Another idiot Lib Dim

Sharon Bowles, the UK Liberal Democrat MEP who chairs the EU parliament\’s economic affairs committee, also proposed that \”golden hellos\” should be clawed back if performance fell short.

Dear Lord, you\’d think these people would be able to understand their own arguments, wouldn\’t you?

And the argument here is that a bonus encourages people to strain too much, to take on too much risk in order to get the bonus. It might be true and it might not be but that is what the argument is.

So, in the case of a golden hello, does someone take more risk in order to earn it? No, obviously, they don\’t. But if that golden hello can be clawed back? Then yes they might.

Golden hellos actually solve the problem of excessive risk taking……

And as for this tosspot:

Belgian Green Party member Philippe Lamberts said he could not find any evidence that the remuneration policies at banks such as Deutsche Bank or Societe Generale \”correspond to any real value creation\”.

\”I am getting fed up of people saying this issue is populist and we should not go into that. Variable salary cannot be bigger than fixed salary,\” he said. \”Don\’t tell me you need two-fold, three-fold, five-fold variable salary to do good work. This is false,\” he said.

Remind me why we handed over the power over what a private business in London (or Bath, Bristol or Birmingham) can pay its employees and how to some Gaia worshipping loon from Flanders? Is this really essential to stopping Germay invading France. Again?

8 comments on “Another idiot Lib Dim

  1. Germany doesn’t need to invade France – the French have handed over anything worthwhile through the EUSSR.

  2. Not sure if ‘their own logic’ isn’t actually correct on this.
    A bonus is not really a reward for past endeavours, is it? If the employee had no alternative employment there’d be no reason to award one. No market forces operating. The bonus is really an incentive for the high performer to remain with the present company rather than take their talents elsewhere. Hence the offering of a golden hello is an attempt to top that inducement to encourage a move. It’s the new company offering a ‘bonus’ on previous track record. With a career path having two three changes of employer it could be seen to encourage risk taking as the employee rides their streak of luck up the career ladder.
    If you accept the premise in the first place, of course.

  3. Incidentally, if LimpDims & Greens really have a problem with incentivising risk, maybe they should look at the system of professional politicians. Whole things built on structuring policy decisions to get the upside of benefit/risk calculation this side of election day, whilst deferring the consequences till after. Worse way, someone else gets to deal with them. Best way, the successful politician gets another round of pulling the same stunt. Even more if the lag on substantial portions of the shit hitting the fan are long enough. (See Gordon Brown)
    Because the electoral cycle’s a mere 5 years, as against the longer career intervals in other fields, there’s even greater inducement to short term risk taking.

  4. The funny thing is that because now bonuses are more and more paid in shares and deferred for years, and only received if you stay in that company (as per politicians desires), to entice someone to leave a competitor, you need to compensate a lot more for what they will leaving behind.

    An unintended consequence?

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>