Northen Rock My A**e
Discussion
I do believe you mean this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1079714/Af...
And yes, that does have comedy value.
And yes, that does have comedy value.
lionrampant said:
I do believe you mean this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1079714/Af...
And yes, that does have comedy value.
Me & my misplaced URL's, they will be the death of meAnd yes, that does have comedy value.
Ta
& yep, NOT funny., especially when you have a bank account with them ......
But surely in order to ensure that NR is brought back on-track and meets its repayments on time, you need someone capable of steering that particular 'ship'. And no-one worth their salt who's capable of doing that is going to do it for peanuts?
It's a tricky one to call. I think the Mail is very 'black-and-white' about it when there needs to be shades of grey. If they paid someone less and therefore got someone less competent and NR failed to meet its repayments on time, what would the Mail's headline be then?
It's a tricky one to call. I think the Mail is very 'black-and-white' about it when there needs to be shades of grey. If they paid someone less and therefore got someone less competent and NR failed to meet its repayments on time, what would the Mail's headline be then?
We want, nee NEED, our financial services companies to be lean, efficient and PROFIT making. Its profit that drives growth and development and without it, its just stale, inefficient and a waste of money.
One good way to drive profit, is to incentivise the employees to actually deliver. Rather than just paying people to turn up to a job 9-5, why not actually give them something to strive for and work bloody hard to get. Not some short term gain, but 12 months of solid hard and consistent work that delivers profit, and at the end they get a bonus...
Now there is a novel idea eh?
Obviously you don't give some lowly paid person a big stinking pile of cash for just doing their job, but for those who have the power, ability and skills to deliver profit, why on earth would you NOT give bonuses? And as for this crap about million pound bonuses.... phah, its rare and limited to the very few at the top. But then again, if you are a senior director in a company that employs 1000's of people, you can expect your pay packet to be pretty good to start with....
Don't believe what the media keep saying. Personally, I am getting right royally pissed off about the media having a go at people in the finance industry making a million quid a year, yet they pay some of these damn news readers that amount! Which is more useful? Someone who reads an autocue or someone who can deliver millions of pounds of profit per year?
I know which I would prefer working for my company....
One good way to drive profit, is to incentivise the employees to actually deliver. Rather than just paying people to turn up to a job 9-5, why not actually give them something to strive for and work bloody hard to get. Not some short term gain, but 12 months of solid hard and consistent work that delivers profit, and at the end they get a bonus...
Now there is a novel idea eh?
Obviously you don't give some lowly paid person a big stinking pile of cash for just doing their job, but for those who have the power, ability and skills to deliver profit, why on earth would you NOT give bonuses? And as for this crap about million pound bonuses.... phah, its rare and limited to the very few at the top. But then again, if you are a senior director in a company that employs 1000's of people, you can expect your pay packet to be pretty good to start with....
Don't believe what the media keep saying. Personally, I am getting right royally pissed off about the media having a go at people in the finance industry making a million quid a year, yet they pay some of these damn news readers that amount! Which is more useful? Someone who reads an autocue or someone who can deliver millions of pounds of profit per year?
I know which I would prefer working for my company....
off_again makes a valid point..
Most of the employees of a bank are NOT on million quid bonuses - they are just regular joe's like the rest of us, trying to do the best they can and earn a crust.
They are middle class contributors to the inland revenue like the rest of us and do not deserve to be lumped with the work shy chav spongers...or have their integrity crucified.
Just remember, they are the ones that probably have earnt their bonuses...
Most of the employees of a bank are NOT on million quid bonuses - they are just regular joe's like the rest of us, trying to do the best they can and earn a crust.
They are middle class contributors to the inland revenue like the rest of us and do not deserve to be lumped with the work shy chav spongers...or have their integrity crucified.
Just remember, they are the ones that probably have earnt their bonuses...
te story with the sole purpose of winding you up and making you hate pretty much everyone.Funk said:
And no-one worth their salt who's capable of doing that is going to do it for peanuts?
XJSJohn said:
if there is no incentives then people will just do fvck all
Maybe I'm in the wrong place, but i think a £700k basic should be incentive enough. The value of money is subjective - that's why the fact that I lost a 'mere' £17k in NR shares makes me sickoff_again said:
Obviously you don't give some lowly paid person a big stinking pile of cash for just doing their job, but for those who have the power, ability and skills to deliver profit, why on earth would you NOT give bonuses?
I think much of the outrage is directed at the idea that these people really are not capable though, otherwise they wouldn't have steered Northern Rock onto the rocks in the first place. Big fat severance bonuses and other bonuses that are being delivered at the taxpayers expense is the problem, I think.The company I work for is introducing a very generous profit share (not that we expect to make much over the coming couple of years), but it's not at the expense of the taxpayer, and if we screw up then we don't get the monies.
PetrolTed said:
"Daily Mail"
Guaranteed to make the blood boil of thousands of pensioners every day.
Why does anyone under 60 read it?
I have noticed over the past few years that the caveat "Could" is placed in almost every 'news story' - especially the spurious MMGW type - most news seems be more in keeping with fiction.Guaranteed to make the blood boil of thousands of pensioners every day.
Why does anyone under 60 read it?
hamski said:
Funk said:
And no-one worth their salt who's capable of doing that is going to do it for peanuts?
XJSJohn said:
if there is no incentives then people will just do fvck all
Maybe I'm in the wrong place, but i think a £700k basic should be incentive enough. The value of money is subjective - that's why the fact that I lost a 'mere' £17k in NR shares makes me sickIf NR were only offering £300k a year for that position instead of £700k and you could earn £600k a year elsewhere, you're not going to take the NR job, are you?
Also, could someone explain to me that if NR has repaid its debts on time and the bloke earns his bonus, surely that's coming out of profit rather than taxpayer's money as the loan will have been repaid? Or am I understanding it wrong?
Funk said:
Also, could someone explain to me that if NR has repaid its debts on time and the bloke earns his bonus, surely that's coming out of profit rather than taxpayer's money as the loan will have been repaid? Or am I understanding it wrong?
The money is owed to the taxpayer, ergo, it should be given back to the tax payer in the form of tax cuts, or redirected into paying off more of the 'Rock's debts ahead of time.esselte said:
Funk said:
If NR were only offering £300k a year for that position instead of £700k and you could earn £600k a year elsewhere, you're not going to take the NR job, are you?
Are there lots of £600k bank jobs around at the moment?....Bing o said:
Funk said:
Also, could someone explain to me that if NR has repaid its debts on time and the bloke earns his bonus, surely that's coming out of profit rather than taxpayer's money as the loan will have been repaid? Or am I understanding it wrong?
The money is owed to the taxpayer, ergo, it should be given back to the tax payer in the form of tax cuts, or redirected into paying off more of the 'Rock's debts ahead of time.Ultimately if the money put in by the Gov't from the taxpayer has been recouped with whatever interest they're charging, then what NR does after that is back over to them as the taxpayer is no longer 'owed' money by them?
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff