AIB Refuse to pay bonus!!

moonshadow

At last the politicians are doing what they are entitled to and the banks are obeying see below,
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/no-aib-bonuses-to-be-paid-after-support-withdrawal-threat-485565.html

A result

Liam Byrne

About bloody time!

Unfortunately it's over 2 years too late telling the banks that we wouldn't be held to ransom.

thebaldsoprano

Liam Byrne wrote: »

About bloody time!

Funny what an upcoming election can do...

Atlantic Dawn

moonshadow wrote: »

At last the politicians are doing what they are entitled to and the banks are obeying see below,
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/no-aib-bonuses-to-be-paid-after-support-withdrawal-threat-485565.html

A result

Most likely because they were told by Mr IMF or by David Cameron that they had to. Why couldn't they have done it last week when pushed?

Also they have put the legislation in governing it within the IMF vote tomorrow in the Dail to make the vote against it all that more difficult for the opposition.

nordydan

The lazy, greedy Irish taxpayer screws the decent and honourable people of AIB yet again. Shame on ye all

cazzak79

im an aib staff member see i admit it. as much as id love to get a bonus unfortunately looks like im in the right area in it. i dont think its right at the moment and we certainly dont deserve it
i want you to remember that vast majority of the staff are not getting a bonus
happy christmas everyone and here to a better new year for everyone:D

NinjaTruncs

They haven't said they aren't paying all the bonuses

The board of Allied Irish Banks has this evening decided not to pay the controversial €40m in bonuses to top executives.

There were what 2,400 people getting bonuses, i can't see all of them being top executives. So there could still be a large part of the 40Mil getting paid out.

cazzak79

i just mean. the customer service staff, tellers in the branches or the admin people and the people who work in the call centre there is alot of staff in these areas would not be seeing bonuses

jimmycrackcorm

This is finally a lone example of the government doing exactly the affirmative action that it should. However I wonder what the net effect on AIB will be from disincentivising their capital markets staff. I'd imagine that the reason they were getting bonuses because of profit achievements and if now as a result the unit will be not as profitable then it is the taxpayer that will lose out even more.

nordydan

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

They haven't said they aren't paying all the bonuses



There were what 2,400 people getting bonuses, i can't see all of them being top executives. So there could still be a large part of the 40Mil getting paid out.

All bonuses getting culled, we got confirmation this evening. The money would have been nice, but in reality the correct decision was made

Inverse to the power of one!

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

This is finally a lone example of the government doing exactly the affirmative action that it should. However I wonder what the net effect on AIB will be from disincentivising their capital markets staff. I'd imagine that the reason they were getting bonuses because of profit achievements and if now as a result the unit will be not as profitable then it is the taxpayer that will lose out even more.

I would imagine that commissions remain in place for the Capital markets staff, so hopefully as the only profitable part of the bank it continues to pull the weight of the rest of the bank.

It's a funny scenario where it's the banks traders are being looked to for profitability and propriety......Gordon Gecko eat your heart out

ArtSmart

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

This is finally a lone example of the government doing exactly the affirmative action that it should. However I wonder what the net effect on AIB will be from disincentivising their capital markets staff. I'd imagine that the reason they were getting bonuses because of profit achievements and if now as a result the unit will be not as profitable then it is the taxpayer that will lose out even more.

the issue here is wider than that particular concern.

either way, i cant see a load of them heading off to greener pastures - it's pretty bleak out there.

motherriley

nordydan wrote: »

The lazy, greedy Irish taxpayer screws the decent and honourable people of AIB yet again. Shame on ye all

This would apply to the Irish banks...they do not even give customers a decent services to the tax payers such as opening on Saturdays’ when customers can do their banking....perhaps they would want too much money to open on Saturday’s , I expect that would be a step too far for the Banks in Ireland. UK banks now open on Saturdays, why not in Ireland.:(

zig

If you work for a company , and that company doesnt make a profit that year, you generally don't get a bonus.
The same has applied here thank god.

PhatPiggins

Inverse to the power of one! wrote: »

I would imagine that commissions remain in place for the Capital markets staff, so hopefully as the only profitable part of the bank it continues to pull the weight of the rest of the bank.

