Bankers "need to join real world" minister says

[adrian29uk]

As far as I am concerned they should not get a penny. They don't bloody deserve it. However as usual they will get their own way and then in another 10 years time it will happen all over again, and we will be having the same discussion all over again. As usual the only people hurt in all this is me and you.

 

[El Presidente]

Sorry to but into bushys question, but very quickly, these people generate and pay a huge amount of revenue to the govt (directly and indirectly). If we don't pay them and they all bugger off then either taxes rise or spending falls to make up the shortfall. Or probably both. If taxes rise you will be worse of financially. If spending falls you will probably also be worse off in terms of standard of living. You may not like it but it is true.

Anyway I'm off home as the Bentley is on a double yellow..

True to a point, if they did bugger off there would still be plenty of talented people in the city to take their places though.

 

[scotjem]

We've heard this argument so often over the years - if we don't pay top salaries, we'll lose all the best talent. Not just about bankers - but MPs, senior civil servants, university principals...

The result is this country, apart from the US, has the most skewed distribution of wealth in the world. But overall, our economy doesn't seem any stronger or more resilient than many others.

 

[Gwylan]

Unless there is a global solution, getting tough with RBS alone helps no one except maybe Labour come next May.

But i bet that's entering Darling's calculations -that would put some clear water between Labour and the Tories. I don't think you can underestimate public opinion on this.

As for Bushy's points. I take on board what he's saying, I don't think it's an easy decision any way you look it. I was reading Robert Peston's blog which clearly describes how the government is wriggling on a hook of its own invention
BBC - Peston's Picks: Public servants on $20m a year

and supports what Bushy was saying about American banks.

But I still maintain that there'll never be a better time to tackle some the city's excesses. Yes, people will be poached and go to other jobs but I'm not convinced 1000s would leave RBS - that won't be the jobs for a start - but some will stay. However, I agree it's a tricky one and not an easy decision for Darling to make.

 

[gripper stebson]

Something that I think is interesting about the whole bankers bonuses / credit crunch' issue is that Premier League footballers seem to have got off scott free.

We are quite happy to hear that Lampard ot Gerrard are asking for £200,000 a f**king week and yet we don't bat an eyelid.

Just a thought like.

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

Having read all the posts on the subject I am inclined to agree with Bushy and Looney. As much as I don't like it because of what the banks collectively did to the economy, they will always have to pay "top dollar" because it seems the Yanks will never agree to any capping of wages, this means if the Government wants the debts paid off quickly the best bankers need to employed by the banks it has shares in. This means paying them the going rate. As Looney says are some of the bankers getting bonuses the ones that f***ed it all up in the first place? If so in my opinion these individuals should get f*** all, just pay the ones who weren't responsible. It's time for some transparency.
So this sort of shit doesn't happen again how about any future Government in charge places more of an emphasis on manufacturing rather than banking to support the economy?

 

[Billy the Fish]

It's a shit system but unfortunately one that we have to go along with.

The only idea I've heard that seems to be worthwhile and enforcable is that the banks should have a cirtain amout of capital in reserve should things go tits up again. This would stop the taxpayer from picking up the bill. Can anyone who's ITK say if that is faesable in the real world.

 

[Super Steve Earle]

Speaking from the inside, it's not just the big bonus earners who will go elsewhere from RBS. This ridulous posturing Governement has screwed over every member of staff who puts in extra effort which in turn brings in the extra income to repay the taxpayer. They will also leave. Just so Brown & Darling can say they are big strong men and can deflect away from their own ineptness.

 

[Lokki 7]

True to a point, if they did bugger off there would still be plenty of talented people in the city to take their places though.

Spoken like a true academic.

 

[beorhthelm]

Are there really thousands of equivalent jobs elsewhere ? Would RBS really suffer if they had to replace some of these supposed high-flyers ?

its more like a few dozen highflyers for each bank, and yes they can and would go elsewhere. RBS is owned by the tax payer, so its ironically in our interests for them to be recruiting and retaining the very best talent at RBS and Lloyds. the sooner they pay back the debt the sooner we get the benefits of selling off back to the sharholders.


as for the original post, it might have more credibility if it didnt come from a politician, they know little of the real world either.

the thing about the "too big to fail" will be resolved by mandating larger reserves or regulating that the investment banking and mainstream banking arms are walled off. i say "will", of course it looks like no one is actually doing anything about regulation, nothing has changed yet, labour's too shit scared to rock the boat sitting so low in the water, while the Tories seem to be missing the direction or courage to come up with a solution that means we can continue to rack in money, but with more oversight and a safty catch in the system. ends up with Vince Cable looking like the progressive one and he has little chance* of directing policy. oh well.

*there is a little... if a hung parliment, shoe in for Secretary to the Treasury

 

[Nobby's Betamax Video]

Again, a distinction has to be drawn between INVESTMENT Bankers & those who work in the RETAIL Banks.

It was the investment bankers who fuelled the excessive and risky lending via the share prices - hence LTSB shares being so low compared to HBoS & RBS for example. They were the oxygen for the fire.

I can see both sides of the arguement around investment bank bonuses &, on a purely moral basis, I'd love them to experience the life that the hundreds of thousands of people in the Retail Banks are having to endure.

For instance, 400 odd jobs are going in Brighton (on top of 100's already announced in this area). Local staff on "average" salaries not being made redundant are being told to relocate to London with the priviledge of an extra 4 hours on their day to commute and a £2000 hole in their annual income due to the gap between net London Allowance and the £3800 annual train ticket. On top of that, being told that their terms & conditions are being changed (worsened) so the bank can save even more money.

The city traders are sitting pretty after being pivotal to this mess whilst ordinary people who work in call centres, back office functions etc on "ordinary" salaries lose their jobs, have what little benefits they have eroded and live in constant fear of compulsory redundancy or not being able to meet ever more challenging targets.

Its an employers market and the retail banks are using this economic climate to make sweeping changes to shaft the "average Joe" whilst the traders carry on as usual.

There won't be industrial action as everyone is too scared to lose their livelihood (plenty more fish in the sea for admin roles) and the media has done a grand job in making the public think that Sally in the Call Centre or Bob in the Branch were the architects of the credit crunch.

It makes my blood boil.

Even worse when I hear of strike action elsewhere to improve pay. Don't people realise how bad the situation is?

Rant over. Keep calm and carry on.

 

[Billy the Fish]

and the media has done a grand job in making the public think that Sally in the Call Centre or Bob in the Branch were the architects of the credit crunch.

Do people actually think that?

Seriously, anyone that thinks staff in their local branch had anything do do with the financial crisis is an idiot.

 

[Freddie Goodwin.]

Maybe the criteria for reaching a bonus needs to be looked at.

If you look at civil Service bonuses, those at the very top may well have a target to cut staff 7 close offices in order to cut costs. So, they do that and although they may decimate the service given, they have reached 'their' targets and thus get a huge bonus.

Meanwhile, the decreasing number of rank & file staff struggle to provide a decent service, with fewer resources, and therefore do not reach their targets or get a bonus. not that you'd know that from the papers.

As somebody said on NSC a while back, to make the poor work harder you cut their pay but to make the rich work harder you increase theirs.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Just where IS this mythical place these tosspots are eternally threatening to bugger off to?

 

[Beach Hut]

Don't under estimate the profits banks based in the UK contribute to huge tax revenues for the Government.

If Labour get this wrong and banks move then the next government (obviously we know who) will give huge incentives for them to move back to the UK.

Love it loath they contribute huge revenue to the UK.

 

[beorhthelm]

Again, a distinction has to be drawn between INVESTMENT Bankers & those who work in the RETAIL Banks.

therein lies the problem: the banks themselves where allowed to blur the line. i think RBS had become more of a investment bank, using the supposedly safe retail deposits to feed the higher risk investments.

Just where IS this mythical place these tosspots are eternally threatening to bugger off to?

the bank over the road, the investment fund down the the street, the empty office in W1 to run your own hedge fund, if we are lucky; New York, Switerland, UAE, Singapore, Tokyo if not. whether one likes it or not, financial services is the UKs largest (only substantial) export and we lose it at our peril. in some areas London is first place in the world, NY and Yokyo would love to take over the business that goes through LIFFE and Lloyds of London.

 

[cunning fergus]

On a different related point, now that the Govt have introduced a 50% tax rate surely they will be doing cartwheels that there are big bonuses being paid in the City?

I means its not like they are going to make any tax revenue from the premiership football stars who set up companies in the Caymans for their wages or other British sporting Gods like Jenson Button, a 9 year Monaco tax exile despsite being Britain's richest sportsman under 30.

So more typical Govt double standards, they say we shouldn't smoke but take 80% in tax a packet, they say we shouldn't drink but take over 40% in tax a pint, they say we should drive less but take 60% in tax on a liter of petrol.

This is of course tax revenue without considering the corporation tax take on the Tobacco Cos, Brewers, Pub Chains and Petrol Cos, then there's the tax on dividends from these companies when they make money, then there's VAT.......etc.etc.

Different world...........I should coco.

 

[clapham_gull]

The bankers don't really get it.

Whilst in the good times they have generated billions upon billions for the UK economy, unfortunately their recent behaivour has led to complete oppositite.

All the time these banks are more or less nationalised, the fat cats should be treated as every other public sector worker and expect no bonus and a pay freeze. Us mortals obviously don't understand their funny banking ways, well sorry - we own you now and until such a time as we don't you play by our rules, not the ones that got us all in a mess.

I have no problem with the "rank and file" getting some kind of "performance bonus", if it's traditionally the way they get paid.

But should the guys at the top be walking away with a nice few million Christmas bonus this year ? Absolutely f*cking not.

 

[Questions]

Just where IS this mythical place these tosspots are eternally threatening to bugger off to?

Is it Swansea ?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I think people are confusing "bankers" with the people responsible for running the retail banking organisation that looks after our pay cheques.

It seems quite clear to me that the bunch of so-called high-flyers who gamble with billions in futures markets contribute absolutely nothing to the security of the average person in the street. It also seems clear that any benefit these shysters bring to the national economy is an accident - the proceeds could just as easily fetch up in the pockets of other players in this multi-national whirligig that tries to pass itself off as some sort of "economy". Whether they pay themselves mega-bonuses, or merely pass their profits on to their friends, makes precious little difference to my well-being.

Meanwhile ... in the real world ... there are genuine bankers in a service industry, who provide sound advice and good stewardship to ordinary families. They earn salaries and don't get massive bonuses. Sadly, they also get tarred with the same brush that the headline writers use to blacken the gamblers who play with millions.

When he died in 1982, my father was a very senior banker in the head office of a clearing bank - a position he had progressed to over a period of forty years, starting as a junior clerk in a small branch. Throughout his entire career, he was never paid a single penny in "bonuses" - not even when he reached the very top of his profession - because, in those days, banks were banks and gambling was an entirely unconnected industry. I'm pleased to see that his bank is still trading profitably and providing a decent service to its customers.