[Closed] if you want to complain about RBS boss's £960,000 pay - here's his email!

Ernie - remember Deng Xiaoping famously stated that "it doesn't matter if a cat is black or yellow (now quoted as white) as long as it catches the mouse." In our mixed UK economy, we had black and yellow cats but they all missed the mouse!

FWIW - since 2004, the highest level of profitability generated by the masters of the universe at RBS was an unimpressive 0.84% (ROA) in 2004. And for that they earn.....?

Customer service is always rated highly so I don't believe higher rewards would make a difference, overall they seem to have the right balance.

What is the difference between the number of customers, employee and capital under management that CFS has and RBS has?

Banks the financial experts lending money left right and centre, what a bunch of cocks, supposedly masters in their field bailed out out by Jo Public. They are leeches.

Instead of whining about his pay and harassing this man, why don't you vote in a far left socialist party instead of the conservatives. Then pay might be fairer, or move to cuba! I'm sure you will all love that!

The people get the government it deserves.

The people get the government it deserves.

Poor quality troll, 2/10.

To be honest I dont really care about how much he gets (A lot more people earn a lot more than me), but if someone gave me a million in shares i'd cash em in and buy a new bike....... or 2........ or 3 ........... or 4.......... you know where this is going! 😛

Ohh and maybe some forks, yes I could do with some new forks.

Ahh. So apparently the difference is between the obscene package of £960,000 and the perfectly reasonable package of £773,000.

Hint: it's in the first post of this thread.

Apparently he won't be accepting his bonus - I'm sure it will make all those who practice the politics of envy very happy - now who's next!

Sorry, haven't read the full topic, but this is my thoughts.

If he gets a bonus of approx £960k in shares. He is then sensitised to work harder and point the company in the right direction. With that, two things happen..

His bonus grows (Share price goes up) and the business pays more back to the taxpayer (in taxes etc).

Surely it's win-win. Win for the chap running a multi billion company, and win for the taxpayer?

I'm sure it will make all those who practice the politics of envy very happy

Well the guy who said this, will certainly be every happy :

[i]"People will not understand how somebody can get a whacking great bonus when they are basically running a state-owned concern"[/i]

Although I had no idea that leading Tory, ex-Etonian, and former Bullingdon Club member, Boris Johnson, 'practiced the politics of envy' 😯

He called the decision to award the bonus "absolutely bewildering".

[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-joins-attack-on-no-10s-failure-over-rbs-bosss-bonus-6295906.html ]Boris joins attack on No 10's 'failure' over RBS boss's bonus[/url]

You and I can sleep easy E_L, Hester is turning down his bonus. Inevitable after Hampton did the same.

Even he agrees he doesn't deserve it :wink:!!

I'm not going to sleep easy hurty.......I've just discovered that my elected mayor practices the politics of envy ! 😐

fatmax - Member

If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys.

Funny how this maxim ever only seems to apply in sectors where the pay is already unconscionably high.

Personally, I reckon he shouldve taken his bonus. He's heading a huge bank at the moment, in a bank, a million pounds is petty cash so for the position he's in and the pressure he's under, the bonus was fitting. Just a load of people thinking the country will sort itself out who have no idea how its gonna happen really shouldn't complain. He's being productive and getting somewhere, if you really want, let'sjust tell him not to bother because obviously, its not worth nine hundred and odd thousand to start rebuilding what's been messed up.

So now the exchequer has missed out on the tax on his bonus. Presumably 50% + 10% NI, or about £600k. Enough for quite a few teachers or some hospital consultants.

I guess nothing is simple.

Presumably 50% + 10% NI

Presumable the exchequer can ask for 84%, since it's 84% owned by the tax payer. Which sounds like a better deal.

You need to sharpen up on your maths konabunny if you want to play the numbers game

earnie - you are being very selective in your quotes, what about all the labour, conservative and lib dem quotes.

In 5 years, when RBS no longer exists and the tax payer is sitting on a loss of 45bn, you will no doubt be calling for the heads of those who failed to appoint the right person to protect the tax payers investment.

Bankers have been getting paid too much. But like it or not Hester has been doing a good job at RBS, shrinking the place, getting it focused on it's core business again and hopefully ready for sale so we can get our money out of it.

He's not the bad guy and if he quits what will that achieve? If Labour are so outraged by his £2mm pay for 2011 why did it pay him £7.2mm in 2008? Epic levels of hypocracy, they really do not have a leg to stand on.

So - if bankers need to have their mouths stuffed with gold to have the incentive to work hard why does this not apply to healthcare workers and teachers? apparently we do not need the incentive of payrises let alone bonuses.

Presumably, he could leave, claim "constructive dismissal" and sue the buggers for lost earnings?

His bonus grows (Share price goes up) and the business pays more back to the taxpayer (in taxes etc).

Surely it's win-win. Win for the chap running a multi billion company, and win for the taxpayer?

Yes, well that's how I see it as long as the bonus is directly linked to profits.

oldnpastit - it's a little more complicated than that as the bonus was paid in shares. Let's assume he holds onto them until the share price doubles..when he sells them, he'll pay tax on the gain - a lot more than the 50% of £960,000.......

