[broon-loon]

Heard someone on radio this morning justifying the bonus payout and suggesting he could earn much more elsewhere!

Civic duty eh..........

[H_B]

David Cameron could easily stop this payment happening.

He is choosing not to.

It's not Hester's fault. He's a well trained trough muncher. That's what they do.

On the explanation, I'd give him the same advice to anyone else, once their bonus was removed. If you can do better elsewhere, f**k off and do one. We'll find someone else to run a bank at a loss for £1 million a year.

[capybara]

I well at this time of austerity it is good to that we are all in this togeather and we are all prepared to make a sacrifice.

Cameron will come out wring his hands,say this is terrible and do sod all about this. Maybe Cable will spring into action.

[BigMartyn86]

Because it's in shares it means if he works harder and does a better job then he will earn more. More incentive for getting the bank back on track and getting himself a better pay out.

TBH I can see why a lot of people get pissed off at bank leaders getting such big pay outs. But on the other hand compare it to some football players. Carlos Tevez is reportedly £9.3 million out of pocket since November. As Man City are refusing to pay him for being a spoilt wee dick and refusing to play.

[H_B]

BigMartyn86, on 27 January 2012 - 10:42, said:

But on the other hand compare it to some football players.

This is an absolutely awful comparison.

[Aufc]

H_B, on 27 January 2012 - 10:49, said:

This is an absolutely awful comparison.

Agreed.

[BigMartyn86]

H_B, on 27 January 2012 - 10:49, said:

This is an absolutely awful comparison.

Yeah I guess your right. One guy is in charge of a bank who is trying to stabilise it in the recession and gets just under a £1 million bonus in shares. Where the other guy just has to kick a ball into a net for a living and makes £286,000 a week after tax. Why is it so justifiable for the footballer to earn obscene amounts of money but not for the banker.

[Reynard]

Who put Hester in this job and why didn't they "regulate" his salary? What were his objectives on taking the job and did he meet his targets? Does he get a bonus simply because that's what they all get or is he getting it because whoever stuck him in the job reckons he has done what is being asked of him.

Meanwhile the taxpayers are still getting the pish ripped out of them. That bank should have been allowed to die. It was bankrupt through its own mistakes, those mistakes shouldn't be compounded by making them state owned.

[broon-loon]

H_B, on 27 January 2012 - 10:38, said:

On the explanation, I'd give him the same advice to anyone else, once their bonus was removed. If you can do better elsewhere, f**k off and do one. We'll find someone else to run a bank at a loss for £1 million a year.

Pretty obvious to you and I, but they must have a seriously overflated opinion of themselves and what they should be earning - if you pardon the pun! Surely that must be addressed ....?

[H_B]

BigMartyn86, on 27 January 2012 - 11:07, said:

Yeah I guess your right. One guy is in charge of a bank who is trying to stabilise it in the recession and gets just under a £1 million bonus in shares. Where the other guy just has to kick a ball into a net for a living and makes £286,000 a week after tax. Why is it so justifiable for the footballer to earn obscene amounts of money but not for the banker.

I wasn't aware that the Taxpayer owned 5/6ths of Manchester City.

You learn something new every day.

[Unleash The Nade]

BigMartyn86, on 27 January 2012 - 10:42, said:

TBH I can see why a lot of people get pissed off at bank leaders getting such big pay outs. But on the other hand compare it to some football players. Carlos Tevez is reportedly £9.3 million out of pocket since November. As Man City are refusing to pay him for being a spoilt wee dick and refusing to play.

H_B, on 27 January 2012 - 10:49, said:

This is an absolutely awful comparison.

Aufc, on 27 January 2012 - 11:01, said:

Agreed.

To be fair, Hester did try and make it once as a striker, but he was shit

[H_B]

broon-loon, on 27 January 2012 - 11:23, said:

Pretty obvious to you and I, but they must have a seriously overflated opinion of themselves and what they should be earning - if you pardon the pun! Surely that must be addressed ....?

Who wants to address it though? It's a circle jerk.

Remember the front benches of both parties also want to , or are already, be paid exhorbitant amounts for executive positions. It's a perpetual gravy train for ex-politicians and their friends.

Why would turkeys vote for Xmas?

Look at how many ex-ministers end up in well paid corporate positions with FTSE 100 companies.

[H_B]

Unleash The Nade, on 27 January 2012 - 11:27, said:

To be fair, Hester did try and make it once as a striker, but he was shit

His brother, Devin, is excellent in the NFL...

[Mozzamozza]

Get these c***s to f**k.

Its banking, not brain surgery.

Arrogant twats.

[Busta Nut]

H_B, on 27 January 2012 - 11:25, said:

I wasn't aware that the Taxpayer owned 5/6ths of Manchester City.

the taxpayer doesn't own shit

[H_B]

Busta Nut, on 27 January 2012 - 12:15, said:

the taxpayer doesn't own shit

Sorry, what?

[Busta Nut]

H_B, on 27 January 2012 - 12:22, said:

Sorry, what?

The taxpayers, do not own anypart of the RBS, the government may claim a stake but not the taxpayers

[Reynard]

Busta Nut, on 27 January 2012 - 12:26, said:

The taxpayers, do not own anypart of the RBS, the government may claim a stake but not the taxpayers

Governments ahve no money of their own. It's all taxpayers money. All of it, every single fucking penny. When they rack up debt the liability falls on the taxpayer. You are fucking dim if you don't even manage to grasp that basic fact.

[H_B]

Busta Nut, on 27 January 2012 - 12:26, said:

The taxpayers, do not own anypart of the RBS, the government may claim a stake but not the taxpayers

What a clown.

[Reynard]

H_B, on 27 January 2012 - 12:57, said:

What a clown.

Is this the sort of moron Salmon wants to give a fucking vote to?

[drs]

H_B, on 27 January 2012 - 10:38, said:

David Cameron could easily stop this payment happening.

No he couldnt, he's bound by what the previous Labour govt that bankrupted the country put in place.

Let us all remember that it was the Labour party that knighted Sir Fred Goodwin.

This post has been edited by drs: 27 January 2012 - 13:15

[Reynard]

drs, on 27 January 2012 - 13:15, said:

No he couldnt, he's bound by what the previous Labour govt that bankrupted the country put in place.

Let us all remember that it was the Labour party that knighted Sir Fred Goodwin.

Indeed. And the same Fred Goodwin that was egged on by Alex Salmon to buy the Dutch bank that ultimately fucked over RBS. A total bunch of fannies.

[Dindeleux]

BigMartyn86, on 27 January 2012 - 11:07, said:

Where the other guy just has to kick a ball into a net for a living and makes £286,000 a week after tax.

Wages in England are crazy but there is no way Tevez earns this much after tax.

[Suspect Device]

If he does well his bonus is worth a lot more than £963k and it's also good for the government/taxpayer.

Not too worried personally. Much better than giving a cash bonus for failure like they normally do. A bonus based on share performance is preferable.

Especially since my wife has 10,000 shares in RBS in her ISA. It would be nice to see an SP of £7 again. For her and the tax payer although I think we (edit: the taxpayer) make a profit on anything more than 70p.

This post has been edited by Suspect Device: 27 January 2012 - 13:39

[Unleash The Nade]

Fucking outrageous waste of taxpayers money.
That kind of cash would have at least bought the Queen a new royal dingy!!