exiges Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16544654 Antonio Horta-Osorio, chief executive of Lloyds Banking Group, has said he will not take an annual bonus for 2011. He has just returned from a two month absence due to fatigue and acknowledged that had had an "impact" on the bank. He also said his bonus should reflect the performance of the group, and "the tough financial circumstances that many people are facing". Mr Horta-Osorio joined the board of Lloyds in January 2011 and became chief executive in March. His basic pay is £1.06m a year, and he would have been eligible for bonus payments of up to 225% of that. In a statement, Mr Horta-Osorio acknowledged that "my leave of absence has had an impact both inside and outside the bank including for shareholders". Lloyds chairman Sir Winfried Bischoff said: "Under Antonio's leadership, the bank made significant progress last year in its transformation against a very difficult economic backdrop." The bank announced on 2 November that Mr Horta-Osorio was to take extended leave because of a stress-related illness. Shares in Lloyds - which is 41% state-owned - fell more than 60% in 2011. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 he joined the Board in January 2011, Became Ce in March 2011, had 2 months off, so he only "worked"* as CE officially and properly (assuming his appointment was 1st March) 8 months, take 1 months off for adjusting to the new position, hand over etc, then thats 7 months. in that 7 months he, andi qoute from the OP Lloyds chairman Sir Winfried Bischoff said: "Under Antonio's leadership, the bank made significant progress last year in its transformation against a very difficult economic backdrop." is Antonio a Financial Genius? and he's only entitled to £2.25m (ish) as a ANNUAL BONUS!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worried1 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 and he's only entitled to £2.25m (ish) as a ANNUAL BONUS!!!!! This is the type of bonus I don't understand. The normal argument is that the banks are still paying big bonuses to the bankers in profitable parts of their businesses even though the overal bank is struggling. This guy heads up the whole bank, so how is it possible that his bonus is tied to anything other than overall profitability and share price? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longtomsilver Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 how noble of him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicestersq Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 he joined the Board in January 2011, Became Ce in March 2011, had 2 months off, so he only "worked"* as CE officially and properly (assuming his appointment was 1st March) 8 months, take 1 months off for adjusting to the new position, hand over etc, then thats 7 months. in that 7 months he, andi qoute from the OP Lloyds chairman Sir Winfried Bischoff said: "Under Antonio's leadership, the bank made significant progress last year in its transformation against a very difficult economic backdrop." is Antonio a Financial Genius? and he's only entitled to £2.25m (ish) as a ANNUAL BONUS!!!!! In his defence, Lloyds has many years ahead of them gradually writing down the value of the fraudulent loans that came with the HBOS transaction. It was good of him to turn down the bonus, though of course no remuneration committee should have ever offered a big bonus like that to a chief exec for a bank whose business ought to be boring and unspectacular. We still need a change in the law, to bar institutions from voting on shares that are held on behalf of others. They have proven time and time again that they use those votes against the interest of beneficial shareholders, and the practice needs to be stopped. Only individuals who are the beneficial holders of the shares should be allowed to vote on the shares. Do this and excessive executive pay will be stopped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buccaneer Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Lloyds chairman Sir Winfried Bischoff said: "Under Antonio's leadership, the bank made significant progress last year in its transformation against a very difficult economic backdrop." Shares in Lloyds - which is 41% state-owned - fell more than 60% in 2011. Perhaps if he works a full year in 2012 he can achieve a 70% drop! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash4781 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 That's some bonus! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milton Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) That's some bonus! +1. Somebody please burn this country down beginning with parliament Is his bonus based upon Lloyds assets, the UK's biggest mortgage book, being paid for by the taxpayer, aka completely fake, mark to market valuations of property, instead of having to write down losses like every other business on the planet would have to do? Banking.......the only game where you cannot lose. So long as youve bought a politician or two...... Government is only for four years. They all need cushy board room jobs when they leave. Edited January 13, 2012 by Milton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammo Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 I should have officially turned down the 0% bonus offered by my company, but I couldn't help but accept the damned thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erranta Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 (edited) he joined the Board in January 2011, Became Ce in March 2011, had 2 months off, so he only "worked"* as CE officially and properly (assuming his appointment was 1st March) 8 months, take 1 months off for adjusting to the new position, hand over etc, then thats 7 months. in that 7 months he, andi qoute from the OP Lloyds chairman Sir Winfried Bischoff said: "Under Antonio's leadership, the bank made significant progress last year in its transformation against a very difficult economic backdrop." is Antonio a Financial Genius? and he's only entitled to £2.25m (ish) as a ANNUAL BONUS!!!!! Shares in Lloyds - fell more than 60% in 2011. Edited January 13, 2012 by erranta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash4781 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Still it would have been funny, if first week back he rocked up in a chauffeur driven, and said "all right boys where's my bonus?