Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Bankers' bonus cap architect says EU must sue UK government 
Author Message
Legend

Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:30 pm
Posts: 45931
Location: Belfast
Reply with quote
http://www.theguardian.com/business/201 ... government

The politicians are either craven or thinking about their own future so it's hardly a surprise the bankers are carrying on regardless.

_________________
Plain English advice on everything money, purchase and service related:

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/


Tue Mar 04, 2014 7:24 pm
Profile
Doesn't have much of a life

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:50 am
Posts: 1911
Reply with quote
What's new. The law is ill-conceived and has predictably perverse consequences. In this case it will force up banks wage bills to the same extent that it reduces their bonus payouts, meaning it is harder to claw back overpaid bonuses or to reduce costs during the next downturn.

What this guy wants is total pay caps for people he doesn't like. But he didn't have the authority to write such a law, so he cobbled together a pisspoor proxy that is easily evaded, and now he's being a whiny bitch about it.


Tue Mar 04, 2014 9:14 pm
Profile
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:21 am
Posts: 12700
Location: The Right Side of the Pennines (metaphorically & geographically)
Reply with quote
You can't bitch about it when you made the law with massive loopholes.

_________________
pcernie wrote:
'I'm going to snort this off your arse - for the benefit of government statistics, of course.'


Wed Mar 05, 2014 7:55 am
Profile WWW
I haven't seen my friends in so long
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 1:03 pm
Posts: 5041
Location: London
Reply with quote
and quite frankly (IMHO) the law should not be there

If as a salesman I have a contract that says I will be paid 10% comission on sales then irrecpective of if I work for a Bank selling financial products or a tarmac company selling tarmac I should be paid my bonus. The politicians should not interfear.

_________________
John_Vella wrote:
OK, so all we need to do is find a half African, half Chinese, half Asian, gay, one eyed, wheelchair bound dwarf with tourettes and a lisp, and a st st stutter and we could make the best panel show ever.


Thu Mar 06, 2014 2:50 pm
Profile
Officially Mrs saspro
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:55 pm
Posts: 4955
Location: on the naughty step
Reply with quote
hifidelity2 wrote:
and quite frankly (IMHO) the law should not be there

If as a salesman I have a contract that says I will be paid 10% comission on sales then irrecpective of if I work for a Bank selling financial products or a tarmac company selling tarmac I should be paid my bonus. The politicians should not interfear.

They probably could try and tax the hell out of it though.


Thu Mar 06, 2014 3:05 pm
Profile WWW
What's a life?
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 17040
Reply with quote
hifidelity2 wrote:
and quite frankly (IMHO) the law should not be there
If as a salesman I have a contract that says I will be paid 10% comission on sales then irrecpective of if I work for a Bank selling financial products or a tarmac company selling tarmac I should be paid my bonus. The politicians should not interfear.

They're not salesmen, the government already interferes in the contract between you and your employer in a multitude of ways, and I suspect you haven't got the capability to cause massive damage to the entire economy if you get out of hand.

The structure of the bonus culture in our financial institutions was one of the identified causes of the trouble in the late noughties which has brought misery to hundreds of thousands if not millions of people. This is an attempt to prevent a recurrence of that behaviour and therefore the massive negative consequences it eventually brings. The only people saying otherwise are people with a vested interest in that culture continuing/coming back. There are already a vast swathe of legislation, both national international, which define how our financial institutions do, or at least should, operate. I've yet to hear a valid argument as to what's so special or disastrous about this one.


Thu Mar 06, 2014 3:08 pm
Profile
Legend
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:02 am
Posts: 29240
Location: Guantanamo Bay (thanks bobbdobbs)
Reply with quote
hifidelity2 wrote:
and quite frankly (IMHO) the law should not be there

If as a salesman I have a contract that says I will be paid 10% comission on sales then irrecpective of if I work for a Bank selling financial products or a tarmac company selling tarmac I should be paid my bonus. The politicians should not interfear.

Yes but commission is different from a bonus which is there to keep you from moving to a competitor. They could pay a higher commission or higher basic. Loads of wages are tweaked because of tax rates or how certain benefits are treated.

_________________
Do concentrate, 007...

"You are gifted. Mine is bordering on seven seconds."

https://www.dropbox.com/referrals/NTg5MzczNTk

http://astore.amazon.co.uk/wwwx404couk-21


Thu Mar 06, 2014 3:13 pm
Profile
Doesn't have much of a life

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:50 am
Posts: 1911
Reply with quote
Amnesia10 wrote:
hifidelity2 wrote:
and quite frankly (IMHO) the law should not be there

If as a salesman I have a contract that says I will be paid 10% comission on sales then irrecpective of if I work for a Bank selling financial products or a tarmac company selling tarmac I should be paid my bonus. The politicians should not interfear.

Yes but commission is different from a bonus which is there to keep you from moving to a competitor. They could pay a higher commission or higher basic. Loads of wages are tweaked because of tax rates or how certain benefits are treated.

Excellent news. The same rule shows that cutting bonuses but raising wages isn't cheating. Controversy over, it turns out that different types of pay are not all... pay.


Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:35 pm
Profile
Doesn't have much of a life

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 6:50 am
Posts: 1911
Reply with quote
jonbwfc wrote:
This is an attempt to prevent a recurrence of that behaviour and therefore the massive negative consequences it eventually brings.

It doesn't address the behaviour. It is a cack-handed attempt to remove the motivation, but easily evaded. They could have stipulated that bonuses over X% of wages should be paid in bonds (the ones that get the bigger haircuts), and then allowed the bonds to be sold off immediately. That would give an early warning of the employees, and the secondary markets, level of faith in the business. One which is far less susceptible to manipulation than Libor - albeit surely less liquid.

This would still have some of the negative implications of the current plan, but would at least have the value of enabling the market to provide useful information, while limiting the need for banks to convert half their wage bill into the sort of payments that are hard to claw back.
jonbwfc wrote:
The only people saying otherwise are people with a vested interest in that culture continuing/coming back. There are already a vast swathe of legislation, both national international, which define how our financial institutions do, or at least should, operate. I've yet to hear a valid argument as to what's so special or disastrous about this one.

I have, if anything, a vested interest in the banks losing out to hedge funds and private equity outfits, these being the majority of my employers. More money would ultimately go into my pocket if it were possible to make it stick. But I object in principle to doing things that are counter productive and ill conceived.


Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:53 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 9 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software.