It's a funny scenario where it's the banks traders are being looked to for profitability and propriety......Gordon Gecko eat your heart out

The capital markets profit made up a huge percentage of AIB's profit for the year in mention. I'm not surprised they feel so aggrieved.

They made plenty of money in 2008 Zig

ArtSmart

PhatPiggins wrote: »

The capital markets profit made up a huge percentage of AIB's profit for the year in mention. I'm not surprised they feel so aggrieved.

they shouldn't be so aggrieved. the is not standard circumstances. there are wider issues of public concern at stake here, not least that the bank is under primarily under public ownership and its debts are being paid by the public. these facts are not irrelevant - quite the opposite.
they are therefore either naive or utterly self absorbed.

PhatPiggins

ArtSmart wrote: »

they shouldn't be so aggrieved. the is not standard circumstances. there are wider issues of public concern at stake here, not least that the bank is under primarily under public ownership and its debts are being paid by the public. these facts are not irrelevant - quite the opposite.
they are therefore either naive or utterly self absorbed.

I'm not denying the external circumstances but as was previously pointed out they're the only part of the bank that's making money. Come jan 2011 we're all going to own AIB. Personally I wouldn't want the capital markets staff disinterested because there's no incentive to make money.

RGS

The letter from Lenihan to AIB concludes with the following:
"Nothing in this letter is intended to prevent the Bank meeting its obligations on foot of a Court Order already obtained."


Does this mean the bonus will be paid to the 90 staff who issued proceedings or to the individual who ran his case.


This issue is likely to find its wa back to the courts.

ArtSmart

PhatPiggins wrote: »

I'm not denying the external circumstances but as was previously pointed out they're the only part of the bank that's making money. Come jan 2011 we're all going to own AIB. Personally I wouldn't want the capital markets staff disinterested because there's no incentive to make money.

of course there will be - but it'll be structured differently. the real prob was the unsecured lending - which will be changed as well.

but the bigger issue still stands and they're out-of-touch if they thought this would be acceptable or go unnoticed.

PhatPiggins

ArtSmart wrote: »

of course there will be - but it'll be structured differently. the real prob was the unsecured lending - which will be changed as well.

but the bigger issue still stands and they're out-of-touch if they thought this would be acceptable or go unnoticed.

No your right it shouldn't be paid in the current context but you're greying the line between the lending arm, all other AIB functions and the capital markets.

I don't think the bonus should be paid in 2010, it should have been paid in 2008 when it was earned and when AIB could afford to pay it. Unfortunately now we can't seperate AIB and Republic of Ireland inc otherwise I'd be advocating that the staff members who earned the money should sue the company for damages.

ArtSmart

PhatPiggins wrote: »

No your right it shouldn't be paid in the current context but you're greying the line between the lending arm, all other AIB functions and the capital markets.

the opposite - i'm clarifying where the real problem was - with the lending arm.

I don't think the bonus should be paid in 2010, it should have been paid in 2008 when it was earned and when AIB could afford to pay it. Unfortunately now we can't seperate AIB and Republic of Ireland inc otherwise I'd be advocating that the staff members who earned the money should sue the company for damages.

Perhaps. We'd have to question the 'afford' bit though.

anyway, the issues are separate. of course those who earn money under agreed terms should be given it, but not under current circumstances. everything has a context.

PhatPiggins

ArtSmart wrote: »

Perhaps. We'd have to question the 'afford' bit though.

anyway, the issues are separate. of course those who earn money under agreed terms should be given it, but not under current circumstances. everything has a context.

Well they filed a profit of €800 odd million in 2008 of which the capital markets generated €500 odd million so I think they could have paid it then.

By in large I think we agree on the same thing. I just don't like the hang em high brigade's current approach to all bank staff in general. Some of them are very good at their jobs(I'm not a bank employee btw)

vintac34

Would love to know if bonus payments are being paid or considered for 2009/2010 ..
Just a simple query from a part owner of the bank?????

Or in other words,one of the impovirished citizens of whats left of the state!!!!

femur61

Did say on the news the person who initiated the court proceedings has been paid their bonus.

ei.sdraob

PhatPiggins wrote: »

The capital markets profit made up a huge percentage of AIB's profit for the year in mention. I'm not surprised they feel so aggrieved.

