Hey Banker, can you spare a dime?
In February 2010 the RBS (Royal Bank of Scotland) proposed a bonus pot for its 22,000 investment bankers of around £1.3 billion (that's not a typo - it is a 'b' in front of illion) against last year's £1 billion.
The Edinburgh-based bank seemingly has been given the green light by UK Financial Investments (UKFI), the body set up to manage the Government's stakes in banks.
RBS is 84% U.K. taxpayer-owned after a string of bail-outs, was in deficit to the tune of £3 billion and was expected to post higher losses for the last year to December.
Where's my shares?
The bonus proposals came despite the deficit and it's almost certain they didn't meet Government lending targets (which were laid out as part of the terms of its bail-out).
Where's my shares?
RBS boss Stephen Hester, who waived his own payout for the previous year (aw, bless), has said the bank must give competitive bonuses to its key staff but that it would pay "the minimum we can get away with" to the investment bankers.
That would be 1.3 billion, then.
Where's my shares?
However, there is some good news for me and my shareholding buddies.
Hoorah! I hear you cry - we're getting our shares?
Not exactly.
Many key banking personnel will receive bonuses, but in shares rather than cash.
The only cash bonuses would be paid to those earning under £39,000, who would get a maximum of £2,000 in cash.
Ah, that's all right then #1.
Thoroughly deserved, I wish I could contribute myself, to a body who's losses for 2009 are no more than losing a five pound note down the back of the couch compared to the £24.1 billion shortfall the year before (a U.K. corporate record).
Well done, everybody.
As regards the fact that they even have the audacity to consider such bonuses, one journalist made the point that "...the bank's argument will be that it recognises the public anger about remuneration in the banking sector, and that it is paying out a much lower proportion of its revenues than any of its major competitors."
Ah, that's all right then #2.
I'll sleep better tonight knowing that.
RBS were not the only ones of course, they just happened to declare first...
Lloyds Banking Group (in which U.K. taxpayers have a 43% stake) reported at the end of February 2010 with a £6.3 billion loss. Although CEO Eric Daniels waived his own £2.3 million bonus, bonus payouts to others will still went ahead (the bonus pool is estimated to be around £2 million).
The Lloyds deficit is primarily due to charges on loans granted by HBOS (Halifax Bank of Scotland, where I have my £6.3 billion, sorry £6.30) before they were rescued by Lloyds.
It's no coincidence that 'bankers' is also rhyming slang in this country for... well, bankers, to be honest.
I worship the ground that's coming to them.
Ross Muir
February 2010
In February 2010 the RBS (Royal Bank of Scotland) proposed a bonus pot for its 22,000 investment bankers of around £1.3 billion (that's not a typo - it is a 'b' in front of illion) against last year's £1 billion.
The Edinburgh-based bank seemingly has been given the green light by UK Financial Investments (UKFI), the body set up to manage the Government's stakes in banks.
RBS is 84% U.K. taxpayer-owned after a string of bail-outs, was in deficit to the tune of £3 billion and was expected to post higher losses for the last year to December.
Where's my shares?
The bonus proposals came despite the deficit and it's almost certain they didn't meet Government lending targets (which were laid out as part of the terms of its bail-out).
Where's my shares?
RBS boss Stephen Hester, who waived his own payout for the previous year (aw, bless), has said the bank must give competitive bonuses to its key staff but that it would pay "the minimum we can get away with" to the investment bankers.
That would be 1.3 billion, then.
Where's my shares?
However, there is some good news for me and my shareholding buddies.
Hoorah! I hear you cry - we're getting our shares?
Not exactly.
Many key banking personnel will receive bonuses, but in shares rather than cash.
The only cash bonuses would be paid to those earning under £39,000, who would get a maximum of £2,000 in cash.
Ah, that's all right then #1.
Thoroughly deserved, I wish I could contribute myself, to a body who's losses for 2009 are no more than losing a five pound note down the back of the couch compared to the £24.1 billion shortfall the year before (a U.K. corporate record).
Well done, everybody.
As regards the fact that they even have the audacity to consider such bonuses, one journalist made the point that "...the bank's argument will be that it recognises the public anger about remuneration in the banking sector, and that it is paying out a much lower proportion of its revenues than any of its major competitors."
Ah, that's all right then #2.
I'll sleep better tonight knowing that.
RBS were not the only ones of course, they just happened to declare first...
Lloyds Banking Group (in which U.K. taxpayers have a 43% stake) reported at the end of February 2010 with a £6.3 billion loss. Although CEO Eric Daniels waived his own £2.3 million bonus, bonus payouts to others will still went ahead (the bonus pool is estimated to be around £2 million).
The Lloyds deficit is primarily due to charges on loans granted by HBOS (Halifax Bank of Scotland, where I have my £6.3 billion, sorry £6.30) before they were rescued by Lloyds.
It's no coincidence that 'bankers' is also rhyming slang in this country for... well, bankers, to be honest.
I worship the ground that's coming to them.
Ross Muir
February 2010