TSB chief executive Paul Pester is standing down following criticism of his handling of a bungled IT switch earlier in the year that left thousands of customers unable to access their accounts for days.
Mr Pester, who was singled out for harshly worded criticism by MPs on the Treasury select committee, will leave with immediate effect.
Unlike Ministers who just sail on into the Cabinet after having pissed away the taxpayers’ money. Actually, that’s a requirement of making it to Cabinet.
But why do they go? Not because a few MPs chuck a few criticisms at a CEO in the select committee.
The TSB’s outgoing boss Paul Pester is still in line for payments and bonuses of nearly £1.7m, despite standing down today following criticism of his handling of a bungled IT switch
Yep, that’s why they get the big bucks.
But the bungling all seems to have been at the Spanish HQ of the company that owns TSB. So Pester was a CEO in name only. That presumably explains why he’s getting only £1.7M.
@dearieme
It seems to me that Mr Pester has been scapegoated
The technical issues and rollout failures seem to be a s a result of the parent Spanish bank’s migration plans that he has has to try and mitigate/defend
I don’t think it has ended here
It must be particularly galling to be criticised for ineptitude and incompetence by a bunch of MPs. I don’t think £1.7m is enough recompense for that.
I work in large IT systems and prepare stuff for deployment \ rollout. There’s no way problems are the CEO’s fault. The buck stops many levels beneath them.
I also agree that it’s probably the new parent company’s fault, and that’s why he is being paid.
I’m not so sure firefoxx. The first time it happens, you may be right. But after a major IT disaster, I’d expect senior management to take a keen interest in ensuring it doesn’t happen again (and again), which doesn’t seem to have been the case here.