Fancy a job paying €500k per annum

donalg1

Allied Irish Banks has written off debts in a small number of cases where it has repossessed houses but is working on industry-wide long-term solutions to lessen the debt burden for struggling mortgage borrowers to help them stay in their homes.
Speaking to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure and Reform, AIB executive chairman David Hodgkinson said he was consulting with the Department of Finance and the Central Bank on a wide range of solutions to assist distressed customers.
Mr Hodgkinson said that the bank was not looking to introduce tailored solutions for just a small number of customers but a massive programme across the bank to allow staff to offer these customers different options to help them.

"We are trying to keep people in their homes," he said.

He said AIB had repossessed less than 20 houses, all but one of which were voluntarily handed over to the bank, and that agreement had been reached with more than 5,000 customers to help them deal with their mortgage debts. Most of these cases involved customers moving to paying only interest on their mortgages.

The head of AIB's home mortgage business, Jim O'Keeffe, said that the bank had only written off mortgage debt in a "small number of cases" or "handful" of cases and only where houses had been repossessed.

Mr Hodgkinson said that the bank was working with the department and the Central Bank to find out the cases where it would be appropriate to write off a borrower's debts. A Government-appointed expert group is assessing possible solutions for mortgage borrowers in distress.

"It is a work-in-progress with the department," said Mr Hodgkinson, who added that AIB didn't want to "go it alone" on wider solutions for mortgage borrowers who cannot repay their debts without the support of the bank's owner, the Department of Finance, and the Central Bank.

On the appointment of the bank's new chief executive, Mr Hodgkinson said that the bank may need to pay above the Government's €500,000 pay cap - up to €690,000 a year - to fill the role.

The Government's committee on bankers' pay, the Covered Institutions Remuneration Oversight Committee (Ciroc), recommended that the salary of the chief executive of AIB be capped at €690,000 in 2009. "I am confident that we will get a CEO for AIB with the Ciroc-recommended salary range," he said.
Mr Hodgkinson said he has recommended that this sum should be paid to the new candidate and that it was up to the Minister for Finance Michael Noonan to sign off on a salary above the Government pay cap but the Minister had not yet approved this.

The board of AIB has interviewed all of the candidates on the bank's shortlist reduced from 250 potential candidates, he said.

The Central Bank had held initial meetings with the candidates on the AIB's shortlist for chief executive but had not yet carried out its fitness and probity tests on the suitability of the candidates, he said.

Mr Hodgkinson said he would be willing to stay on for another year as non-executive chairman of the bank to allow a smooth handover to the new chief executive. He had initially intended to act as chairman of the bank for a year after being appointed in October 2010.

__________________________________


I am sure now that the Bank could find a suitable candidate who would be willing to settle for half a million a year.

W.Shakes-Beer

Yes

The Outside Agency

It is not enough.

Saila

ok then...Ill do it :rolleyes:

melekalikimaka

you want the best you have to pay for it, i'd rather pay full wack and get the best, than peanuts and get a monkey

LeixlipRed

melekalikimaka wrote: »

you want the best you have to pay for it, i'd rather pay full wack and get the best, than peanuts and get a monkey

The best what though? Best **** who speculates with our money? Or the best lobbyist of the government. Should be ****ed in a dungeon the lot of them.

Plazaman

I'd love to know what magical powers these would be candidates possess that warrant €690,000 per year (€13,270 gross per week so say net roundy about €7,000 per week).

And so if they only got €500,000 (which I already thought was written in stone when we the taxpayers took over the bank), would they only half do the job, perhaps shut down part of their super sized brain and magical powers?

The Outside Agency

melekalikimaka wrote:

you want the best you have to pay for it...

absolutely...because there is obviously nobody else in the entire world competent enough to do it for less.

SEPT 23 1989

I am a majority shareholder in that cesspit and i say €500,000 and not a cent more:mad:

Saila

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I am a majority shareholder in that cesspit

so your net worth is what....... €400 maybe?

tricky D

melekalikimaka wrote: »

you want the best you have to pay for it, i'd rather pay full wack and get the best, than peanuts and get a monkey

Usually I'd agree, but previous experience suggests otherwise in this area. Last time the banks paid the top whack and got great lenders. Unfortunately the positions were for bankers and the people we got were useless at that. Much easier to lend than to bank.

Sykk

€500,000 per year isn't a particularly bad thing for someone who has to run that hellhole. It's an unbelievable amount of pressure plus the responsibilities are enormous.

Why would any highly skilled businessman do it for anything less?

donalg1

melekalikimaka wrote: »

you want the best you have to pay for it, i'd rather pay full wack and get the best, than peanuts and get a monkey

Well a few years ago they were paying a lot more than 500k and look what we got for that, a country in ruins due mainly to the poor underpaid bankers. But sure half a million is nothing, you wont get much for that these days maybe a lad straight outta sixth class who shows a good understanding of maths.

What you would consider the best to be worth half a billion? Bet you have an application in for that job for sho

Mongarra

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I am a majority shareholder in that cesspit and i say €500,000 and not a cent more:mad:

And there I was thinking the Government (or we even) had the majority shareholding!

