Tory - The caring conservatives

[skipper734]

High Directors pay is not such a bad thing for the Country though, El Pres? Presumable the money has already had Corporation Tax deducted, and then when it becomes bonus or pay, it becomes subject to a further 50% in personal taxation. Unless it is paid into a further Company owned by the Director to deal with this massive income, and of course get the VAT back on everything the Director uses in connection with his Company.

 

[GT49er]

Someone who turns around say a FTSE 100 business that is losing money, laying of Labour to a business that is very profitable and is again hiring Labour and expanding....Is entitled to ?? Is he wrong to feel entitled to large bonus??..

If bonus is result related....I have no problem with them.

A fully earned bonus - OK. But as I said in my post, it's a matter of degree. If as a reword for my ability, achievements, enterprise and success my annual remuneration is ten times what most of my neighbours get, OK, fair enough would you say? Or should it be a hundred times, a thousand times, or way more than their ever likely to earn in their entire lifetime?
Again, as I said, how much is a matter for debate - and how it can be achieved an even bigger one!

 

[El Presidente]

High Directors pay is not such a bad thing for the Country though, El Pres? Presumable the money has already had Corporation Tax deducted, and then when it becomes bonus or pay, it becomes subject to a further 50% in personal taxation. Unless it is paid into a further Company owned by the Director to deal with this massive income, and of course get the VAT back on everything the Director uses in connection with his Company.

Some of that money would come to the Exchequer in the form of tax, but so too would employees if there was less inequality between staff and board.

In 1980 FTSE 100 board members were paid on average 25 times the mean national wage.

In 2015 FTSE 100 board members are paid on average 149 times the mean national wage.

If there's evidence that the UK has benefited from this change in income distribution I have no problem, but the evidence seems to be thin on the ground.

Martin Sorrell is head of an advertising company, WPP. Last year his package was £43 million. WPP is a successful company, but would it be unsuccessful if he was 'only' paid £4.3 million, for example?

 

[nicko31]

Some of that money would come to the Exchequer in the form of tax, but so too would employees if there was less inequality between staff and board.

In 1980 FTSE 100 board members were paid on average 25 times the mean national wage.

In 2015 FTSE 100 board members are paid on average 149 times the mean national wage.

If there's evidence that the UK has benefited from this change in income distribution I have no problem, but the evidence seems to be thin on the ground.

Martin Sorrell is head of an advertising company, WPP. Last year his package was £43 million. WPP is a successful company, but would it be unsuccessful if he was 'only' paid £4.3 million, for example?

The argument is these bosses are worth it because they generate huge wealth. This is possible because they have huge capital at their disposal, but its the company capital not theirs

Of course they are handsomely rewards when the market cap of a PLC goes up 100's of million, but not punished when it goes down.

Its a win-win for them and just shows the system is broke. The problem is its a closed shop right up to the head of government, a lot them gets knightwoods too like Martin S for example. Happy Days...