Money is never enough. Or is it?

Basically, this article discusses about the amount of money the Chief Executive of a national bank has received as an annual bonus (we're not talking about the salary, "just" the bonus)...something arouns 56 times the salary of the average employee.

What do you think about it? Too much? Overall fair, taken into consideration the responsibilities a CEO has compared to the average employee?

Reply 1

Palindromic

bit excessive but CEOs deserve bonuses. everyone moans about it, but if companies dont give big bonuses then CEO would go to another company that does give them. being a CEO is extremely stressful, and is prone to mass media scrutiny and calls to be sacked if anything happens, even if its not your fault! CEOs have to have these big bonuses in order to attract them, thus making the company even more successful :smile:

Reply 2

Hopple

I don't see why chasing out the bankers who got us into this mess is a bad thing. But even if we don't intend to chase them out, is incentivising them with quick huge cash a good idea? Tie them in to the share price, and they can only start cashing out after 5 years or something.

Reply 3

blue n white army

Original post by Hopple

Pre-financial crisis executives were still remunerated with share-options and other share schemes. It's not as simple as it seems and doesn't necessarily guarantee good performance.

a note on the OP, the majority of an executive directors remuneration package is bonus and they only have a simple base salary.

Reply 4

Rakas21

It's entirely fair.

Ultimately he chose to go into banking presumably because he wanted a high salary, he then got to the top of his profession and now commands a great salary.

If you object to this practice then buy shares in the business and raise your objections.

Reply 5

Izzyeviel

Banks pay silly wages, but regardless, I agree. Good results should be rewarded with a good bonus.

Reply 6

Hopple

Original post by blue n white army

True, I think the 'tons of cash now' scheme needs to be wiped out from more than just the very top.

Original post by Rakas21

Yeah, buy shares so he can claim he's done an even better job.

Reply 7

Rakas21

Original post by Hopple

True, I think the 'tons of cash now' scheme needs to be wiped out from more than just the very top.

Yeah, buy shares so he can claim he's done an even better job.

What's your problem with it? If you want a high salary you go into a field paying high salaries and try get yourself to the top.

Society has no right to tell a profitable that what they are paying is excessive, it is their right to pay their staff.

People need to stop being envious and start aspiring to to be as wealthy as this guy.

Reply 8

CEKTOP

RBS is currently in an appalling state, I call for a £0 bonus for the fat dude in the picture.

Reply 9

blue n white army

Original post by Hopple

True, I think the 'tons of cash now' scheme needs to be wiped out from more than just the very top.

Yeah, buy shares so he can claim he's done an even better job.

Hester has done a good job though since joining RBS though....

Reply 10

Hopple

Original post by Rakas21

We own RBS. And it is us who are acting as guarantors for the banks. We don't have a say but we should.

Original post by blue n white army

Hester has done a good job though since joining RBS though....

Look at the share price whilst he's been there, although it hasn't been wiped out, I fail to see how he's done a 'good job'. And even then, why it had to be an obscenely highly paid person there to manage it.

Reply 11

Rakas21

Original post by Hopple

We own RBS. And it is us who are acting as guarantors for the banks. We don't have a say but we should.

Look at the share price whilst he's been there, although it hasn't been wiped out, I fail to see how he's done a 'good job'. And even then, why it had to be an obscenely highly paid person there to manage it.

So lets have the treasury run it or give it to the BOE as a retail arm, if so then i'd support low salaries. Unfortunately for you, the government decided not to take control.

He's doing a good job in so far as his job is to get rid of bad debt and return it to profitability, the share price of a government owned venture is'nt the best indicator given the potential for intervention.

Reply 12

Bill_Gates

Alot of wanabe investment bankers will come into this thread. Then they will hit the real world and realize the carrot is out of reach, the games already been won and your not even on the pitch. Its never justifiable its morally wrong.

Reply 13

ApresAlkan

If you reduce wages of the rich they will leave. And be replaced at the lower figure by people with exactly the same skill level. If you limit salaries/bonuses, then that means that more money has to be spent on the lower workers so that we live in a more equal society—a better society.

Reply 14

blue n white army

Original post by Hopple

the fact that the government own a large chunk of the shares is probably keeping the share price down though.

as for the high pay corporate governance codes state that remuneration should be set at a level that will attract and retain the best talent. If you offer them a low package why would they want to come? especially in a risky industry where big decisions have to be made.

Reply 15

yaboy

If i was the CEO i would try rake in every penny, every man for themselves sorry but life isnt a fair game

Reply 16

Rakas21

Original post by ApresAlkan

Thats not how business works.

Either they will sit on the cash like Apple do or reinvest it in the business, there's little reason to think that money would go on increasing the salaries of anybody else.