They made plenty of money in 2008 Zig

In 2008 the markets rose from one of the deepest recessions

a monkey with money to spend could have made money

Sir Shankalot

ei.sdraob wrote: »

In 2008 the markets rose from one of the deepest recessions

a monkey with money to spend could have made money

Whether a monkey could have made the money or not is irrelevant, the poster was correcting an untruth posted by zig concerning whether or not AIB made money in 2008

despite what people think about the €40m AIB bonuses, the staff have been told three times they were getting this money. last week they were even advised that even if something happened they could not be stopped as payroll had all been set up to run this Friday.

Out of the €40m, half of it would have been recouped in tax straight away, so we are down to €20m. If people think that this €20m was going to be stashed under people's beds I would disagree. Some of the money would have been spent on cars, in restaurants, in hotels, in pubs, in clothes stores, basically being pumped back into the real economy. I would prefer to have the money in the hands of commerce than in the hands of our Government

the cash is not the issue, it is a relatively tiny amount of money. we spend €60m euros EVERY day of the year for 365 days of the year on social welfare, yes €60m per day on social welfare

Brian Lenihan has politicised a row over €40m euros...trying to chase votes and portray himself to be a great statesman, standing up for the working man. He threatened AIB with the news that state funding was in danger should they pay these bonuses. Where was this bravery and single-mindedness when the IMF and EU were pushing him and Brian Cowen around the playground, when they were "negotiating" the terms of a bailout package that runs into tens of billions at 5.8%, effectively mortgaging our country for a generation. Why then could he not have displayed the same kind of balls, looked them in the eye and said "Sorry lads...we cannot afford that...we are going to have to default on all our bank and sovereign debt....hope it does not spill over into the rest of Europe..."

ei.sdraob

Sir Shankalot wrote: »

Whether a monkey could have made the money or not is irrelevant, the poster was correcting an untruth posted by zig concerning whether or not AIB made money in 2008

despite what people think about the €40m AIB bonuses, the staff have been told three times they were getting this money. last week they were even advised that even if something happened they could not be stopped as payroll had all been set up to run this Friday.

Out of the €40m, half of it would have been recouped in tax straight away, so we are down to €20m. If people think that this €20m was going to be stashed under people's beds I would disagree. Some of the money would have been spent on cars, in restaurants, in hotels, in pubs, in clothes stores, basically being pumped back into the real economy. I would prefer to have the money in the hands of commerce than in the hands of our Government

the cash is not the issue, it is a relatively tiny amount of money. we spend €60m euros EVERY day of the year for 365 days of the year on social welfare, yes €60m per day on social welfare

Brian Lenihan has politicised a row over €40m euros...trying to chase votes and portray himself to be a great statesman, standing up for the working man. He threatened AIB with the news that state funding was in danger should they pay these bonuses. Where was this bravery and single-mindedness when the IMF and EU were pushing him and Brian Cowen around the playground, when they were "negotiating" the terms of a bailout package that runs into tens of billions at 5.8%, effectively mortgaging our country for a generation. Why then could he not have displayed the same kind of balls, looked them in the eye and said "Sorry lads...we cannot afford that...we are going to have to default on all our bank and sovereign debt....hope it does not spill over into the rest of Europe..."

Maybe if they are so "talented" they can go and get a job in another bank :rolleyes:
Oh wait with the likes of "AIB" or "Anglo" on your CV good luck getting a job anywhere respectable and honest
It was the investment wings of these banks that screwed up so much in first place, anyone I feel sorry for is the cashiers, they will be the ones loosing their jobs.


Ive seen how these "bright sparks" operate in early 2008, one manager in particular was pushing hard to invest in stocks and hedge funds in august 2008, a month later almost all of these got wiped off the face of the earth

efb

Sir Shankalot wrote: »

Whether a monkey could have made the money or not is irrelevant, the poster was correcting an untruth posted by zig concerning whether or not AIB made money in 2008

despite what people think about the €40m AIB bonuses, the staff have been told three times they were getting this money. last week they were even advised that even if something happened they could not be stopped as payroll had all been set up to run this Friday.

Out of the €40m, half of it would have been recouped in tax straight away, so we are down to €20m. If people think that this €20m was going to be stashed under people's beds I would disagree. Some of the money would have been spent on cars, in restaurants, in hotels, in pubs, in clothes stores, basically being pumped back into the real economy. I would prefer to have the money in the hands of commerce than in the hands of our Government

the cash is not the issue, it is a relatively tiny amount of money. we spend €60m euros EVERY day of the year for 365 days of the year on social welfare, yes €60m per day on social welfare

Brian Lenihan has politicised a row over €40m euros...trying to chase votes and portray himself to be a great statesman, standing up for the working man. He threatened AIB with the news that state funding was in danger should they pay these bonuses. Where was this bravery and single-mindedness when the IMF and EU were pushing him and Brian Cowen around the playground, when they were "negotiating" the terms of a bailout package that runs into tens of billions at 5.8%, effectively mortgaging our country for a generation. Why then could he not have displayed the same kind of balls, looked them in the eye and said "Sorry lads...we cannot afford that...we are going to have to default on all our bank and sovereign debt....hope it does not spill over into the rest of Europe..."

Yes, lets take the money from the Blind, Widows and carers and give it to the great financial minds that work in AIB...

(not even worthy of a roll-eyes, he must be a troll)

Cookie_Monster

The government has effectively over-ruled the courts here. That's kinda worrying.

AIB were bound by the court decision to pay these bonuses, rightly or wrongly, it all legal and now the Gov is just standing on that law by blackmailing AIB that it would not get its funding.

Why is the government suddenly above the law, not a pleasant thought :mad:
If I was entitled to that money I'd be going back to court again for sure

Sir Shankalot

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Maybe if they are so "talented" they can go and get a job in another bank :rolleyes:
Oh wait with the likes of "AIB" or "Anglo" on your CV good luck getting a job anywhere respectable and honest
It was the investment wings of these banks that screwed up so much in first place, anyone I feel sorry for is the cashiers, they will be the ones loosing their jobs.

You are absolutely clueless, "it was the investment wings of the banks that screwed up so much in the first place" - no it was the lending wing that lent money that is never going to be paid back that caused the problem. Your ignorance of the subject is breathtaking. I know plenty of people who work or have worked in AIB or other banks and they will find it a lot easier to find a job than someone like you who probably forms their opinion from a headline in the Metro

efb

This 'entitled' to speak really smacks of injurylawers4u...

bankbailoutwonga4u.ie?????

dan_d

All I can think is....pity he can't be so effective in standing up to the PS unions when it's needed....among others...

dissed doc

PhatPiggins wrote: »

No your right it shouldn't be paid in the current context but you're greying the line between the lending arm, all other AIB functions and the capital markets.

I don't think the bonus should be paid in 2010, it should have been paid in 2008 when it was earned and when AIB could afford to pay it. Unfortunately now we can't seperate AIB and Republic of Ireland inc otherwise I'd be advocating that the staff members who earned the money should sue the company for damages.

Doctors, nurses, fire fighters, police all took paycuts even though it was the civil service and management side of the HSE public sector that was overstaffed and overpaid.

If the company they work for makes a profit, then fair enough pay the bonuses but if the company makes and overall loss of billions than it can't afford to pay the bonuses. You tar all the public sector with the same brush - this is what happens in reverse.

Sir Shankalot

efb wrote: »

Yes, lets take the money from the Blind, Widows and carers and give it to the great financial minds that work in AIB...

(not even worthy of a roll-eyes, he must be a troll)

why am I a troll? is it because I have an opinion that conflicts with yours?

By your twisted logic, every penny spent on things other than the Blind, Widows and carers is a direct slight on these sections of society. Grab your pitchfork and head down to AIB HQ so...all the staff there must be evil, thick, coniving, money-grabbing scumbags

For the final time as frankly I am sick of repeating this point, the €40m relates to 2008. Believe it or not by paying out this €40m it will not result in a retrospective cut in the 2008 welfare budget for the Blind, Widows and Carers. I share the concerns of the poster who raises point of the Govt overruling the courts and people are being very naive if they think that yesterday's action was anything other than a politically driven vote-chasing exercise.

whippet

I think people are getting caught up in the headlines here.

