Forum menu
Sir Fred gets his windows smashed and his car done over…
[url] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7962825.stm [/url]
…and his former employers are paying for his security!?!
He’s got £700,000 a year FFS and he gets RBS to stump up £290 a month for his security. Do they pop to the shops for him when he runs out of loo roll too?
Can’t imagine that many of the poor sods who have lost their jobs recently are getting the same benefits.
Pah.
All part of his contractural arrangements, now if youd have done well at school you may be in the same boat, instead of being jealous.
Last time my car was vandalised all i got was a crime reference number from the police.
I wish they'd been so proactive with me. Alas, Im only a normal person.
The Scotsman even published a photo of the house.
http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/Vandals-attack-Sir-Fred-Goodwin39s.5106367.jp
[img] 
[/img]
A wee bit of Google Earth Streetview to find the exact location, and now we can all join in 🙂
Why not attack Myners instead? Then again, why let a bit of factual detail get in the way of good old fashioned inverse snobbery and jealousy.....
It's almost as if there is a deliberate plot to deflect genuine and well-justified public anger over the total failure of our economy into pointless hassling of one (admittedly rather obnoxious) little man.
BigDummy - Member
It's almost as if there is a deliberate plot to deflect genuine and well-justified public anger over the total failure of our economy into pointless hassling of one (admittedly rather obnoxious) little man.
Surely not.....who could have come up with such an idea?
I just find it incredible that his former employers who are on the arses at the moment are still picking up his bills.
You would think that a bloke who is making that sort of cash could find £290 a month from his own pocket.
So, attacking his home, and terrifying his family is right? What have they done to upset people?
Cowardly. Instead of being angry, people should be using this situation, to lobby the government, to try and have laws changed to prevent this kind of thing happening again.
But then, it's easier to throw a brick through someone's window, than to actually sit down and think...
RudeBoy speaks sense there.
Oh, and if a member of the 'public' is considered to be at threat, then the police will have a duty to provide extra protection. Which will cost the taxpayers more money.
Nice one. Let's not let intelligent consideration get in the way of blind hate, eh?
there's some bloody thick people out there. As per project, it's all contractual so the guy has done nothing wrong. Sadly there's a retarded notion prevalent right now looking to blame individuals which is both naive and ill informed.
Alternatively, I have no particular objection to a general insurrection, storming the Bank of England, burning Alistair Darling in effigy (or indeed in person), waving placards marked "Death to the Tripartite System of Financial Governance" or "Down with the Collateralised Debt Obligation Promoters" etc etc. But just smashing up Sir Fred's car is feeble-minded, and whining about how people are stopping his care getting smashed up just demonstrates a lack of focus.
🙂
CaptainFlashheart - Member
Then again, why let a bit of factual detail get in the way of good old fashioned inverse snobbery and jealousy.....
Hardly snobbery .. I admit I am jealous as apparently if I am rubbish at my job and bankrupt the company requiring a government bale out i get sacked and a bad reference...he gets £700,000 and free security
Capt you use the words snobbery and jealousy where most people would talk about fariness,standards and reasonableness.
He is not the correct target though just the latest face of rampant unfettered capitalism/greed but I would be embarrased to be in receipt of that money for that level of competency.
PS why on earth are you and RB agreeing is it a trick?
Gordon Brown and the Labour machinery are happy for the great unwashed to direct their anger towards Sir Fred and the large sums that are still manageable to a lay person.
The process of having the Goodwin scape goat hung out almost daily and the way ministers pander to the Labour strategy on this is pretty nasty and imho typical of desperate measures of a government in sharp decline.
Have I stepped into an alternative world where rudeboy talks sense?
Maybe the reaction to Sir Fred has been born out of the feeling that there is nothing that people can do to change the situation.
Political parties available to the electorate (as much as they deride each others efforts) would all have put us in this same roundabout situation.
Protest wont work. It just doesnt.
Banks have to stay despite how poorly they are run.
And. We all have to be part of the system if we dont want to live in a cave eating cat food.
As for protection from the police when you are being threatened. Maybe true from PC Plod out in the middle of the country but, as has happened in the recent past in various instances in East London, individuals are harrased with violence at there front door, the police do nothing and in one instance the individual being theatened gets stabbed and killed leaving a wife and young daughter. Despite various recorded please to the local police for help.
>it's all contractual so the guy has done nothing wrong<
Eh?
Not that I condone vandalism but:
Given the parlous state of the bank at the time and the fact his ( enhanced) pension settlement did not comply with RBS policy ( ergo he also lied to the select committee) I think you'll find that both he and the idiot Board that awarded him that severance package were more than a little guilty of corporate vandalism.
