Persimmon Homes -- CEO £100m Bonus...

[Eric Mc]

There are many who think the words "morals" and "the law" are synonymous.

They don't have the moral maturity to be able to discern that the two do not always coincide.

[sidicks]

Eric Mc said:

There are many who think the words "morals" and "the law" are synonymous.

They don't have the moral maturity to be able to discern that the two do not always coincide.

Eric - who would those people be?

I think its quite clear that morals and the law are entirely different. I'm not sure that anyone on here has tried to equate the two. which comments are you referring to?

[drainbrain]

sidicks said:

I think its quite clear that 'morality' and 'the law' are entirely different.

Really? Is that what you think?

Do you also think "the two do not always coincide" means the same as "the two are entirely different"?

[Yipper]

To give it some context...

The average UK healthcare-sector employee bonus in 2017 is roughly 1% of their base pay.

The average UK private-sector employee bonus (all industries) in 2017 is roughly 7% of their base pay.

The average UK private-financial-insurance-sector employee bonus in 2017 is roughly 40% of their base pay.

The Persimmon CEO's bonus in 2017 is roughly 10,000% of their base pay.

[mondeoman]

"Hello, Government Official here"
"Hello, Persimmon here, how can I help you"
"We want to give you some free money"
"Why thank you very much"
"No problem, now be sure to use it wisely"
"'course we will, til next year..."

.....time passes.....

"Hello CEO here"
"Watcha guvn'r"
"That free cash the gubbermnt gave us...."
"Yeeesss?"
"Fancy a slice of it, freebies like?"
"Cor, yeah, how?
"Well, cos it was free, we've blown our profit forecast for this year (we'd've been screwed otherwise!) so I was thinking we can fiddle a bit through the bonus scheme, its so badly written it s a joke!"
"Right - what do I need to do?"
"Nothing much, just vote with me if you have to and email me your bank details, job jobbed" "oh, and buy the way (you can afford to know!), 'ave a chat wiv Charlie, he's got some other scam for you"

[sidicks]

drainbrain said:

Really? Is that what you think?

Yes, morality and law are different things. They can of course overlap.

drainbrain said:

Do you also think "the two do not always coincide" means the same as "the two are entirely different"?

No, nether did I say any such thing.

Eric was claiming the "There are many who think the words "morals" and "the law" are synonymous".

We are yet to be told who these 'many' people are, or have that claim supported by evidence.

Edited by sidicks on Saturday 16th December 17:53

[poo at Paul's]

In 12m they will be like Carillion.

[drainbrain]

sidicks said:

Eric said: "There are many who think the words "morals" and "the law" are synonymous".

We are yet to be told who these 'many' people are, or have that claim supported by evidence.

Edited by sidicks on Saturday 16th December 17:53

Are you aware of legal/accountancy firms and huge corporations who boast of their skills in the art of 'tax avoidance' ?

And are you also aware that there are many who encourage these practices because they are not illegal to practice?

[sidicks]

drainbrain said:

sidicks said:

Eric said: "There are many who think the words "morals" and "the law" are synonymous".

We are yet to be told who these 'many' people are, or have that claim supported by evidence.

Are you aware of legal/accountancy firms and huge corporations who boast of their skills in the art of 'tax avoidance' ?

And are you also aware that there are many who encourage these practices because they are not illegal to practice?

Do these same people claim to be operating 'moral' schemes?

[drainbrain]

sidicks said:

Do these same people claim to be operating 'moral' schemes?

Like bankers whose immoral practices are not within the reach of criminal law to address I wouldn't imagine the morality of their schemes would be of the slightest concern to them. It's even possible they have no moral understanding beyond equating 'right' and 'legal' otherwise they would be doing what they knew to be wrong. Exactly the people you want Eric to explain to you.

Or do you think they are aware that what they are doing is "wrong" in the eyes of society but they continue to do it because it is legal and profitable and that is of far greater priority even if it is of highly questionable morality?

[sidicks]

drainbrain said:

Like bankers whose immoral practices are not within the reach of criminal law to address I wouldn't imagine the morality of their schemes would be of the slightest concern to them.
[quote]

So they don't believe legal and moral are synonymous then?!

drainbrain said:

It's even possible they have no moral understanding beyond equating 'right' and 'legal' otherwise they would be doing what they knew to be wrong. Exactly the people you want Eric to explain to you.

Or do you think they are aware that what they are doing is "wrong" in the eyes of society but they continue to do it because it is legal and profitable and that is of far greater priority even if it is of highly questionable morality?

Or maybe they are not claiming that legal and moral are synonymous at all, and are happy to let clients make the (subjective) moral judgement...

[drainbrain]

sidicks said:

drainbrain said:

Like bankers whose immoral practices are not within the reach of criminal law to address I wouldn't imagine the morality of their schemes would be of the slightest concern to them.
[quote]

So they don't believe legal and moral are synonymous then?!

drainbrain said:

It's even possible they have no moral understanding beyond equating 'right' and 'legal' otherwise they would be doing what they knew to be wrong. Exactly the people you want Eric to explain to you.

Or do you think they are aware that what they are doing is "wrong" in the eyes of society but they continue to do it because it is legal and profitable and that is of far greater priority even if it is of highly questionable morality?

Or maybe they are not claiming that legal and moral are synonymous at all, and are happy to let clients make the (subjective) moral judgement...

What you hear time after time is that their tax affairs are being conducted in line with the laws of the land. So either they are saying "yes we know we are doing wrong but it is legal" or they are saying "we are doing right because it's legal".

Which do you think they are saying?

And ducking the moral imperative or abnegating responsibility for making the judgement by passing it to their clients isn't making their deliberate practice of what they know is damaging to others (a 'wrong'?) any more moral or morally neutral because it is legal.

