RBS bonuses

[d9f1c7]

How can they have a bonus if they made a loss?

[youngmafbog]

It should depend on what arm of the bank the employee is working. RBS did in fact make a profit but then wrote off the Greek debt, hence the loss.

In addition many are not the people who caused the loss but have been bought in to clear the mess. Pay peanuts, get monkeys (just look at Civil service IT) RBS have clearly not decided to go that route.

Unfortunatley the general public are either thick, lazy or too stupid to look past the end of their nose or what the press feed them

[jake-the-peg]

Well the general public aren't thick enough to be lending money to the Greek Government

Sounds like they're smarter than RBS!

[andy-hughes]

Executives in banks are usually signed into complex contracts which boil down to a bonus even if the bank loses, and a bigger bonus if it succeeds.

The argument is that bonus structures are needed to attract the right 'calibre' of executive, even when that patently fails to be the case.

I work at BT, and a couple of years ago, the Global section was the only part of the business to make a loss. The head - brought in about a year previously, was sacked, and his payoff would take me twenty-five years to earn! I wish I was that useless!

[VHG]

Maybe they would have made a worse loss without the excellent work of the people who would get a bonus.

[rov1100]

They are given yearly targets and if they are met receive a bonus. Nobody would expect them to clear their debts in one go but maybe the prospects look brighter.

[nannybooby]

I think that its madness its the same as spending more money on unnessecary items ,when you are in overdraft,but Brown and Blair said they could so they do .

[sasskins]

I don't object to the bonus if they've done a good job.
I do object to the huge amount of the bonuses.

[Zeuhl]

<<but Brown and Blair said they could so they do>>

No. Huge remuneration packages are the norm in the Financial sector worldwide.
If that is wrong then it needs to be addressed internationally.

Alternatively we could act unilaterally in which case most of 'The City' will move to wherever they can still earn megabucks and London will cease being a world financial centre costing the country zillions in gdp.

[sasskins]

London 'will cease being a world financial centre'.
Good, because as such we are a laughing stock.
Giving millions to India who throw it back at us.
They stomp on our 'stiff upper lip'.

[bigbadmarty]

What exactly is the esoteric skill that these greedy egocentrics posess ?
Is it something more than accountancy and management ?
Is vast ammounts of common sense and/or intelligence ?
What is it these "execptional" individuals have that we mere mortals don't ?
I'll bet they say we wouldn't understand .
ar5eh0les

[Zeuhl]

<<London 'will cease being a world financial centre'.
Good, because as such we are a laughing stock.>>

Well London is the world's largest financial centre alongside New York and has the largest city GDP in Europe. The Financial Sector added gross value of £86,145 million to the UK economy in 2004. The UK's exports of financial and business services make a significant positive contribution towards the country's balance of payments.

So if it all moved to, say, Frankfurt - you'd be pleased. Is that right?
I was just wondering how you'd redress the huge loss to our economy.

[modeller]

Most of these bonuses are paid on the number of transactions whether they lose or make money. Which of course is a racket but if someone reduces a loss maybe they deserve recognition .

I similar thing happened years ago when the nationalised steel industry was losing £40m a day and Magregor was brought in from the US to sort it out .
He was paid £2m for his services but he reduced the loss to £10m and the industry could then be sold off. Everyone screamed about his pay out but he was worth every penny.

[sunny-dave]

... and it was such an astonishing success too - look at the huge, vibrant, healthy steel industry we have now ... errrr

[gingejbee]

You haven't been listening to much radio today, obviously. The experts have been explaining this, ad nauseam.

[sasskins]

..../// I was just wondering how you'd redress the huge loss to our economy///

Our economy is doing so well, why the need to redress?

A grip is what's needed.

[Zeuhl]

<<Our economy is doing so well, why the need to redress>>

Yes, very funny.

[sasskins]

No sensible response available then eh zeuhl?

[zebo]

As a number of people have indicated, the Press are only interested in a headline, losses v bonuses. RBS has many arms in its business and, believe it or not, many of those are doing well and are on target. It was never going to be turned round in a few years after Fred the Shred's period in charge, anyone working for RBS at that time knew he was utterly unsuitable for the job he was supposed to do. There is a lot of respect for Stephen Hester within the company.

[owdhamer]

the bigger the loss the bigger the bonus, thats how the banks worked

[Zeuhl]

<<No sensible response available then eh zeuhl? >>

Sorry I assumed you were being sarcastic

Especially as you hadn't made any 'sensible response' as to where you would find the 100 billion a year or so that the financial sector contributes to our economy not to mention the jobs and indirect contributions.