Good point, Lardy. But I'm sure a wealthy man will get police protection 'if necessary', as the life of such a valuable tax-paying member of society is worth more than some ordinary bloke in a housing estate?
now if youd have done well at school you may be in the same boat,
The school I went to encouraged us to do well as it might lead to a solid career as a factory labourer. I don't remember any mention of being CEO of a large bank being offered as a viable career choice.
trailmonkey - Membernow if youd have done well at school you may be in the same boat,
The school I went to encouraged us to do well as it might lead to a solid career as a factory labourer. I don't remember any mention of being CEO of a large bank being offered as a viable career choice.
Goodwin started his career behind the counter in a branch of the bank, IIRC.
because of goodwin's mismanagement of rbs, the bank had to bailed out to the tune of what, about £24billion. some people wouild have been fired, but goodwin gets a pretty substantial reward. pretty hard to swallow for some of us, but probably really difficult for a bank worker whose been paid off, someone whose business has folded because the bank has withdrawn their overdraft facilities or someone who has lost their job and is facing having their home repossessed. personally, i'm surprised it hasn't happened earlier, and won't be surprised if it happens again. in fact, speaking for myself, i'm looking forward to seeing his picture on the news after he's had a kicking from a couple of ex-construction workers.
meanwhile, calamity broon and his pals say the big words about how this in "unacceptable" and "all means" will be used to recover some of the money which the government agreed to him having whilst doing hee-haw about it and letting him keep his sir-hood
Have we got to the bottom as to why freddy wasnt fired? I know if i had performed to such a level at work id have probably got the sack and on good grounds.
As someone who is self employed and starting to feel the pinch, I dont have much sympathy for the man whatevwer comes his way.
As for remuneration boards, I can only think of one organisation which is more self serving and back scratching and thats MP's. Theres no hope.
[i]Goodwin started his career behind the counter in a branch of the bank, IIRC. [/i]
Can someone post the addresses of the people who promoted him, so we can smash their windows too?
But I'm sure a wealthy man will get police protection 'if necessary', as the life of such a valuable tax-paying member of society is worth more than some ordinary bloke in a housing estate?
Well, yes. And personally, I'm not going to grumble that someone who's paid millions of pounds into the tax system gets more protection than some council house scrote that's done nothing but milk the system without ever paid anything in. But that's a different debate altogether.
The reason RBS are paying for his security is that they, and the government, are responsible for the public villification of Goodwin. They made public his pension package to divert attention from the fact that the government played a far greater part in RBS's downfall than Fred. If he or his family, or indeed his property was harmed, he'd have a very strong case against his former employers.
I'm afraid I cant really blame Goodwin - he did what was best for him, he is sticking to what he originally signed up for. Its the people who agreed to it that are at fault. If someone offered me a million a year for doing nothing I'd be an utter idiot to refuse it. I'd be paying 400K a year in income tax which is probably more than the average person pays in a working lifetime, I'd expect "the system" (police etc) to work fairly well for me.
His job is to maximise Shareholder value, he failed, why wasn't he just fired like anyother employee in that situation?
Well, yes. And personally, I'm not going to grumble that someone who's paid millions of pounds into the tax system gets more protection than some council house scrote that's done nothing but milk the system without ever paid anything in. But that's a different debate altogether.
He earned millions and paid tax on it, fair enough. But the taxpayer is now a 70% stakeholder in RBS, meaning we paid 70% of the £60 million + pension fund he's living off just now, in other words, he's on a £49 million state handout. I'm pretty sure most of the schemie wee gadgies aren't on that, not even the fat ones with more kids than barnardos.
Where the government are the ones at fault as they agreed to the pension, St Fred is simply the public face a corrupt and self serving system, and had he just for one monent thought, "konw what, I don't deserve this" maybe he woudn't be as reviled as he is today.
"konw what, I don't deserve this" maybe he woudn't be as reviled as he is today.
Tosh. He'd still be blamed for the state RBS is in, he'd just be poorer.
The man earned £billions for shareholders, can you get your head around that? £Billions! That's thousands of £millions. Thousands and thousands of millions of pounds. £60 million is absolutely **** all in comparison. And in terms of the amount of money the government is throwing at the banks, it doesn't even register.
And personally, I'm not going to grumble that someone who's paid millions of pounds into the tax system gets more protection than some council house scrote that's done nothing but milk the system without ever paid anything in
In regards to the particular case mentioned by Lardy Biker; The victim was actually employed, and a father.
Are you going to be quite as bold as you are on here, and tell his child 'sorry your daddy was killed, but he's just not important enough for anyone to care about'?
It may be the reality, it don't make it right. Every single person in this country should receive the same protection from the law, as any other. Regardless of how much or how little money they have.
It's certainly several decimal points on the wrong side of comparable.
Seriously, he was just doing his job and, when people ask him if he has morals or cares about making money this way, they should remember that he is a capitalist banker. Nothing more, nothing less.