I was listening to Lenny on Newstalk this morning and he gave a quick summary of what happenend.

AIB didn't want to pay the bonus but were taken to court to force payment of the 'debt'. As lenny said, as there was a debt to be paid the board of AIB had to swear on oath inability to pay.

The board couldn't swear this oath as there is an ability to pay, therefore they couldn't offer a defense.

With the intervention of the Minister saying he will withold investment / recapitalisation should a bonus be paid this changed the game totally as now AIB actually have an inability to pay. The reasoning is, if they pay the €40m the will run out of Capital and become insolvent instantly.

In my opinion it was played out very well by AIB and the Department of Finance. The fact that the employees had to go to court to force AIB to pay up shows that the bank actually didn't want to pay the bonuses.

But as with everything the actual details will get lost in the headlines of the tabloids and people will assume that 'public outrage' won out in the end.

Sir Shankalot

dissed doc wrote: »

Doctors, nurses, fire fighters, police all took paycuts even though it was the civil service and management side of the HSE public sector that was overstaffed and overpaid.

If the company they work for makes a profit, then fair enough pay the bonuses but if the company makes and overall loss of billions than it can't afford to pay the bonuses. You tar all the public sector with the same brush - this is what happens in reverse.

these people are not taking paycuts though, they are having money earned and agreed upon in 2008 effectively clawed back - can you see the difference? I genuinely do not want to sound patronising by asking that question...I am just highlighting the difference and I feel like I am banging my head against the wall so I must not be making my point very well

I don't work for a bank, never have - but I know plenty of decent people who do. We have all been hit by levies and taxes but in each and every case, these levies and taxes will relate to FUTURE income, not money already earned - can anyone hear me!!!

Tipp Man

ei.sdraob wrote: »

In 2008 the markets rose from one of the deepest recessions

a monkey with money to spend could have made money

I'm just curious how this line above is tied into the line below?? Surely you are contradicting yourself there

ei.sdraob wrote: »

It was the investment wings of these banks that screwed up so much in first place, anyone I feel sorry for is the cashiers, they will be the ones loosing their jobs.


Ive seen how these "bright sparks" operate in early 2008, one manager in particular was pushing hard to invest in stocks and hedge funds in august 2008, a month later almost all of these got wiped off the face of the earth

And just with regards to the quote below, I know a few people who have Anglo, AIB and BOI on their CV's and let me tell you it hasn't hindered them in the slightest. I know several (traders etc) who have left Ireland and been substantially rewarded in London and further afield. It would be foolish to think that just because Irish banking is in a mess that some of these people can't or won't up sticks and leave. And it would be even more foolish to think that they can't or won't secure some very good jobs for themselves

We talk about brain drain when the unemployed leave, surely if you create a situation where highly paid workers who are working will seriously consider leaving (and I'm sure most will) then you a creating a brain drain.

Will FAS create as many well paid jobs as this 40m would have cost??

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Maybe if they are so "talented" they can go and get a job in another bank :rolleyes:
Oh wait with the likes of "AIB" or "Anglo" on your CV good luck getting a job anywhere respectable and honest

whippet

Sir Shankalot wrote: »

I share the concerns of the poster who raises point of the Govt overruling the courts and people are being very naive if they think that yesterday's action was anything other than a politically driven vote-chasing exercise.

they didn't overrule the court, the government can't do this.

What they did was change the ability of AIB to pay the money, which was central to the court action.

efb

Sir Shankalot wrote: »

why am I a troll? is it because I have an opinion that conflicts with yours?

By your twisted logic, every penny spent on things other than the Blind, Widows and carers is a direct slight on these sections of society. Grab your pitchfork and head down to AIB HQ so...all the staff there must be evil, thick, coniving, money-grabbing scumbags

For the final time as frankly I am sick of repeating this point, the €40m relates to 2008. Believe it or not by paying out this €40m it will not result in a retrospective cut in the 2008 welfare budget for the Blind, Widows and Carers. I share the concerns of the poster who raises point of the Govt overruling the courts and people are being very naive if they think that yesterday's action was anything other than a politically driven vote-chasing exercise.

