Well...
yes, but they're a business, they only have our money because we give it to them (also because Gordon Brown.... texture like sun, had the stupid idea to give them FREE MONEH! with little control) and you have to remember that the bank is made up of lots of departments. If your company's Sales dept made a tits up that you in your dept had nothing to do with, would you be happy to get a pay cut? No, it wasn't your fault. Not every bank worker had a hand in the Great Fuck Up (I prefer this to 'the Credit Crunch') so why should they all be punished for it?
(Samulayo built a little fort on, Sun 19 Jul 2009, 12:33, 1 reply)

"so why should they all be punished for it?"

Because we, as their customers, are being punished for it.

*I* didn't have anything to do with the Great Fuck Up, but am enjoying lower returns on my savings and investments because of it. Because of the Great Fuck Up, many companies are finding it tough to continue doing business at all. Many more are shedding employees. This isn't wholly the fault of the banks, but don't be misled - they had a huge part in it.

If the business is struggling enough to require to be bailed out by the government, what justification is there for giving anyone bonuses? That money could pay of part of the debt, or be reinvested sensibly to pay off more at a later date.

I'm not against people being paid (and thus rewarded) for doing their job. But for struggling organisations to give very hefty bonuses at a time when they are in significant debt, and charging their customers through the nose for loans and credit cards which are continually pushed at them is somewhat distasteful.
(Captain Skippy pooed in a bag and left it on your doorstep, Sun 19 Jul 2009, 13:18, closed)

moneygeddon
I thought alot of places had stopped bonuses for most workers, apart from where they are owed them by contract. You have to remember that alot of these people are on not much above minimum wage and depend on the bonuses to get a livable wage.

The main culprits (besides the people taking loans they can't afford and the min-wage workers approving said loans) are speculators. These are the people who have caused the large number of problems and the failure of many companies - including my previous employer an Investment Management company. These are the people that deserve the vitriol, not the standard bank worker. Bankers deserve vitriol for totally different reasons - giant knotted ties with pink shirts being one.

Incidently I am very pissed off with the 0.5% AER I'm getting on my ISA (down from 7% when I started it) and have nothing but hatred for the people who are really to blame for the economy. ie speculators and people lending more than they can repay. Really I should put my money into premium bonds as there is the whole lottery thing to it which might net me some moneh! and the ISA interest is no longer paying for my nights out.
(Samulayo built a little fort on, Sun 19 Jul 2009, 13:44, closed)

No.
The banks choose to underpay their staff in the first place, and the staff in turn agree a bonus structure based on its success. The banks are not currently succeeding.

It is *not* a good thing that people depend on bonuses, but that isn't anything in favour of the banking system - it is just more demonstrative of how broken it is.
(Captain Skippy pooed in a bag and left it on your doorstep, Sun 19 Jul 2009, 17:42, closed)

Minimum wage:
"You have to remember that alot of these people are on not much above minimum wage"
What the fuck, not much ABOVE the minimum wage?

I spent three years living ON the minimum wage. It's perfectly feasible. No one *needs* a bonus, that's why it's called a bonus. It's extra. It shouldn't be considered part of your normal salary or expected as part of your income.
(MightyX5 living on a small island on, Mon 20 Jul 2009, 16:47, closed)