He was there to make money, both for himself and for the bank and shareholders. He did that. Or at least part of it.
You can't expect a bank CEO to be ethical in a capitalist society. It just does not work.
At the end of the day our current Prime Minister presided over the economic decisions that put us in this position, and the inflation of the public sector which is going to become increasingly unsustainable.
Blaming the banks is nonsense. They may have made stupid decisions but any organisation in a market economy is expected to act in its own self interest, and they were largely acting within the legal framework imposed by the government.
Blaming the banks, or individual bankers, is a political ploy to delay the broader realisation that the economy is completely borked, that we area service economy with one of the highest cost structures in the world, that anybody in a major pension scheme is essentially screwed, and that all the resources that should have been spent on stabilising and regulating the economy have been wasted by excess public spending. When people realise these things New Labour might, ironically enough, end up more hated than Thatcher ever was.
Sir Fred probably reflects on all this quite happily, but then everybody in this godforsaken country is playing the system so why shouldn't he.
At the end of the day our current Prime Minister presided over the economic decisions that put us in this position, and the inflation of the public sector which is going to become increasingly unsustainable.
Will he face calls to relinquish his pension, I wonder?
The man earned £billions for shareholders
Good point crayola. He also presided over the virtual bankruptcy of the institution whereby all those shares on which juicy dividends have been paid are worth jack (tens of billions). Hopefully the yeild and the period over which the shares were held would cover the price deop to zilch. Had it not been for the intervention of the state, something the banking industry has railed against since the year dot, RBS would be no more.
As much of a scapegoat as he is. he's not blameless and if you stick your head up to take the plaudits for doing well you should be prepared for the roasting when you cock up.
It's hardly a surprise now that everything has gone down the pan that those responsible might be the targets of personal attack - even though there are countless more besides Fred that might deserve to be on the receiving end of a bit of direct action. Unfortunately for him, he's a figurehead, and a bloody greedy one too - so, now he's getting a bit of a kicking from those who feel he'll never really be punished for his greed.
He blatantly took the pension pay-off, one assumes, hoping that everything would soon blow over and that some of his mates in whatever gentlemens' clubs he frequents would get him a nice quite little non-executive number on the board of a not too well known company. Isn't this what usually happens?
Pah - I've no sympathy for him. Plenty more it could and should happen to as well.
[i]They may have made stupid decisions[/i]
**** 'em. If I took the same casual attitude to risk, I'd be in jail.
Will he face calls to relinquish his pension, I wonder?
I suppose he may well do....from some of your old school chums who are no doubted quaking in their boots wondering if it's their recently restored sash windows in the fine environs of K&C which will next be broken by a flying brick.
Good call lardy_biker, the man has always been arrogant and quick to point out 'his' cleverness at pushing through fantastic deals, now suddenly invisible when all of that's fallen down. That's partly why he's getting blasted by all and sundry
noteeth, I think you'll find if you broke any laws, and then got caught, you'd be in jail. That is pretty much the way it works.
Until we have a new electoral system where everything is put to a retrospective tv vote on a saturday night, it is the government's job to produce and monitor the legal framework that runs the country.
the man has always been arrogant and quick to point out 'his' cleverness at pushing through fantastic deals, now suddenly invisible when all of that's fallen down. That's partly why he's getting blasted by all and sundry
Gordon or Fred? Works for both, really....
if I am rubbish at my job
Well, who decides what's rubbish? The shareholders or directors decided what position they wanted the bank to take and appointed someone appropriately. Blaming one man for the downfall of the bank is frankly ridiclous.
We're all in this mess because of the culture of greed, risk taking and slack regulation. That dates back to.. ooh.. umm.. let me think.. who started all that? It's on the tip of my tongue...
[i]I think you'll find if you broke any laws, and then got caught, you'd be in jail....it is the government's job to produce and monitor the legal framework that runs the country[/i]
It's exceedingly, er, rich of the financial sector to moan about the poor quality of regulation. Nobody was forced into ludicrous financial instruments - just as nobody was clamouring for transparency.
Tell you what: we'll try staffing general surgery with half the usual number of nurses - and then take bets on the outcome. If a given % of patients survive the day, then we'll award ourselves a bonus. Trebles all round! 👿
They weren't forced into anything, they were allowed to get away with it by the regulatory framework. If the regulators didn't understand the situation that isn't the banker's responsibility either.
[i]If the regulators didn't understand the situation that isn't the banker's responsibility either.[/i]
Utter pish. And I take as dim a view of the regulators/policy makers as anybody.
But WTF would I know - I just [i]consume[/i] public wealth, as opposed to [i]producing[/i] it.
Oh, the irony.
Everyone who works directly for RBS just got a 10-15% pay rise as a sweetener and anyone being paid off is getting 7 weeks tax free for every year they have worked for the company...