No, it's your highly charged language that makes me think your a troll!

Grrr I hate bankers... Lolz

fliball123

PhatPiggins wrote: »

The capital markets profit made up a huge percentage of AIB's profit for the year in mention. I'm not surprised they feel so aggrieved.

They made plenty of money in 2008 Zig

Really I think it has came to light that the AIB balance sheet was a sheer face lie...So infact they didnt make a profit they just cooked the books to reflect that...For once the gov has done the right thing...Now next on the aganda are the other bankers who have recieved bonuses and payouts over the last 2/3 years and then on to the monster that is the public sector...Go Brian go

fliball123

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

The government has effectively over-ruled the courts here. That's kinda worrying.

AIB were bound by the court decision to pay these bonuses, rightly or wrongly, it all legal and now the Gov is just standing on that law by blackmailing AIB that it would not get its funding.

Why is the government suddenly above the law, not a pleasant thought :mad:
If I was entitled to that money I'd be going back to court again for sure

No lenny done the right thing he simple said if these bonuses are paid we the tax payer will not bail you out...I think morally it is the right thing to do...regardless of what profit these guys maid...why should I the tax payer be paying their bonus...Thats the question that no banker here can answer

The bank can now say and I believe it is in Irish employment law that if a company is in threat of going out of business ...then they do not pay bonuses or something like that...well done lenny

fliball123

Sir Shankalot wrote: »

these people are not taking paycuts though, they are having money earned and agreed upon in 2008 effectively clawed back - can you see the difference? I genuinely do not want to sound patronising by asking that question...I am just highlighting the difference and I feel like I am banging my head against the wall so I must not be making my point very well

I don't work for a bank, never have - but I know plenty of decent people who do. We have all been hit by levies and taxes but in each and every case, these levies and taxes will relate to FUTURE income, not money already earned - can anyone hear me!!!

keep banging that head kid...as I have stated even if it was back in 2008 its clear that the banks cooked thier books to show a profit. It is also clear that in 2010 that the tax payer will be paying this bonus...Why should we pay this bonus...Riddle me that one

Sir Shankalot

fliball123 wrote: »

No lenny done the right thing he simple said if these bonuses are paid we the tax payer will not bail you out...I think morally it is the right thing to do...regardless of what profit these guys maid...why should I the tax payer be paying their bonus...Thats the question that no banker here can answer

The bank can now say and I believe it is in Irish employment law that if a company is in threat of going out of business ...then they do not pay bonuses or something like that...well done lenny

there is €19bn worth of things that we cannot afford to pay next year as that is the size of our budget deficit but we will pay them regardless. you are congratulating Lenihan for something he was at best forced to do and at worst did to curry favour with the electorate.

Why did Lenihan not simply add a piece of legislation under the terms of the bank guarantee of Sept 2008 whereby bonuses could not be paid in any institution that was guaranteed by the state? Throwing flowers at him now is like congratulating an arsonist for putting out the fire

Cookie_Monster

fliball123 wrote: »

No lenny done the right thing he simple said if these bonuses are paid we the tax payer will not bail you out...I think morally it is the right thing to do...regardless of what profit these guys maid...why should I the tax payer be paying their bonus...Thats the question that no banker here can answer

no it nots morally the right thing to do. this dates back to 2008.
the gov are imposing stupid terms on a deal already done.those people are entitled to their money, the only way the shouldn't be is if the gov didn't bail the bank out and it went to the wall. Moral coming from the likes of Lenihan, are you joking, he is one of the worst people this country has ever had in charge of anything, he has no morals, the budget proved that, all he did was tax the easy target and support his high paid friends.

Why should you, the tax payer, be paying for their salary, or their cars, or their expenses, or their investment decisions. We (the gov) decided to wade in and support it, you can't just pick and choose which bits 2 years later.

leeroybrown

I'd expect this to end up back in the courts, initially with an action against AIB and then possibly in an action against the state. Whenever I hear politicians commenting about politically overruling/ignoring the law in the 'interests' of public opinion I get quite worried. I'd prefer if the bonuses weren't paid but only if it's in a fully legal fashion.

fliball123

Sir Shankalot wrote: »

there is €19bn worth of things that we cannot afford to pay next year as that is the size of our budget deficit but we will pay them regardless. you are congratulating Lenihan for something he was at best forced to do and at worst did to curry favour with the electorate.

