RBS chief to get £963,000 bonus

[Herr Tubthumper]

This is some u-turn on public sector pay. Fair play Dave and Gideon. Teachers next?

 

[bhaexpress]

I know it may not be totally relevant but think what Premier League players get, Tevez lost £9.3 million so far with his current dispute, how much was he on to start with ?

 

[sten_super]

Well yes - I agree to a certain degree, however 82% of this company is owned by the tax payer. The tax payer (and the Government if you believe what they say) are against it.

The board have threatened to resign and the Government has backed down. Should have called their bluff.

So much for strong leadership.

I agree with this. I don't have a problem, per se, with him receiving a large bonus, if he's earnt it. It appears in this case that the government (the majority shareholder) didn't think he'd earnt it, and wanted to veto it. The board threatened to resign, and the government backed off. If we can't tackle executive pay in publicly-owned enterprises, what hope the rest of the economy?

 

[Deleted member 22389]

For this chief executive to be getting nearly 1 million pound in bonuses, when the company has already made thousands redundant and is partly owned by the tax payer is a complete and utter joke. What a kick in teeth for the people that where made redundant from RBS. They must be feeling completely betrayed and pissed off. And what a piss take to the rest of us, after everything that has happend.

This chief executive is hardly on the bread line is he.

If I was an RBS customer I would take out all my money in protest. I know this would have a negative effect, but these arseholes at the top need to understand that without us, they are nothing and I mean nothing.

As we can see after all the mess that has been created in the past, nothing has changed has it. They are still taking what they can. If people think that is acceptable then is just plain greedy in my book. If I was in his position I would think about the people that where made redundant, and I would think about the image of the bank, and I would also think about how greedy it would make me look. I would not accept it.

Why would you need it anyway, if you already have millions in the bank.

 

[Poyetry In Motion]

Don't forget - we're all in this together. He's struggling just as much as the rest of us

 

[drew]

What I would like someone to explain is what has he done that is exceptional. Redundancies make the books look better. Also, correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't the bulk of quantitive easing just gone into re capitalising the banks and very little has found it's way into the economh where it is needed?

 

[sten_super]

What I would like someone to explain is what has he done that is exceptional. Redundancies make the books look better. Also, correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't the bulk of quantitive easing just gone into re capitalising the banks and very little has found it's way into the economh where it is needed?

Thanks, I've been looking for an excuse to post this!

The UK economy needs a shower of money in the high street | Simon Jenkins | Comment is free | The Guardian

I'm not (politically) your typical Guardian reader, and a lot of the CiF stuff I vehemently disagree with, but this is pretty bang on the money to me. Quantitative easing has been a shower of shit so far and has simply served to help the banks. Given that the Bank of England are quite likely to announce some more QE in the not-too-distant future, I'd like to see it take a form much more likely to actually have an effect on the wider economy - and giving non-bankable money to people seems like a pretty decent idea to me.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

He got shares last year. He's the chief honcho of RBS and he's presided over a year when the value of the shares went down. So they pay him a bonus of more shares to reward his "success"?

If he carries on like this, how long before the company collapses and everyone congratulates themselves that we are, at least, "retaining top performers"?

But share price isn't the only measure of success. In this case he's turned a loss making business into a profitable one. Something we the tax payer need so RBS can pay back what it owes. Compared to many CEOs he's paid a low bonus and yet has managed to turn a failing business around. I'd rather have somebody of his calibre running RBS so we might get our money back than some monkey for peanuts and see RBS plummet.

 

[drew]

Thanks, I've been looking for an excuse to post this!

The UK economy needs a shower of money in the high street | Simon Jenkins | Comment is free | The Guardian

I'm not (politically) your typical Guardian reader, and a lot of the CiF stuff I vehemently disagree with, but this is pretty bang on the money to me. Quantitative easing has been a shower of shit so far and has simply served to help the banks. Given that the Bank of England are quite likely to announce some more QE in the not-too-distant future, I'd like to see it take a form much more likely to actually have an effect on the wider economy - and giving non-bankable money to people seems like a pretty decent idea to me.

