drat01 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 People think bonuses are evil and should not be paid to these banker becuase they got us into this mess etc... Totally unfair. Bonuses are contractual and are there to reward hard work. Back office workers who do the same job regardless of the economic situation deserve their bonuses and bonuses are there to reward the staff on their efforts that year. The clue is in the name ........ BONUS Definition: Something given or paid in addition to what is usual or expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 no **** word removed of a banker should get any bonus's for the forseeable future the excuse for them before was it got the brightest of talents well how shit has that turned out to be ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 no **** word removed of a banker should get any bonus's for the foreseeable future not every bank collapsed and had to borrow tonnes of money , so why tar all with one brush ... clearly you have issues with bankers but to call them "word removed " is shocking really ..If you got robbed in the street by a scouser does that mean every scouser is a word removed and should be locked up ? On the US capping thing , Obama can only cap the ones that borrowed government money, can't he ? ..means the other banks are free to pay bigger salaries and hook the better people ..kinda creates an imbalance , doesn't it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 don;t care Tony, they all took the piss, they all played the same games and they caused this mess. I don;t remember any banker ever coming out these past months and apologising, I don;t remeber an hedge fund manager doing that in the UK all banks are in trouble except it seems for HSBC and the industry as an whole should take the blame. The rationale behind bonuses was partly to blame and frankly a governemnt policy should be to tax all bounses at 80% ... not many now would **** off will they ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 frankly a governemnt policy should be to tax all bounses at 80% ... . Why not 100%? Nothing like 'incentivising' people.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 they all took the piss, they all played the same games and they caused this mess every single one of them , you know this for a fact do you ? By the same logic then , I assume that means you hold EVERY labour MP responsible ..and i don't remember Brown coming out and apologising either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 frankly a governemnt policy should be to tax all bounses at 80% ... . Why not 100%? Nothing like 'incentivising' people.. go on then explain what good it has doone this, the reason we are in the mess is that the banks because of no regulation took greater and greater risks to get more and more bonuses I don;t get any bonuses at work and the levels they got it for pushing bits of money around and actually contributing nowt was and is obscene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Ian I don't disagree with you that banks have screwed up but as Tony said to blanket them all as removed words is very silly. To then advocate even more tax on a select group (which i assume is completely illegal anyway) seems like an equally barking proposition to me. That is unless you mean that all bonuses paid to the work force of UK Plc should be subject to higher tax? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Mandelson's words today are perfect on Bank's Bonus's Mandelson warns RBS on high pay Lord Mandelson Lord Mandelson urged the bank to be mindful Lord Mandelson has told the Royal Bank of Scotland that it risks alienating ordinary people if it gave its traders and bosses "exorbitant" bonuses. The business secretary's comments came after a report in The Times said the firm is to award large bonuses, despite expectations of huge annual losses. "Please be mindful about how this looks and what public opinion will be," said Mr Mandelson. The recently bailed-out bank said its pay policy had yet to be decided. The bank, which is now majority owned by the government, told the BBC: "The board has yet to decide on remuneration policy for the year." It is set to release its annual earnings results on 26 February. "We have previously announced that the Board will receive no bonuses in 2008 and if there are any bonuses for 2009 they will be paid in shares," RBS said in a statement. BBC article Now do you agree with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 no specfic tax on those obscene bonus's in the city and yes it is tarring everyone with the same brush, tough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I don;t get any bonuses at work and the levels they got it for pushing bits of money around and actually contributing nowt was and is obsceneStrange how they were contributing nowt, but now that they aren't pushing these bits of money around any more the global economy has seized up. Maybe they were doing something important after all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Now do you agree with that? I see nothing wrong in performance related bonuses IF things are going well .... the banking sector is not unique in that regard ... Thing is , lets say you work in a department that has made £100m profit for the year and you've worked hard to help it achieve that .. the department next door makes a loss of say £100m .. should you be penalised for that other departments loss ? or should you get paid a bonus ?? as to his comment " it risks alienating ordinary people if it gave its traders and bosses "exorbitant" bonuses " I wonder what the ordinary people think about MP's expenses ... MP's are not really in any position to preach ...are they ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted February 5, 2009 Author Share Posted February 5, 2009 Now do you agree with that? I see nothing wrong in performance related bonuses IF things are going well .... the banking sector is not unique in that regard ... Thing is , lets say you work in a department that has made £100m profit for the year and you've worked hard to help it achieve that .. the department next door makes a loss of say £100m .. should you be penalised for that other departments loss ? or should you get paid a bonus ?? as to his comment " it risks alienating ordinary people if it gave its traders and bosses "exorbitant" bonuses " I wonder what the ordinary people think about MP's expenses ... MP's are not really in any position to preach ...are they ? my company made 200m profit last year, I got no bounus's, I see no justification for them in any business at all, they do not encourage hard work but just greed, I would reckon the majority of the working population don;t get bonus's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 I have never taken a sick day in my life Have you ever been ill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 my company made 200m profit last year, I got no bounus's, I see no justification for them in any business at all, they do not encourage hard work but just greed, I would reckon the majority of the working population don;t get bonus's So if I work hard, put in extra hours etc to meet my targets and get my bonus am I just being greedy? It sounds like this is maybe a wee bit of jealousy on your part and you actually resent people doing well for themselves. Please correct me if I'm wrong though.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomzep Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 my company made 200m profit last year, I got no bounus's, I see no justification for them in any business at all, they do not encourage hard work but just greed, I would reckon the majority of the working population don;t get bonus's Then why do companies offer them? Surely they dont want to just give money away to greedy workers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 my company made 200m profit last year, I got no bounus's, I see no justification for them in any business at all I assume you will be telling the head of TNT that then ( think that's where you work , isn't it ? ) Field Sales Executive TNT is the UK leader in express parcel delivery, providing an unparalleled range of guaranteed business-to-business services. In this role you will sell our service ... Location: Liverpool (L24) • Salary: £21,850 + fully expensed car, bonus and commission • Company: TNT UK. • Job type: Permanent • Date posted: 04/02/2009 Indoor Sales Executive TNT is the UK’s leading business-to-business delivery service with a reputation for innovation and service excellence. This role involves selling our market-leading service to customers over the telephone. You will also source new business and keep in close contact with our exis ... Location: Barking (IG11) • Salary: £18,880 + bonus, commission and benefits • Company: TNT UK. • Job type: Permanent • Date posted: 04/02/2009 It sounds like this is maybe a wee bit of jealousy on your part and you actually resent people doing well for themselves. Please correct me if I'm wrong though.. tad harsh Awol , Ian is only expressing his point of view , in his own inimitable way .. tbh I don't think it's jealously driven , I think it's more the principal verses his beliefs in this case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 The problem is quite simple, where Bonus's become the norm they are no longer a bonus. In the banking sector especially they have become the norm. The package should be more like a sales plan and commission paid on certain targets being reached. These targets are measurable and changeable. Typically they will work on a hockey stick scale where they rise as you get closer to 100% The down side, if you can call it that, is typically base salary goes down which incentivises you to work to achieving target. If you reach 100% one year next year your target is adapted accordingly in the following to a higher ceiling points What we are seeing here is a mix of base salary and commission (they call it bonus) and the rest of the real world dont work like that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 See Tony you have made that big mistake of mixing job types - base is low on those with incentives being the higher portion. Its the old OTE thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted February 5, 2009 Share Posted February 5, 2009 Now do you agree with that? I think that as the majority shareholder, the government, on behalf of the taxpayers, ought to be laying down the law to the bank's board not just (correctly) warning of risks of alienation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts