are there for one reason and that is to make as much money as they can.
If they are a private sector company it is entirely up to them how they go about it (within the law)