So once again, either they are aware they are doing wrong albeit legally, or they aren't aware of the wrong, or they equate moral and legal, or they are well aware of the wrong and are happy enough with that as long as it is justifiable by being legal.

Again, which do you think is the case?

Edited by drainbrain on Saturday 16th December 18:50

[sidicks]

drainbrain said:

And ducking the moral imperative or abnegating responsibility for making the judgement by passing it to their clients isn't making their deliberate practice of what they know is damaging to others (a 'wrong'?) any more moral or morally neutral because it is legal.

So once again, either they are aware they are doing wrong albeit legally, or they aren't aware of the wrong, or they equate wrong and legal, or they are well aware of the wrong and are happy enough with that as long as it is justifiable by being legal.

Again, which do you think is the case?

Neither did I say it was.

At no point are they claiming that these are moral schemes 'simply because they are legal'.

[TooMany2cvs]

drainbrain said:

Like bankers whose immoral practices are not within the reach of criminal law to address I wouldn't imagine the morality of their schemes would be of the slightest concern to them. It's even possible they have no moral understanding beyond equating 'right' and 'legal' otherwise they would be doing what they knew to be wrong. Exactly the people you want Eric to explain to you.

Or do you think they are aware that what they are doing is "wrong" in the eyes of society but they continue to do it because it is legal and profitable and that is of far greater priority even if it is of highly questionable morality?

Is all tax avoidance immoral, in your opinion?

Remember: tax evasion is illegally not paying tax that's due, while tax avoidance is legally arranging your affairs to minimise the tax due.

So...
Tax evasion is driving an untaxed car, while tax avoidance is buying a low-VED car instead of a high-VED one.
Tax evasion is not declaring cash-in-hand earnings on your tax return, tax avoidance is putting your savings in an ISA.
Tax evasion is buying black-market ciggies that have been brought in from Belgium or wherever, tax avoidance is stopping smoking because ciggies are too expensive.

[drainbrain]

sidicks said:

At no point are they claiming that these are moral schemes 'simply because they are legal'.

So are you saying that when accused of wrongdoing and the answer is that they are obeying the law, they are not answering the accusation of wrongdoing by affirming that their actions are legal?

Because that sounds very much to me as though they are saying they are NOT doing wrong because it is LEGAL and therefore not wrong...ie right. Which is basically what Eric said. They are synonymising 'right' and 'legal'.

[sidicks]

drainbrain said:

So are you saying that when accused of wrongdoing and the answer is that they are obeying the law, they are not answering the accusation of wrongdoing by affirming that their actions are legal?

Because that sounds very much to me as though they are saying they are NOT doing wrong because it is LEGAL and therefore not wrong...ie right. Which is basically what Eric said. They are synonymising 'right' and 'legal'.

I believe that they are answering accusations of wrongdoing in terms of illegality.

The law is (or should be) objective, morality is subjective.

[drainbrain]

TooMany2cvs said:

Is all tax avoidance immoral, in your opinion?

Remember: tax evasion is illegally not paying tax that's due, while tax avoidance is legally arranging your affairs to minimise the tax due.

So...
Tax evasion is driving an untaxed car, while tax avoidance is buying a low-VED car instead of a high-VED one.
Tax evasion is not declaring cash-in-hand earnings on your tax return, tax avoidance is putting your savings in an ISA.
Tax evasion is buying black-market ciggies that have been brought in from Belgium or wherever, tax avoidance is stopping smoking because ciggies are too expensive.

Depends what you mean by 'immoral'. I could argue for it either way. It would also depend on the tax, who was doing the taxing/paying and what form the avoidance was taking.

My opinion on the topic is that the Persimmon CEO should be taxed to the nth degree. But my optional opinion is that the bonus should have been shared between every Persimmon employee given that the bonus does not directly relate to its recipient's sole performance.

[Halb]

nyxster said:

Pigs at the trough. It's not like he personally built all those houses, so it would have been far better shareholder value to invest that money in existing and new staff training - how many apprenticeships could they deliver with 600m to address the shortfall in skilled workers to meet the needs of future housebuilding targets or retaining and training existing staff to improve product quality?

Should have been capped at 6 - 10x salary maximum. It doesn't take a corporate genius to sell products in a captive market where price and supply have been artificially constrained by planning laws, and virtually no competitive pricing pressure exists between a cartel of big suppliers.

It doesn't benefit the company, and it doesn't benefit the economy because very little of that 600m will be spent in the real economy but is likely to get squirreled into trust structures vs the boost to the real economy paying out decent bonuses to all employees suffering 10 years of negative wage growth or creating training schemes to get the skills in place for future house building growth to solve the shortfall.

Fair play to him, I'd take 100m if someone gave it me, but its shoddy corporate governance and terrible PR given how political house prices and shortages are at the moment and a gidt to the trotskys after the housing builders bleated for so much taxpayer support like h2b only to trouser all the benefits.

UK plc 2017, make ya proud.

[drainbrain]

sidicks said:

I believe that they are answering accusations of wrongdoing in terms of illegality.

The law is (or should be) objective, morality is subjective.

Seriously. You seriously believe that the media interrogators are accusing these corporate giants of criminality and not of moral wrongdoing the interrogators are well aware is legal to practice?

As to morality, what do you understand as society's 'mores', or does no such thing exist, or is it some sort of 'collective subjectivity' whatever the hell that might be?

[sidicks]

drainbrain said:

As to morality, what do you understand as society's 'mores', or does no such thing exist, or is it some sort of 'collective subjectivity' whatever the hell that might be?

Do you mean morals? You don't believe that morality is subjective?

I think that morality is grey, not black and white, and individuals decide where to draw the line.