Rum Ration
the Navy Network

**BreathingOutOnTheWayUp** · 27-01-12, 19:24

Originally Posted by finknottle

We, the taxpayer are the majority shareholders in RBS...

Well spotted but which was your source for this juicy gem?

Most here are used to your regular bouts of spleen-venting Finks; but shirly there were enough visuals from Monty to put anyone off their second helpings of spleen for today TYVM!

Sentiments agreed, but the trouble is that your line-up is inboard again, into RR; rather than being more usefully directed towards those elsewhere who might (?) even be able to arrange a remedy other than the lone cyber straitjacket available to us poor plebs at RR.

Instead perhaps you could try bleating angrily to your MP/Laird of the Manor/Clan Chieftain/Lord High Provost/favorite minor Royal or even to the Scottish Daily ........ (insert rag of choice) comments pages?

.....Unless this just your first public post-hibernation flash-up of the year for the hielan' ootrage oomnibus, in which case I've well & truly bitten...

Bob

**SJRM_RN** · 27-01-12, 19:28

Out of interest Finks, what's your standpoint on the capping of benefits, does that represent a 'disgraceful failure of leadership'? Just wondering

**CmdKeen** · 27-01-12, 19:32

Originally Posted by finknottle

We are RBS and if a bonus is to be paid the decent thing would be to wait until Hestor has been successful in putting the bank back on the rails, not now.

You mean as has exactly been done by granting him shares he can't sell for a few years...
Anyway I'm loving RBS. I bought shares at 20p and am very happy with their current 27p.

The idea anyone actually capable of doing the job would for a lesser sum is laughable. It is one of the highest profile jobs in British, and indeed worldwide, finance, and thus will attract loads of negative press regardless. Some of the senior managers at RBS are earning more so they'd hardly be lining up to replace him.
Oh and RBS announced a £2bn profit this year. So it is hardly a reward for failure.

And since when did fink care about bankers being made unemployed?

**(granny)** · 27-01-12, 19:33

My understanding on this is that he was employed as it was thought that he was the best person to turn round RBS performance. Who decided that he was the best man ? If we as the taxpayers are the majority shareholder, why did 'we' agree to his terms of employment ? If it was the, then, Board of Directors who chose him, considering their record as to previous choices, they were not quite the right people to decide. Agreeing a bonus package before performance is proven is, to me, unacceptable. Any man worthy of his hire does his job and is very well paid for it. The excuse that if you didn't pay these grossly high wages no-one would get the best men is a load of crap, thought of by those who make sure that these priviledged jobs are kept for the 'boys'.
Rant over......I know what I mean anyway!

**finknottle** · 27-01-12, 19:39

Originally Posted by SJRM_RN

Out of interest Finks, what's your standpoint on the capping of benefits, does that represent a 'disgraceful failure of leadership'? Just wondering

Capped at £26,000 is the intention, there are many working people who would be over the moon if they were bringing home that sum, such as 18 year old Royals serving in Afghanistan, so HMG should be reducing that amount considerably, IMO.

**finknottle** · 27-01-12, 19:40

Originally Posted by BreathingOutOnTheWayUp

.....Unless this just your first public post-hibernation flash-up of the year for the hielan' ootrage oomnibus, in which case I've well & truly bitten...

Bob

Has a SORN been issued?

**finknottle** · 27-01-12, 20:01

Originally Posted by CmdKeen

You mean as has exactly been done by granting him shares he can't sell for a few years...
Anyway I'm loving RBS. I bought shares at 20p and am very happy with their current 27p.

The idea anyone actually capable of doing the job would for a lesser sum is laughable. It is one of the highest profile jobs in British, and indeed worldwide, finance, and thus will attract loads of negative press regardless. Some of the senior managers at RBS are earning more so they'd hardly be lining up to replace him.
Oh and RBS announced a £2bn profit this year. So it is hardly a reward for failure.

And since when did fink care about bankers being made unemployed?

It might look good on paper but Hestor has overseen the sacking of 20,000 staff so far with thousand more to go, so that 'profit' will soon go on benefits for those who are now, or soon will be without a job.

It just so happens that I have a great deal of empathy for those who lose their jobs due to the incompetence of those above them.

**blondemolotov** · 27-01-12, 20:37

Originally Posted by finknottle

Capped at £26,000 is the intention, there are many working people who would be over the moon if they were bringing home that sum, such as 18 year old Royals serving in Afghanistan, so HMG should be reducing that amount considerably, IMO.

£26,000?! I worked 50 hour weeks hard graft to support myself and someone else for less than half of that! And you're telling me I could've got £26,000 for sitting on my arse?! Things are backwards...

**tam** · 27-01-12, 20:55

Don't let the buggers grind you down finknottle, wherever there is a trough you will always find truffle hunters to get their snouts in it.

**WreckerL** · 27-01-12, 20:59

Originally Posted by blondemolotov

£26,000?! I worked 50 hour weeks hard graft to support myself and someone else for less than half of that! And you're telling me I could've got £26,000 for sitting on my arse?! Things are backwards...

If I read it correctly that's the maximum anyone could get i.e. out of work disabled with 15 kids from 20 different fathers living in central London and who has a drug habit to feed...at least I hope read it correctly!!!