Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
observer

Bank bonuses?

Recommended Posts

Is the Government doing enough to get a grip of the Banks, some of which we now own? The Irish Government have threatened their Banks with a 90% tax on any bonuses paid to staff and the cutting off of bail out money in the future. While everyone else is having to take a bite into this s**t sandwich called austerity, the very people and institutions that caused this mess, are acting as if nothing has happened. :twisted:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They didnt directly cause the mess. ?850bn is owed by the UK specifically EXCLUDING bank liabilities. Indeed the banks have already paid back a substantial sum and we should make a profit on the bank deal eventually.

 

If they are government owned then maybe we shoudl have a say, but a tax across the banks for those who didnt come cap in hand is a bit unfair?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to reports, major failures in banking regulation and the maintenance of the financial stability of the country ? coupled with excessive and high-risk lending by the banks ? led to the crisis in Ireland, the same as in America, UK, Greece, Portugal etc etc etc.

 

And the bankers still expect their bonuses. :evil::evil::evil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I worked for pretty low wages on the counter in a bank branch, and if I had met all of the criteria of my employers scheme to qualify for my bonus - usually simple things like attendence record, productivity, generating leads and referrals - then I'd be pretty upset about some professional chair polisher of a politician or snivel servant with a gold plated final salary pension telling me that I didn't deserve the bonus.

 

Especially when it was exactly those same chair polishers who were responsible for setting up and enforcing the very regulatory framework which failed to prevent the problem when it proved to be so woefully inadequate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I worked for pretty low wages on the counter in a bank branch,

 

Fair enough, but it not those people who get the bonuses. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes they do. Most bank branch or call centre staff are on some sort of bonus or performance related pay.

 

And a grand or so in bonus once a year makes a very substantial difference to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's plenty of people about calling for all bank bonuses to be withheld. The focus seems to be on the TOTAL amount the banks are set to pay in bonuses, and the really big bonuses paid to the high rollers account for only a relatively small percentage of this.

 

And if you're going to pay some bonuses but withhold others, where do you draw the line? why draw it just there? and who draws it?

 

I'd say that if any employee has met or exceeded the criteria laid down in advance by the employer to qualify for a particular level of bonus, then there is no possible justification for not paying it. If some of the bonuses which result seem excessive or un-deserved, then that's an issue over which which the shareholders or stakeholders need to hold the board of directors or senior management team to account, and demand their explanations on how the drafting and implementation of the scheme was decided in the first place.

 

There's never a reason to punish the staff - however well paid they may be - for the failings of the people at the top.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As they say 'We are all in it together'

 

If a company or a bank fails, everyone suffers, from the top down, regardless of whose fault it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What ever happened to just doing your job - a set number of hours per week for a set salary? Bonuses are designed as an incentive for so called good performance - well I can't see how having to be baled out by the tax-payer corresponds to "good performance"? If we turn the arguement on it's head, failiure should be rewarded with the loss of wages - NOT a bonus. :twisted:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What ever happened to just doing your job - a set number of hours per week for a set salary? Bonuses are designed as an incentive for so called good performance - well I can't see how having to be baled out by the tax-payer corresponds to "good performance"? If we turn the arguement on it's head, failiure should be rewarded with the loss of wages - NOT a bonus. :twisted:

 

Sound logic, obs.

All bonus schemes are open to manipulation & corruption, we had an estimator who's catchphrase when bonus slip times were challenged was, give it here lad - " A stroke of the pen turns a nought into ten" and if you were in favour adjust the duration of the task to suite the operative. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In this situation, an across the board bonus of up to ?1000 each for achieving results would be fair to the lower paid. The top management are already getting perks and huge salaries so they should get the same.

If they don't like it, there's the door. They will huff and puff, but if the grass was greener, they would already be gone. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it were only a ?grand Peter; but as one of these spivs said on the Panorama prog; when asked about his bonus - "I only managed a Mazaratti this year". :roll: I have to wonder what has happened to Vince Cable's ideas - Break up the Banks, so they are no longer "too big to fail", and seperate the High Street from the Casino operation: tax their profits and bonuses etc - oops forgot, it's the Tories who are calling the shots, and they won't upset their mates. :twisted:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What ever happened to just doing your job - a set number of hours per week for a set salary?

 

Bonus schemes, profit related pay, commision, call it what you will - they're all designed to provide an incentive to those staff who do more than just keep their chairs warm for a set number of hours per week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most bonus schemes I am aware off are fast eating into the basic salary and thus most people rely on the same. Its performance related pay at the end of the day so if they perform within the expected parameters then why not be paid. if they dont, they dont. Simples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since it's now virtually impossible to actually sack someone for just putting the hours in and delivering sub-standard performance, then bonuses amd PRP provide a way to weed out the slackers in industries which are dominated by the collective pay agreements insisted upon by the "rate for the job" trade union dinosaurs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To get for workers a fair days pay for a fair days work - it's called getting paid for the job. All bonuses do, is suppress real wages (as they don't count towards pensionable earnings, hourly rates etc) and ultimately erode basic salary - and the irony is, you don't get anymore out of folk, as there are only so many hours in the day; and if you want them to live at the office, just pay them overtime (all the younguns shout - "what's that"?)! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going against the flow here. If bonuses are legal and the banks want to pay them, so be it.

If it's so wrong - the government should legislate, one way or another. I just have a feeling there is more to this than the black and white picture with which we are presented.

 

Happy days

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Its called GREED and short termism Harry :!:

 

are we talking about EU Parliament members and their expenses here?? :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's called greed in an "I want it, I want it NOW" WORLD. One economist on TV has suggested that lessons havn't been learnt and we'll suffer another Banking crisis within the next 25 years. Meanwhile folk are still using their credit cards like there's no tomorrow - I think they owe over a ?billion for the Xmas shopping alone - so the public havn't learnt anything either. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To get for workers a fair days pay for a fair days work - it's called getting paid for the job. All bonuses do, is suppress real wages (as they don't count towards pensionable earnings, hourly rates etc) and ultimately erode basic salary - and the irony is, you don't get anymore out of folk, as there are only so many hours in the day; and if you want them to live at the office, just pay them overtime (all the younguns shout - "what's that"?)! :lol:

 

You have obviously never had to work alongside a lazy, bone-idle, shirker who spends their entire day dreaming up new ways of doing the absolute minimum work they can get away with without actually breaching their contract - while the rest of the team run around like blue a**ed flies trying to get the job done.

 

Fair days work for a fair days pay is all well and good. But now that an employer can no longer discipline or sack a shirker without the union screaming blue murder and having to get involved in tribunals and legal action, then how can a fair days work be measured and enforced?

 

It ain't about how long you spend at your desk. It's about what you do while you're there!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×