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybong Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Isn't he going move to a bank in Dubai or somewhere like that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wherebee Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Jesus wept guys (and girls), the guy turns down a bonus and you STILL criticise his actions. Yes, the numbers are big, and probably too big given the rest of the landscape, but he DID say no. He could have said yes. You are no better than the people I once worked with in financial services who, when I said I didn't want a bonus in my package because it was an adverse incentive on my role at that time, said I was mad..... You should be praising this bloke from the rooftops, and continuing to criticise people such as GoodBadwin who still trousered every penny. :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaine Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 I agree - its a good start All he needs to do next is grow some balls and stop spouting nonsense about how demand for small business loans is down and they lending to help business where necessary - they need to start acting like a bank and stop relying on 'computer says NO' mentality Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiCasaSuCasa Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 We shouldn't be praising him for turning down a bonus for failure. What should enrage people is the fact that the government and the Lloyds board signed off on his contract which allows him to take ridiculous amounts of money no matter what he does or how his company performs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicestersq Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 We shouldn't be praising him for turning down a bonus for failure. What should enrage people is the fact that the government and the Lloyds board signed off on his contract which allows him to take ridiculous amounts of money no matter what he does or how his company performs. We should praise him. There are two separate issues. His turning down of the bonus, which is very good of him. His ridiculous contract in the first place, which is bad, and not his fault. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Harold m Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Apart from the size one of the biggest issues with 'bankers bonuses' is in the name. The major rationale for paying people a large portion of their income in a single, delayed fashion is meant to be to incentivise two things. 1) to buy their arses so they will work extra hours and weekends or they won't get paid. 2) to make sure they don't leave half way through a project or to join a rival. In theory both of these are useful management tools and shouldn't be resented in principle. The alternative ( presuming they are not sacked) is to pay them a lower income ( again a matter of judgement) or do away with bonus and pay in salary. (this would be worst of all outcomes and thanks to the last government it became the thing to do in rbs and lloyds) Front office staff may be paid more along commission but again not neccesarily, risk managing or unwinding a way out of a very dangerous and dogshit portfolio can be one if the most difficult tasks of all . You might have a portfolio of complex , opaque derivatives which if handled recklessly might cost another couple of billion, or you may escape with a loss of 10 mil or so. Either way, you can see the common sense in paying the right person a couple of million to influence the outcome . The problems arise in bull markets that are engineered by meddling politicians, then every retard can make bundles and they all get paid as if they were the cause of the success. The other problem is the people who caused the problems are now sitting on vast untouchable bundles of wedge whilst very few of those being slated were in charge when the house blew up. The model needs changing not the people now in charge. Start with no bailouts, glass stegall 2, remuneration paid on delayed 5 year basis and in shares Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winkie Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 (edited) We shouldn't be praising him for turning down a bonus for failure. What should enrage people is the fact that the government and the Lloyds board signed off on his contract which allows him to take ridiculous amounts of money no matter what he does or how his company performs. Correct....a bonus should only be paid when agreed targets have been met.....not rewarded for under performance, the shareholders the owners should be given more authority as to who get what if anything. Edited January 14, 2012 by winkie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tbatst2000 Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 We shouldn't be praising him for turning down a bonus for failure. Er, why not? He did the right thing, of course he should be praised. Having said all that, it's not clear he did fail vs. whatever targets he was set since they haven't been published to my knowledge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libspero Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 (edited) Er, why not? He did the right thing, of course he should be praised. Having said all that, it's not clear he did fail vs. whatever targets he was set since they haven't been published to my knowledge. Agree.. it's easy to scoff, but I wonder how many here would really turn down £2m if they had the chance to take it and run. As a side note, I expect anyone stepping up to run one of these businesses at the moment while the pressure's on and the press/public are looking to blame anyone but themselves.. he probably actually deserves the bonus he's turned down. Certainly more than the wide boys who sleepwalked into the whole sorry mess five-plus years ago. Edited January 14, 2012 by libspero Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.