TJ you of all people should be hoping Hester sticks around and succeeds. Your independent Scotland cant afford a perpetually bust RBS.

When he took the job (at the request of G.Brown and A.Darling) I dont think he was signing up to be public enemy #1. Whatever he does it will be the same this time next year. Haters gonna hate.

Here he is on a horse.

[img] [/img]

Man of the people.

I think they've squeezed that pic to make him look a bit thinner though.

Here he is on a horse.

And? What's your point? Or is a little bit of the chip on your shoulder showing through?

Prejudice is a terrible thing, isn't it? Or is prejudice acceptable if it's [i]your[/i] prejudice?

When he took the job (at the request of G.Brown and A.Darling) I dont think he was signing up to be public enemy #1. Whatever he does it will be the same this time next year. Haters gonna hate

he must have had an idea he would come under scrutiny and the pricing of his bonus at a whisker under a million seems to be a clear sign he was hoping no one would notice

every year at bank bonus time a lot of people are offended by the money thrown around in the sector, and that was before the crash, rising unemployment, wage freezes, inflation, recession- all caused by failures in banking
the guys already a millionaire running a publicly owned bank,what was he expecting?
wait till you see the fuss next year when we are even further down the pan

Prejudice is a terrible thing, isn't it?

What prejudice?

It's just a picture of him on a horse.

'all caused by failures in banking'

all caused by our collective greed! the need to own your own home (regardless of whether you could afford one!), the need to have a 'national health service', the need for the latest gadget / bike / bling!

The debt fuel comes from our owns societies unrealistic expectations.

all caused by our collective greed! the need to own your own home (regardless of whether you could afford one!)

I don't think this is quite fair.

There was a concerted effort by the monied classes to convince the general public that they could afford to buy their own homes without proper consideration of what the freeing up of credit would do to house prices.

And we are still being conned by politicians and bankers into believing that high house prices are due to a lack of supply, when in fact they have far more to do with too much credit.

What sent house prices into the stratosphere was banks providing 100% (+) mortgages, which led people to believe that it was OK to pay more for a house than you knew it was worth (on the grounds that it would be worth that at some point in the future).

It wasn't just greed. It was a cynical exercise to get people into debt, where they could be milked for the rest of their lives.

But now we are all paying the price, because the (truly greedy) banks have created more debt than can be serviced by the economy, leading to defaults and the whole thing unravelling.

Some people might have been greedy/opportunist, but the people who should have known better, and allowed the situation to get out of hand were politicians and bankers.

RPRT - sometimes we have to make our own decisions. We simply cannot blame others for things like borrowing more than one can afford. Would you jump off a cliff if a banker/politican said it was good for you?

druidh - Member
oldnpastit - it's a little more complicated than that as the bonus was paid in shares. Let's assume he holds onto them until the share price doubles..when he sells them, he'll pay tax on the gain - a lot more than the 50% of £960,000.......

fwiw the terms of the bonus meant he couldn't cash in the shares until 2014.

Would you jump off a cliff if a banker/politican said it was good for you?

Of course not, but it wasn't like that.

It was more like people were being told to go through a door and something nice would be waiting for them on the other side...

'go through a door and something nice would be waiting for them on the other side...'

so, RPRT if someone told you to go through a door and something nice would be waiting for you, would you walk through that door without having done your homework? Or would you just wander in and hope for the best?

rightplacerighttime - Member
It wasn't just greed. It was a cynical exercise to get people into debt, where they could be milked for the rest of their lives.

And despite everything that's happened in the last 2/3 years, there's still folk on here looking for, and recommending, cheap credit to buy shiny new toys.

How convenient to have someone to point the finger at.

so, RPRT if someone told you to go through a door and something nice would be waiting for you, would you walk through that door without having done your homework? Or would you just wander in and hope for the best?

Well, as it happens we have a nice house and not much of a mortgage, so no, I personally didn't go through the door.

But if you really don't understand what I'm trying to say, but would rather exercise your pedantry muscle, carry on...

I've said it before.. I wish the STW forum archives were extensive enough to let us pull out the threads whinging that the Banks weren't handing out loans easily enough.

You have a different memory to me then.

I recall about 10 years ago, loads of people remortgaging their houses to "release the equity" that they could then spend on a car/kitchen/holiday - safe in the knowledge that their house prices would rise inexorably and that it would all be covered.

I also know people who took out self certified (liar) mortgages for almost the entire value of their houses.

I also know people who leapt into the buy-to-let business pretty much at the drop of a hat.

And all the time people were being urged to jump into the housing market NOW, before they got left behind forever.

RPRT - i thinks its you who is not understanding what im trying to say

and as for 'we have a nice house' as long as im alright jack..........

so, RPRT if someone told you to go through a door and something nice would be waiting for you, would you walk through that door without having done your homework? Or would you just wander in and hope for the best?