Newspapers get everything wrong!

listermint

Plazaman wrote: »

I'd love to know what magical powers these would be candidates possess that warrant €690,000 per year (€13,270 gross per week so say net roundy about €7,000 per week).

And so if they only got €500,000 (which I already thought was written in stone when we the taxpayers took over the bank), would they only half do the job, perhaps shut down part of their super sized brain and magical powers?

You wash your mouth out, These people are 'the best' didnt you see in the report it states 'the best'.......

Phill Ewinn

I doubt the entire bank is worth €500k. What do these fvcking dreamers be smoking? I'd say hell yeah, as soon as the bank repays it's debts and makes a reasonable profit then go ahead and draw that kind of salary. Until the markets change or a miracle happens you might as well employ fvckng mickey mouse to run it.

listermint

Sykk wrote: »

€500,000 per year isn't a particularly bad thing for someone who has to run that hellhole. It's an unbelievable amount of pressure plus the responsibilities are enormous.

Why would any highly skilled businessman do it for anything less?

Who says these tools are highly skilled businessmen, Goldman Sachs was full of highly skilled businessmen. The only thing highly skilled about alot of these lads is their ability to talk bulls**t have an answer for everything and sit at the top of a committee while other minions do the grunt work.

Theres around a thousand lads driving taxis out there that could run that bank better.

donalg1

listermint wrote: »

Who says these tools are highly skilled businessmen, Goldman Sachs was full of highly skilled businessmen. The only thing highly skilled about alot of these lads is their ability to talk bulls**t have an answer for everything and sit at the top of a committee while other minions do the grunt work.

Theres around a thousand lads driving taxis out there that could run that bank better.

Yeah but they arent members of the proper golf clubs though so got no chance getting into the top jobs in the bank

Son Of A Vidic

melekalikimaka wrote: »

you want the best you have to pay for it, i'd rather pay full wack and get the best, than peanuts and get a monkey

Our banking system and credit rating has been destroyed by these very same over paid monkeys. Reckless lenders and their persistent managerial incompetence has put us on our knees. They have a very high opinion of what they are worth don't they? They shouldn't even be on half of it, because they offer nothing to society and represent no value. They are merely professional gamblers and nothing more, such scum should thus be paid accordingly.

melekalikimaka

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

They are merely professional gamblers and nothing more, such scum should thus be paid accordingly.

very naive to think that, stop reading the red tops and maybe look into exactly what their roles entail...

Akrasia

Sykk wrote: »

€500,000 per year isn't a particularly bad thing for someone who has to run that hellhole. It's an unbelievable amount of pressure plus the responsibilities are enormous.

Why would any highly skilled businessman do it for anything less?

Responsibilities??

What are you talking about. They might make decisions, but they're not held responsible for the consequences. No bankers have been held responsible for anything they have done. If they cock up, they might at worst lose their job, but even if they're fired, they still get a 'golden handshake' payment equivalent to winning the fecking lottery.

There is just as much stress in a minimum wage job working in a call centre or on the checkout of a busy shop, except for us, we are 'held responsible' to everything that goes wrong can lose our jobs at any time with no notice and barely a pittance compensation

The top 5% of earners in this country are completely out of touch with reality.

SEPT 23 1989

Mongarra wrote: »

And there I was thinking the Government (or we even) had the majority shareholding!

Newspapers get everything wrong!

Thats what i meant we own that dump

Hank_Jones

melekalikimaka wrote: »

you want the best you have to pay for it, i'd rather pay full wack and get the best, than peanuts and get a monkey

Yes, because the people who have previously held such positions did fantastic jobs.

Clearly worthy of such massive wages.

It's just a pity that the public can't put their own financial backing behind these people.

Oh....wait...

Akrasia

melekalikimaka wrote: »

very naive to think that, stop reading the red tops and maybe look into exactly what their roles entail...

They are looking to get paid 13 times the average industrial wage, 27 times the minimum wage, and that isn't even including all the extra perks, the gold plated pension, the expenses, the share options and bonus packages etc...

It's an obscene amount of money. That kind of inequality is very damaging to society as a whole and there is a lot of research out there that shows societies that have the largest gaps between the richest and the poorest score lower in quality of life indices so it affects everyone (it's not just sour grapes)
http://harvardmagazine.com/2008/07/unequal-america-html

MagicSean

melekalikimaka wrote: »

you want the best you have to pay for it, i'd rather pay full wack and get the best, than peanuts and get a monkey

Why do we need the best. Someone not corrupt or stupid would do.

Mongarra

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Thats what i meant we own that dump

Sorry, picked you up wrong. Thought you meant you had a few shares personally.:o

TheZohanS

Yup.

deandean

Ach the 500K or 690K is only the advertised / stated Salary.
Then there's the bonus, say 200K per anum,
and the regular pension contribution, say 150K per anum
and the special pension contribution, say 100K per anum
And Additional payments, say 150K per anum
Plus shares, say 50K per anum
Plus car plus expenses plus clubs, say 50K per anum
Plus a couple of special Advisors (mates) he'll bring along, 100K p.a. each.
and a departure fee, say 500K upon termination

That's the real cost, and what what pi$$es so many people off, esp bank shareholders.