RBS.

[TWR]

After this disgusting offer of a bonus would you contemplate moving your account elsewhere?

[lcg]

no. how is it disgusting? it was deemed ok by the then government in this guy's employment package! of course, if you think you can do a better job for less....i suggest you apply.

[VHG]

Surely they are all as bad as each other.

To get and keep the "top people" nowadays companies offer huge salaries, big share bonuses and pensions.

I worked for a huge IT company a few years ago, and when they got a new boss at the top one of things they offered him was to continue to pay his salary for a year if he died in while still the boss (as well as of course a huge salary and millions of pounds worth of shares).

If the rest of us died while still working for them our salary stopped straight away.

[ummmm]

Like lcg said.

He gave up his 1.5 million bonus last year (I think that's what I heard)

[VHG]

As a follow on the the "boss" of the It company I mentioned above.

When he retired has was offered a 10 year "consultancy" job with the company, at 2 million dollars a year, where he was only expected to work a total of one month during the year, and had full use of all the companies facilities (company jet, cars etc).

When Jeffrey Katzenberg left Disney (he had made Lion King and other films) he was eventually given $250 million dollars by Disney (after going to court).

THAT is the sort of bonuses some of the top people get nowadays.

[TWR]

Did I mention a Job position Icg? so you think it's right that this person should except the bonus whilst the country is on its knees because of the banks?

[TWR]

That says it all VHG.

[factor-fiction]

Rightly or wrongly, there are thousands of people in the City who earn much bigger bonuses. I suspect most of the other big banks pay big bonuses in the event of targets being met.
I am puzzled as to why the previous government sanctioned the current bonus agreement which seems to have been rather generous given the disappointing result for RBS in terms of share price and lending values.
On the other hand, if we want the best leaders to run RBS and boost its value ready for when we sell our large stake to the private sector, it may be difficult to attract and retain them going forward if we continually put pressure on them to forgo their bonus even when they meet the agreed targets.

[lcg]

yes. i thought i made that clear in the first word of my post. as for trying to cap bonuses etc. in this global economy (as banking is)...pay peanuts, get monkey. as a taxpayer and an rbs customer, i would expect a competent, qualified, competitive ceo to the next high st bank. or do you think they should run rbs into the ground along with the rest of our money?

[TWR]

I think they are already doing that Icg. they don't do your saving much good do they.

[lcg]

snort. what savings? i'm not rich enough for those! the only thing that gets my goat is people who say give up the bonus/it's unfair/the world is wrong etc.....but i bet if they got offered a contractual bonus, how many would say'oh no, i don't want it, thanks' or 'please give it all to the needy'? answer: not many - so why should this chap? what makes him so different? the government decided they didn't want to run the bank, employed him with the terms and conditions of the contract and then turn round and do/say all this crap? it just proves to me what a bunch of w*****s the politicians are and how jealous (but hypocritical) the british public are. poor bloke just can't win. so...i'd take it.