Why did Lenihan not simply add a piece of legislation under the terms of the bank guarantee of Sept 2008 whereby bonuses could not be paid in any institution that was guaranteed by the state? Throwing flowers at him now is like congratulating an arsonist for putting out the fire

And as I said in a previous post now that this issue is dealt with bank bonuses paid to bankers in the last 2/3 years where the banks bare face lied about the state of their balance book and cooked the books, these bonuses should be clawed back aswell..

Then next is the public sector and the Croke park agreement.

and by the way I was being a little bit tongue in cheek with regards to Lenny but he did the right thing at least once and believe me FF wont be getting my vote next year...

As for putting in legislation back in 2008 by all accounts he was lied to by the banks..The banks where yeah its not too bad maybe a couple of billion is needed which was a bare faced lie

and yet still none of the banker alligned people here have answered the moral question I asked which was..(and I will slap it in bold and maybe underline it)

WHY SHOULD I THE TAX PAYER PAY THESE BANKERS 40 MILLION IN BONUSES

ei.sdraob

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

The government has effectively over-ruled the courts here. That's kinda worrying.

AIB were bound by the court decision to pay these bonuses, rightly or wrongly, it all legal and now the Gov is just standing on that law by blackmailing AIB that it would not get its funding.

Why is the government suddenly above the law, not a pleasant thought :mad:
If I was entitled to that money I'd be going back to court again for sure

Its not the first time the government broke contracts, remember PS cuts


Now what's more worrying is that they are unwilling to break "contracts" with bondholders and grill em

ei.sdraob

Sir Shankalot wrote: »

You are absolutely clueless, "it was the investment wings of the banks that screwed up so much in the first place" - no it was the lending wing that lent money that is never going to be paid back that caused the problem. Your ignorance of the subject is breathtaking. I know plenty of people who work or have worked in AIB or other banks and they will find it a lot easier to find a job than someone like you who probably forms their opinion from a headline in the Metro

The guy offering "investments" in shares and funds was with the investment branch a whole month before the stock market skydived, showing fancy charts that went only up the way

fliball123

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

no it nots morally the right thing to do. this dates back to 2008.
the gov are imposing stupid terms on a deal already done.those people are entitled to their money, the only way the shouldn't be is if the gov didn't bail the bank out and it went to the wall. Moral coming from the likes of Lenihan, are you joking, he is one of the worst people this country has ever had in charge of anything, he has no morals, the budget proved that, all he did was tax the easy target and support his high paid friends.

Why should you, the tax payer, be paying for their salary, or their cars, or their expenses, or their investment decisions. We (the gov) decided to wade in and support it, you can't just pick and choose which bits 2 years later.

Very true but being honest with you being an ordanary tax payer no alignement to the p.s or banks...any small win for the average tax payer is a step in the right direction...and the next gove will deal with the p.s... but you still did not answer my question , you just redirected it somewhere else

caseyann

They will more than likely challenge it,as the person who took the action in first place has been paid.Therefore chances are if they also take action,they will be paid aswell. And in all likely hood fianna fail know this,and will have no control if the bonuses are paid.

And i am going to say it again,why are the tds still getting all of their wages and expenses but can cut wages etc.. how is that making cut backs.
Yes on everyone else but themselves.

What is the pay of the people who were meant to have recieved these bonuses?

omega666

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Why should you, the tax payer, be paying for their salary, or their cars, or their expenses, or their investment decisions. We (the gov) decided to wade in and support it, you can't just pick and choose which bits 2 years later.

well actually we can! the bailout money comes with terms or conditions. it’s not free money for AIB to do as they please with.
One of those condition now is that no bonus's are paid which the Gov are quiet entitled to do. So yes actually they can pick and choose which parts.

i think the vast majority of irish taxpayers are glad to see the government doing something right for change. it may be a political exercise but who cares.