to be fair. Isn't it irrelevant who's in government? Who said this, who said that. I understand a government has kept this bank afloat. But as long as you have these non executive directors who are given the "jobs for the boys" by the people that they then decide to give financial bonuses to. They each earned between 103,000 - 150,000 in 2010. Surely do something about them rather than a government?

from the 2010 annual report on remuneration

Changes to approach
In addition to the changes made to executive directors’ remuneration
arrangements, the Remuneration Committee reached decisions on the
following key areas during 2010:
establishing a governance framework for incentive plans and bonus
funding across the Group, involving the Finance, Risk and Human
Resources functions at all key decision points;
a structure of deferment for incentives for up to three years, with the
ability to clawback if appropriate; and
the introduction of a new Long Term Incentive Plan following
consultation with a number of institutional shareholders.
The new LTIP received the approval of over 99% of shareholders at the
Annual General Meeting in 2010, and at the same meeting the
Remuneration Report received overwhelming shareholder support.


The shareholders approved how these people were paid. The non execs hired remuneration advisors from Price waterhouse Coopers LLP

It's all very interesting reading. Download a pdf from:
www.investors.rbs.com/report_subsidiary_results


I think more importantly Hester was always going to get this money even form early 2011. What is of greater interest is he got over £2,000,000 in his overall package than he did in 2009. (page260)

Do a find for the word remuneration for all the juicy bits on the pdf

to be fair. Isn't it irrelevant who's in government? Who said this, who said that. I understand a government has kept this bank afloat. But as long as you have these non executive directors who are given the "jobs for the boys" by the people that they then decide to give financial bonuses to. They each earned between 103,000 - 150,000 in 2010. Surely do something about them rather than a government?

from the 2010 annual report on remuneration

Changes to approach
In addition to the changes made to executive directors’ remuneration
arrangements, the Remuneration Committee reached decisions on the
following key areas during 2010:
establishing a governance framework for incentive plans and bonus
funding across the Group, involving the Finance, Risk and Human
Resources functions at all key decision points;
a structure of deferment for incentives for up to three years, with the
ability to clawback if appropriate; and
the introduction of a new Long Term Incentive Plan following
consultation with a number of institutional shareholders.
The new LTIP received the approval of over 99% of shareholders at the
Annual General Meeting in 2010, and at the same meeting the
Remuneration Report received overwhelming shareholder support.


The shareholders approved how these people were paid. The non execs hired remuneration advisors from Price waterhouse Coopers LLP

It's all very interesting reading. Download a pdf from:
www.investors.rbs.com/report_subsidiary_results


I think more importantly Hester was always going to get this money even form early 2011. What is of greater interest is he got over £2,000,000 in his overall package than he did in 2009. (page260)

Do a find for the word remuneration for all the juicy bits on the pdf

It's very unattractive isn't it. Was there ever a share offer for RBS in his time or a raising of sorts? This would significantly cheapen the stock with there being more shares in the company earning FA?

Also, did this lot do worse than other banks? Were they more wrapped up with the buggers that caused the GFC?




investing.thisismoney.co.uk/quote/RBS

interesting little note on how much directors sold shares for. Hester sells round 50% of his shares on the days he gets them.

It's very unattractive isn't it. Was there ever a share offer for RBS in his time or a raising of sorts? This would significantly cheapen the stock with there being more shares in the company earning FA?

Also, did this lot do worse than other banks? Were they more wrapped up with the buggers that caused the GFC?




investing.thisismoney.co.uk/quote/RBS

interesting little note on how much directors sold shares for. Hester sells round 50% of his shares on the days he gets them.

The UK taxpayers financial interests in the banks are not controlled by the government. A separate, arms length, company was set up to control the public investments and have independent decision making powers regarding those investments. The company is called UK Financial Investments Ltd.

www.ukfi.co.uk/about-us/what-we-do/

Anyway, its all a non-issue now as it seems that Stephen Hester has decided to decline his bonus....

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16783571

The UK taxpayers financial interests in the banks are not controlled by the government. A separate, arms length, company was set up to control the public investments and have independent decision making powers regarding those investments. The company is called UK Financial Investments Ltd.

www.ukfi.co.uk/about-us/what-we-do/

Anyway, its all a non-issue now as it seems that Stephen Hester has decided to decline his bonus....

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16783571