So, he gets a million because he's sacked a few and the Government have pumped money into his books adding to the share value. Great, capitalism at work.

Also, I love the way the government say they have to allow it otherwise the he and other members of the board might walk. Lovely how in these austere times when 'we're all in it together, Hester, either directly or more likely through helpful hints from his friends, has threatened to quit if he doesn't get it.

 

[BLOCK F]

He got shares last year. He's the chief honcho of RBS and he's presided over a year when the value of the shares went down. So they pay him a bonus of more shares to reward his "success"?

If he carries on like this, how long before the company collapses and everyone congratulates themselves that we are, at least, "retaining top performers"?

Great incentive to get the share price up,though!

 

[wakeytom]

Great incentive to get the share price up,though!

Exactly, and to turn a huge loss last year in to a decent profit this year sounds good to me, the shares may be down but that will be due to other factors as all bank shares have been hit in 2011 due to Euro fears and generally not based on the underlying business.

On another matter when everyone is going on about share prices and also redundencies, generally when redundencies are announced a share price will increase, so that cannot be used as an argument.

I think we need to pay top bonus if we want top execs to run a partly national bank, with a view to a good re-sale value in the future.

 

[beorhthelm]

Is that like contractually agreed pension rights ?

i'm going to have to pee on your chips there, he's contractually entitled to £1.66m bonus.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Lovely how in these austere times when 'we're all in it together, Hester, either directly or more likely through helpful hints from his friends, has threatened to quit if he doesn't get it.

Much like public sector workers going on strike to try and protect their pensions I guess - the only difference the board won.

 

[sir albion]

I find it pathetic that the media make this man out to be a greed ball,fact is RBS will not want to lose this man to another bank and this is why he should be rewarded well.Its time all this picking on bank bosses bollocks stopped as these guys can actually help bring us out of the recession and learn from past mistakes.

This one million will be heverly taxed and who's to say its not split into shares etc

 

[Westdene Seagull]

This one million will be heverly taxed and who's to say its not split into shares etc

I think the clue might be that is was £963k of shares ! It will of course be taxed when he sells them.

 

[Hotchilidog]

When RBS is privately run concern making it's own cash then can pay what they like. Whilst they being propped up by the public and putting people out of work the chief exec should just get his salary for doing his job and not get any bonuses.

 

[ROSM]

The fact that this has been paid wholly in shares based at yesterdays share price is a huge positive. the organisation share price of which we own 82% has to increase for the bonus to be realised and even then he will be taxed on the growth. If it goes up by 50% so does 'our' investment. RBS is now profitable (whether the underlying reasons have longevity is another matter) but this is no quick win - it needs sustained growth for the next 3 years AND the market/environment to strengthen for this to be worth anything.

The government may say they were anti this - I'm not so sure they ever really were?

 

[Randsta]

Seems fair sack most of your employees get a phat pay out!! Well done

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Given the UK government have moved heaven and earth to keep the banks afloat over the past few years....I wonder how difficult it is to run a bank these days? I wonder if the RBS boss screwed his eyes shut and raised his arms and said 'look, and no hands' how long the bank would keep going for? At least a few more years I reckon.

 

[beorhthelm]

When RBS is privately run concern making it's own cash then can pay what they like. Whilst they being propped up by the public and putting people out of work the chief exec should just get his salary for doing his job and not get any bonuses.

its precisly that sort of attitude that led to the downfall of public sector owned industry*. no incentives, no drive, no excellence. successfull companies are built on incentivising their employees. sure, there can be poor incentive schemes, too easy or too difficult to be realistic, but if you start from a position of just making do and see how you go, you will end up going backwards. theres nothing wrong with bonuses set with well considered targets.

* not a specific UK issue, any country this applies to.