At the same time as trying to convince everyone that they needed to buy houses and we'd all be happier and richer buying into the dream.
They put measures in place to prevent an easier option via social housing.
We were being herded down a one way street, with gates being locked behind us.
I was lucky enough to have inherited a house but I see many for whom it's been a brick around their neck

Well, as it happens we have a nice house and not much of a mortgage, so no, I personally didn't go through the door.

in other words, he's got equity, but he didn't 'cash it in'...

but lots of people did.

and lots of governments did similar things with their national budget.

('more debt is fine, because we'll be earning more next year, and then we can afford to service the debt', repeat, repeat, repeat, etc. oh dear.)

and here we are.

Of course I understand what you are trying to say.

You are trying to say that people who are now in difficulty are there largely because of their own greed.

I disagree.

I think that some were greedy, but that many, if not most were conned into thinking that the economy and housing market works in a different way to the way it really does.

I also think that they/we are still being conned.

We are led to believe that economists/politicians/bankers might be best placed to run the financial system in a way that benefits us all. But I don't think they do. I think that they run it largely for their own interests in a conspiracy of silence.

Just as most people wouldn't question a doctor who looked after their health, so they don't question professionals who look after their money. But they should because people who have control of your money have a conflict of interests.

Apparently he's not going to accept the Bonus anyway.

If anyone is bothered ?

RPRT - I sympathise with your position and glad that you are not affected personally. But 'tis a good lesson for all - don't take things for granted and take responsibility.

Retail financial services is full of charlatan's and the best advice is the check everything [b]very carefully indeed. [/b]Ditto, sadly, doctors. I have had two incidents recently with mis-diagnosis. One with recommendation to give my son unnecessary steroids - "it won't do any harm"!!??? Ditto my mother - mis-diagnosed for 20 years and my mother-in-law. And as for politicians....!???

Only a fool doesn't question.....

I'm not saying that doctors don't get things wrong - just that they don't have a vested interest in doing so.

Whereas in the financial sector there is often an incentive to behave inappropriately - hence the vast number of mis-selling cases now going through the system.

But my point about taking on credit isn't that a few wrong uns were pushing a few specific deals, it's that for a while, not only the whole of the industry, but almost all of Government, and the Opposition, and the media were urging a particular (wrong) course of action.

It's very difficult for individuals to see past that.

Do the people of Cuba "deserve" to live under the government of Cuba?
Poor quality troll, 2/10.

@Konabunny

I was talking about democracies. If the people cared so much about bankers pay they should not have voted in a conservative government who protect the wishes of a sector of society well known for rampant cronyism, corruption and greed.

Honestly, mountain bikers are often the 4 wheel drive Audi London types. How many of you would have liked to live in a fairer and more heavily taxed country like Norway pre-2008? Not a lot.....most of you were living a dream built on the credit bubble. Some of us knew what was going to happen and the people failed to take note.

it's that for a while, not only the whole of the industry, but almost all of Government, and the Opposition, and the media were urging a particular (wrong) course of action.

They wouldn't dare do anything like that now

What if - say - CmD were to suggest that we should try to pay off our credit cards?
That's great financial advice

I'm going to write to him and suggest he does just that, what could he possibly see wrong in doing that?
I'm sure he'll include it in his next conference speech

[quote=nealglover]...Apparently he's not going to accept the Bonus anyway.

If anyone is bothered ?

Well it looks like nobody is actually bothered.

I reckon he should have taken it, based on the lack of response to the news of him turning it down.

.

Neal - sorry, but I think that's because your news had been posted earlier!!

Jota - imagine if CMD said, go and use a credit card to spend and as a form of credit. Time to bash the plastic! How would that advice be classified?

mashiehood - Member

earnie - you are being very selective in your quotes, what about all the labour, conservative and lib dem quotes.

I posted a link to the [i]whole article[/i], what more did you want me to do - copy and paste the entire article out of the Independent ? ffs 😀

Jota - imagine if CMD said, go and use a credit card to spend and as a form of credit. Time to bash the plastic! How would that advice be classified?

As you know he pulled the 'pay off your cards speech'
under threat of upsetting all his mates in big business and banking no doubt

Indeed he did! But the serious point, is lets hope people do not reach for the plastic given current APR's and the cheap cost of alternative funding. Its a message that always gets bogged down in silly politics when it is made.

But don't you think that by pulling that speech [old news, I know] that's effectively what he's [and the government] condoning?

'kin madness

nealglover - Member

I reckon he should have taken it, based on the lack of response to the news of him turning it down.

Eric Daniels (Lloyds) declined his £2.3m bonus for 09. Practically nobody noticed. So next time round he said screw it.

As you know he pulled the 'pay off your cards speech'
under threat of upsetting all his mates in big business and banking no doubt

He could afford to, safe in the knowledge that no one would actually pay a blind bit of notice to what he was saying, but that loads of old buffers around the shires would say "Quite right. What a sensible young man our Prime Minister is"

Eric Daniels (Lloyds) declined his £2.3m bonus for 09. Practically nobody noticed. So next time round he said screw it.

I don't blame him.

People love to moan on about it, and spam every social Internet site for people to send emails to (what's clearly not) his personal email address and complain about it.

But he turns it down and people barely notice.