Obscene amount of Remuneration

[grumpy]

Off to Brazil next week!

its that bad

 

[DRC]

Off to Brazil next week!

Your not Ashley Cole then!

 

[sleepy]

It seems there are a lot of wannabe commie farmers around. Maybe we should take all land back into state ownership and pay farmers a national average wage. Pay everyone the same amount. Sure it will work great

In what way is the work of these highly paid people hard?

What skills do they actually need?

I'd be interested to know? Or are they relying on the research of others, of their minions? Do they really make the big decisions?

Or are they really just gambling, and when they are lucky they are heroes, but when they get it wrong they get a million pound pay off anyway?

I worked in each department of a multinational company as part of my training many years ago. Sometimes the MD or another director was required to sign a tender for a job or sign a purchase order or a contract with a customer. Frankly, they often hardly bothered to read it as we were entrusted and paid to get that right. They were more like figureheads or focal points for customers. I'm not convinced they worked any harder than those below them. Certainly, most of the senior management arrived two hours after I started work and left two hours before I finished and seemed more concerned with buying a stake in a football club than dealing with problems within their company. They did not have the pressure of deadlines and sales negotiations that we on lower levels had. Nor did they have to solve some difficult technical problems themselves. They might have done so earlier in their careers but latterly they were avuncular figures, part of a sort of aristocracy of industry, who felt entitled to large remuneration and a steady job. I cannot recall one single improvement initiated by the senior management. They always got consultants in to do their thinking for them. There was no technical or engineering leadership whatsoever. Improvement came piecemeal from the middle levels of the company and lacked real coordination or discipline.

Rant over about my experience of British senior management.

Yawn yawn yawn. You had as much opportunity as your boss did to do his job. He probably just worked fecking hard for a long time and grasped every opportunity.

You clearly don't know anyone who has a 'fat cat' job, but those sort of wages come with an immense level of stress and they will be on the job 24/7/365 unlike the employees who work 9-5.
Said people tend to be very good at dealing with stress / work levels and can manage it better than everyone else.

 

[Dman2]

Yes its obcene, but is it better or worse than some jumped up twit who stands on a football field for 90 mins once a week

 

[smcapstick]

Yes its obcene, but is it better or worse than some jumped up twit who stands on a football field for 90 mins once a week

Why? That jumped up little idiot generates piles of cash for the club, it's shareholders, Bentley dealerships and local landscapers. Not to mention HMRC! It's all good.

GREED IS GOOD.

 

[Chickcatcher]

not knowing anything about uk agriculture!

Its the NFU after all ...........

I have Knowledge of Richard Percy and I think your comment unfair, about not knowing anything about UK agriculture but thats life. I am sure my neighbour is of the opinion I am not a proper Farmer either.

 

[Muck Spreader]

Yes its obcene, but is it better or worse than some jumped up twit who stands on a football field for 90 mins once a week

I think there a big difference between a top flight footballer and a board member of a plc. Whilst I loath the amount footballers get paid nobody on this forum would have the talent to do that job. However, most of the people here would be capable of being a board member. A large business is the sum of the people who work in it, and it can just as easily fail or rise due to the secretary as the ceo.

 

[DrWazzock]

It seems there are a lot of wannabe commie farmers around. Maybe we should take all land back into state ownership and pay farmers a national average wage. Pay everyone the same amount. Sure it will work great



Yawn yawn yawn. You had as much opportunity as your boss did to do his job. He probably just worked fecking hard for a long time and grasped every opportunity.

You clearly don't know anyone who has a 'fat cat' job, but those sort of wages come with an immense level of stress and they will be on the job 24/7/365 unlike the employees who work 9-5.
Said people tend to be very good at dealing with stress / work levels and can manage it better than everyone else.

What's communist about taking issue with over payment of those who supposedly run companies?

Anybody who thinks that some people work so hard that they deserve more than 100k per annum is in my view either incredibly naive or seriously deluded.

Nobody is worth more than that.

Yes it might appear they have made millions for their shareholders, but they haven't done it alone. They stand on the shoulders of the lower ranks who people on here are so swift to condemn. Tommy Atkins et al.

 

[grumpy]

What's communist about taking issue with over payment of those who supposedly run companies?

Anybody who thinks that some people work so hard that they deserve more than 100k per annum is in my view either incredibly naive or seriously deluded.

Nobody is worth more than that.

Yes it might appear they have made millions for their shareholders, but they haven't done it alone. They stand on the shoulders of the lower ranks who people on here are so swift to condemn. Tommy Atkins et al.

so what would be your pay structure for all jobs?

 

[SilliamWhale]

so what would be your pay structure for all jobs?

I think it should be a good reflection of the business' foot soldiers. So not too many massive pay hikes between grades of employee but enough to make people realise that status and higher pay are respected.

I don't agree with Sleepy the board of executors are in incredibly stressful jobs by default.

 

[grumpy]

I think it should be a good reflection of the business' foot soldiers. So not too many massive pay hikes between grades of employee but enough to make people realise that status and higher pay are respected.

I don't agree with Sleepy the board of executors are in incredibly stressful jobs by default.

i always remember a farm worker on a 2000 acre farm saying he does all the work as all the boss does is answer the phone every 5 mins or shuffle paper about,

 

[Grain Buyer]

What's communist about taking issue with over payment of those who supposedly run companies?

