Fred Goodwin\’s superinjunction lifted

So Fred Goodwin\’s superinjunction has been lifted.

It is now permissible therefore to say what part of all the fuss was about.

Allegedly, and I have only heard this said, I have no evidence one way or another, Sir Fred was banging one of the birds on the risk management team.

I\’ve heard it said that she enjoyed a \”meteoric career\”.

So far, so ho hum. Alpha males, even if they are accountants, have been known to make pretty with the female staff and female staff have been known to, entirely of their own accord, be willing to make the two backed beast with alpha males: even accountants. Promotions have happened as a result of such bedroom games.

While it\’s interesting to the public that this was going on, for the public is interested in such news, it\’s not particularly in the public interest. It\’s entirely possible that the privacy rights of two consenting adults come before the hoi polloi\’s interest in Tab A being used in Slot A, B or C.

However, where it all becomes rather murkier is that risk management was the one great big stonking failure at RBS. Arrogant and over-bearing chief executives are supposed to be brought to heel by the risk management department. That\’s what they\’re for.

But, of course, if part of the senior management of the bank calls the chief exec \”sweetie pie\” (or even, painful though it is to think of an accountant in this manner, \”Big Boy! Yes! Yes! There!\”) some of the time and \”Are you quite certain about the risk profile Sir Fred?\” at others, then it\’s possible that the risk management of the bank wasn\’t being quite all that it could be.

To put it another way. Sir Fred was indeed hubristic. He certainly needed to be constrained by the risk management department. But if, purely as an example of what most certainly didn\’t happen, he installed his mistress as the person supposed to restrain him*, that would be in the public interest, wouldn\’t it?

* Yes, I know, Fnarr, Fnarr.

11 comments on “Fred Goodwin\’s superinjunction lifted

  1. “But if, purely as an example of what most certainly didn’t happen, he installed his mistress as the person supposed to restrain him*, that would be in the public interest, wouldn’t it?”

    – or even if there was the appearance that that might have been the case, it would be in the public interest.

  2. not sure where company law leaves shareholders here…do shareholders have any grounds for action other than their basically non-exixstent rights?

  3. “Promotions have happened as a result of such bedroom games. While it’s interesting to the public that this was going on, for the public is interested in such news, it’s not particularly in the public interest.”

    I think it is very much in the shareholders’ interests. This is a form of renumeration to the boss. It is using their money, not the Alpha Male in question, to polish said Nob’s nob. That is close to theft. There are certainly bosses in America, not mentioning any Silicon Valley companies in particular, although you wouldn’t have to be an, ah hem, oracle to work out which, who routinely give expensive cars to pretty woman who work for his company. As long as that is his money, that is fine, but as soon as it is the company’s money (or job) it isn’t.

    As the shareholders consist, either in actuality or potentially, the entire public, the public has a right to know. This is very much in the public interest.

  4. When did risk management ever restrain anything?
    If you were NBG you got shuffled there. You’d get a salary and maybe bonus 50%. Traders got similar salary but bonus 1000%.
    Where do you think the power lies?

  5. I’ve got a copy of the book on risk management written by the chief risk manager of RBS, if anyone wants it. Only thrown a couple of times across the room so in near virgin condition. I stopped reading before I got to the sex scenes, obviously.

  6. Perhaps being his mistress could have given her more power rather than less.

    “I think you should reconsider that risk profile Sir Fred – perhaps you should sleep on it. Alone.”

  7. Pingback: The BBC really don’t understand the internet…. « Left Outside

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.