RBS chief to get £900,000 bonus

Wookster

There is an ever so mild stench of hypocracy about Labour castigating the bonus that they put in place.

kabayiri

wotsthat wrote: »

...
If we keep blaming bankers it means no-one else needs to look at how their own actions might have contributed to the problems.
That's certainly not on-message these days - wouldn't get applause on Question Time either.

I don't buy this everyone is to blame argument. There are a large body of people out there who are conservative in monetary terms and who are net savers. I'm not responsible for the idiot down the road who might mortgage the house to go to Florida. I quite rightly rely on sensible lending policy.

Besides, it takes an awful lot of Florida trips to make up for a mistake like buying ABN Amro.

homelessskilledworker

vax2002 wrote: »

I think if any of us were put in charge of RBS we would be hard pushed to loose £744 000,000 in six months.
Thats some going !
I may not be a financial wizard worthy of a 900k bonus, but I could have told them that investing tax payers money in Greek bonds was a sure fire way to loose the lot !
Can I have a bonus please....
Thats the talent you speak of ?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2022709/RBS-posts-losses-794m-failure-taxpayer-backed-banks.html

In short their business plan is

1. The Government prints Billions(QE)

2. The Banks stick it straight into their vaults and hoardes it

Soooo difficult

DUKE

Pity they don't cap his wage to £26,000. Or minimum wage all round, see how they like it!

dtsazza

DUKE wrote: »

Pity they don't cap his wage to £26,000. Or minimum wage all round, see how they like it!

I think if that happened, we wouldn't have any banks.

I know that if I was capped to minimum wage, I'd quit my current position and take up a very undemanding job with plenty of slack time, no stress and no responsibility. There'd be little point in putting in effort above that if I weren't going to be rewarded for it.

That, or I'd move to a more sensible country and keep doing a skilled job for appropriate remuneration.

Emy1501

As already said Labour Employed him and the current government could let him walk if they are not happy with his bonus package. Once he walks they could employ some people at 100-200k and see how they get on. Of course its a 40b+ gamble but it will keep the public happy.

Personally i don't see why he shouldn't take his bonus as he was head hunted from another job where he was doing pretty well and I suspect he will get another job paying more than he's on if he left. He is not in a goodwill industry so why should he do any job for less than he's worth?

ILW

I believe the problem is that the performance criteria are rather opaque, and should be known by the shareholders.

kabayiri

Emy1501 wrote: »

...
Personally i don't see why he shouldn't take his bonus as he was head hunted from another job where he was doing pretty well and I suspect he will get another job paying more than he's on if he left. He is not in a goodwill industry so why should he do any job for less than he's worth?

Actually, RBS is one of the ultimate expressions of goodwill and good faith shown by the UK taxpayer in a corporate institution.

In their hour of need, we bailed them out to the tune of billions and billions. This level of generosity has never been seen towards any other industry.

It is very much a special case. I'd support deferred bonuses definitely...once the taxpayers get their money back.

CLAPTON

lets gets this in proportion

the condems authorised an £8million package for Horta-Osorio of Lloyds.

How is it that no-one is reminding Dave and Nick that they agreed this package?

ILW

What has Hester actually achieved to get the bonus?