RBS chief to get £900,000 bonus

dunstonh

Milliband was just on the news saying that the Conservatives are the only ones that think the bonus is fair.

Other than the fact he didnt look at all prime minister material, he totally ignored the fact the pay was agreed by Labour and not the Conservatives. I can put up with a bit of expenses abuse (as most in the country do that - not the extremes as that is fraud) or infidelity (again, public are just as bad) but outright lies or misinformation is unforgivable.

atush

brenii wrote: »

My IQ is a touch over 100.
.

Fooled me, you sound like a right numpty:D

atush

So, let me get this straight.

We are all in an uproar. Because a guy was hired to turn around a failing bank. And it made a profit after the biggest loss ever in a UK company (under the prev head/govt).

So we are punishing him for doing what he was hired to do? What would have done if he had not done his job? Beggars belief.

A._Badger

It was interesting to note that the 'filthy capitalists' on Evan Davis's Radio 4 business show, The Bottom Line, this evening also agreed with the 'nay' lobby. Bonuses, as one put it, should be just that - something extra on top of your salary, to be striven for as the reward for exceeding targets, rather than just meeting them.

And no (for once) these weren't the usual BBC Guardian pundits. The BBC billled them as: "Keith Clarke, former Chief Executive and now Director of Sustainability at civil engineering and design consultancy Atkins; entrepreneur and investor Deborah Meaden; Heather Killen, co-founder of private equity and corporate finance advisory boutique Hemisphere Capital."

So not exactly your typical Socialist Worker readers with Billy Bragg on random repeat on their iPods (except maybe the chap - never trust anyone with 'sustainability' in his job title).

CLAPTON

I still confused

how did the Condem agree a £8 million golden hello to Antonio Horta-Osorio (CEO of Lloyds) without 137 post commending this move on this bulletin board

At least Hester didn't go off sick after a few months and he is doing the job he was recruited to do.

Jennifer_Jane

CLAPTON wrote: »

I still confused

how did the Condem agree a £8 million golden hello to Antonio Horta-Osorio (CEO of Lloyds) without 137 post commending this move on this bulletin board

At least Hester didn't go off sick after a few months and he is doing the job he was recruited to do.

Yes, it's appalling. But I've only the strength and interest in whinging about one bonus at a time. The point about this chappie is that he hasn't returned the bank to profit, he hasn't helped lots of new companies start up, he may have completed some tasks per his contract, but he's been in the job since 2008. As for Lloyds, what is the situation with Lloyds?

By the way, re the tax being paid on Mr Hester's shares, if he's only entitled to them in 2014, would that mean that he won't be paying tax on them? I seem to remember my own share options in a Company having some kind of tax benefit after 2 years, and being tax-free after 5 - but I may have that completely wrong.

(Also, am just watching The Sunday Politics Show. Someone should tell the Labour Party that they'll get very wrinkled with all their pious frowning and eyebrow raising).

atush

Some of you numpties just can't read? The bank is back in the black.

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/edinburgh/around-the-capital/rbs_back_in_black_with_2bn_profit_1_1948227

Jennifer_Jane

atush wrote: »

Some of you numpties just can't read? The bank is back in the black.

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/edinburgh/around-the-capital/rbs_back_in_black_with_2bn_profit_1_1948227

Thank you for this. I would, however, have preferred it if you had been a bit nicer, a bit more polite. It wouldn't have hurt to do so, would it? Less to have typed, even. But still, thank you for posting this link.

tartanterra

Jennifer_Jane wrote: »

Yes, it's appalling. But I've only the strength and interest in whinging about one bonus at a time. The point about this chappie is that he hasn't returned the bank to profit, he hasn't helped lots of new companies start up, he may have completed some tasks per his contract, but he's been in the job since 2008. As for Lloyds, what is the situation with Lloyds?

By the way, re the tax being paid on Mr Hester's shares, if he's only entitled to them in 2014, would that mean that he won't be paying tax on them? I seem to remember my own share options in a Company having some kind of tax benefit after 2 years, and being tax-free after 5 - but I may have that completely wrong.

(Also, am just watching The Sunday Politics Show. Someone should tell the Labour Party that they'll get very wrinkled with all their pious frowning and eyebrow raising).

I think the bonus looks appalling in the current climate, but I also think it is wrong to withhold it, if it is enshrined in his contract.

What I would like to see however, is Mr Hester pay his fair share of tax on his bonus.

There is something fundamentally wrong with the taxation system when the well paid can use complex tax legislation to reduce their overall tax burden to a percentage below which the poorest paid employees in their organisation are being taxed at.

There isn't much point in trumpeting a headline rate of tax, if in reality, dozens of routes are in existence to avoid it.

atush

Jennifer_Jane wrote: »

Thank you for this. I would, however, have preferred it if you had been a bit nicer, a bit more polite. It wouldn't have hurt to do so, would it? Less to have typed, even. But still, thank you for posting this link.

It was a gentle chiding for not reading in previous posts that they had gone back into black but still ranting about it anyway. It was not meant to be mean.


"Numpty
Scottish usage:
a) Someone who (sometimes unwittingly) by speech or action demonstrates a lack of knowledge or misconception of a particular subject or situation to the amusement of others.

b) A good humoured admonition, a term of endearment"