Anybody who thinks that some people work so hard that they deserve more than 100k per annum is in my view either incredibly naive or seriously deluded.

Nobody is worth more than that.

Yes it might appear they have made millions for their shareholders, but they haven't done it alone. They stand on the shoulders of the lower ranks who people on here are so swift to condemn. Tommy Atkins et al.

it's communist on the basis you are looking to control something which is currently governed by market forces. It is also relative to your pay structure, so whilst 100k may sound like a huge amount of money, to some it is bugger all. Lets assume you earn, (guessing) 30k, and someone comes along who gets 12k and deems your salary "excessive", then suggests you could do what you do for 15k....what would you say?

 

[SilliamWhale]

it's communist on the basis you are looking to control something which is currently governed by market forces. It is also relative to your pay structure, so whilst 100k may sound like a huge amount of money, to some it is bugger all. Lets assume you earn, (guessing) 30k, and someone comes along who gets 12k and deems your salary "excessive", then suggests you could do what you do for 15k....what would you say?

Its not true to say this sector is governed exclusively by market forces because we all know its not. If market forces prevailed the value of some of the investments would have completely lost liquidity.

Its disingenuous to pretend is raw free market in tooth and claw because it isn't. Nothing is.

 

[DrWazzock]

it's communist on the basis you are looking to control something which is currently governed by market forces. It is also relative to your pay structure, so whilst 100k may sound like a huge amount of money, to some it is bugger all. Lets assume you earn, (guessing) 30k, and someone comes along who gets 12k and deems your salary "excessive", then suggests you could do what you do for 15k....what would you say?

I was not seeking to control, I just feel that no one is worth say more than 10 times the pay of another man who puts in a full week.

I don't have so much of a problem with real entrepreneurs who have worked their way up and done well in free markets. What annoys me is the sort of appointee who doesn't risk his own cash but uses others peoples money and helps himself to an overly large share of it. Or provides some sort of monopolised service which we can't do without, he knows it, and just keeps on jacking up the fees way beyond reasonable levels.

So what would the people on here think was excessive remuneration?

 

[sleepy]

I was not seeking to control, I just feel that no one is worth say more than 10 times the pay of another man who puts in a full week.

I don't have so much of a problem with real entrepreneurs who have worked their way up and done well in free markets. What annoys me is the sort of appointee who doesn't risk his own cash but uses others peoples money and helps himself to an overly large share of it. Or provides some sort of monopolised service which we can't do without, he knows it, and just keeps on jacking up the fees way beyond reasonable levels.

So what would the people on here think was excessive remuneration?

The guys being paid a few million quid a year are paid this much because otherwise they would go elsewhere or just not bother to work at all. If you had 20 million quid in the bank as a result of perhaps a successful career in a big company and doing well from stock options, would you bother to get out of bed for 100k? Of course you wouldn't. So if you want the guy who has 30 years industry experience, has a ton of mega valuable contacts and a track record of being successful, you have to pay him (or her) well.

So to answer your question there is no such thing as excessive renumeration. People are worth what somebody else is prepared to pay them; if you disagree with that statement you are in fact a commie.

 

[JP1]

 

[SRRC]

Much of the objection to big pay is envy, perhaps your head might be in a better place if instead you thought "I could achieve that!"

Another side to it is that out of his £1.7m he will pay tax of about £1m, out of his remaining take home of £0.7m another 25% will go in purchase taxes. All that tax eventually may benefit you!

 

[Muck Spreader]

[quote="Sleepy, post: 425714, member: 22"
So to answer your question there is no such thing as excessive renumeration. People are worth what somebody else is prepared to pay them; if you disagree with that statement you are in fact a commie.[/quote]

That someone is usually your mate from another PLC. Remuneration committees are highly incestuous and the chair will generally be a current or former CEO of another PlC. It's case of you scratch my back and I will scratch yours.

 

[Brisel]

Much of the objection to big pay is envy, perhaps your head might be in a better place if instead you thought "I could achieve that!"

Another side to it is that out of his £1.7m he will pay tax of about £1m, out of his remaining take home of £0.7m another 25% will go in purchase taxes. All that tax eventually may benefit you!

Not if he is smart enough to have an accountant like Jimmy Carr's!

 

[Brisel]

it's communist on the basis you are looking to control something which is currently governed by market forces. It is also relative to your pay structure, so whilst 100k may sound like a huge amount of money, to some it is bugger all. Lets assume you earn, (guessing) 30k, and someone comes along who gets 12k and deems your salary "excessive", then suggests you could do what you do for 15k....what would you say?

There's an obvious answer to that question that isn't suitable for the forum! The person at the top of the tree gets others to do the work. They are responsible for those others & if they screw up the person at the top gets it in the neck. The person at the top has the risk & responsibility, so why not share in some of the reward as an incentive? I repeat my remark about paying peanuts & getting monkeys. Monkeys don't run successful businesses like NFU Mutual, they are just envious of those that do.

Without ambition there can be no success. A £500k pay packet made up of bonuses for building the business would give me ambition.

My one caveat is that bonuses ahould be structured towards sustainable business growth, not turnover or commission on trades whether good or bad. Too many bonus schemes are open to abuse & encourage unsustainable cynical practices to achieve those bonuses.