Noonan to abstain on Boucher pay package

Chips Lovell

bmaxi wrote: »

...but obviously asking for a contribution from it's executive cadre is not included in the business plan....

Really?

AIB has said that pay across the bank will have fallen by about 50% from 2008 levels once a severance programme and on-going cost-cutting measures take full effect.

The bank said its overall pay bill had already fallen by 31% since 2008, with the chief executive's pay down 76% and senior executives taking a 64% drop in pay, the latter including an average 33% reduction in base salary

.

Cody Pomeray

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Boucher's salary is very low by international standards.

Which international retail bank are you comparing Bank of Ireland to (since it would be entirely inappropriate to compare it to an investment bank)?

In fact, even if you look at the salary of the CEO of a large international banking group like Soc Gen, its CEO is on a combined payment package of about €1.4 million.

That means that Boucher is on 60% of the salary of Soc Gen's CEO, yet Soc Gen is a vastly bigger opertation with 600% more assets than Bank of Ireland, and plays a pivotal role in the European banking system.

Are you for real?

Low salary?

bmaxi

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Really?

.

Disingenuous at best, more creative accounting.
To say the CEO's salary has been cut by 76% since 2008 may be true, I don't have the figures but that is not the same as saying the CEO has taken a 76% pay cut. The CEO has only been there for about a year and has, to my knowledge, not taken a pay cut nor have his board.
The situation is, in 2009/2010 the previous board saw the writing on the wall and decided to take the money and run with their nice little retirement packages, doubtless to take up another lucrative handy number, provided by their peers in the other financial institutions.
A new CEO and Board were appointed on lower salaries, although the full picture of their perks has yet to be seen. This is far from the self sacrificial scenario presented in your quote.

Chips Lovell

So you're saying that because there are new executives in place, cuts to executive pay don't matter?

If people want AIB to start charging mortgage rates that are unsustainable, that's fair enough. But they should accept that if they do that, it may well require more state cash to keep the bank running, which will come from the taxpayer. It will also make it less likely that the bank will ever leave state hands.

bmaxi

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

So you're saying that because there are new executives in place, cuts to executive pay don't matter?

If people want AIB to start charging mortgage rates that are unsustainable, that's fair enough. But they should accept that if they do that, it may well require more state cash to keep the bank running, which will come from the taxpayer. It will also make it less likely that the bank will ever leave state hands.

Let's not play word games, that's not what I said and you know it, cuts to executive pay rates are to be welcomed.
Front line staff in virtually every sector of the workforce have taken de facto cuts in existing pay rates, not in aspirational pay rates. Those executives were free to decline the positions at the rates offered, they chose to accept so presumably were happy with the remuneration. Your quote was presented in such a way as to convey some sort of altruistic attitude on the part of the Board, whereas, in effect it was just a massaging of the true facts
I doubt we will will see the exit of AIB from State control any time soon, it's a massive white elephant which will hang around our necks for the forseeable future. Placing more obstacles in the path of hard pressed mortgage holders will not help that, for reasons I've already stated.

Colours

Richie Rich Boucher's salary is disgusting and I don't care nor see the relevance in these fancy statistics that claim it's not that high comparably. My monthly BoI mortgage has risen by €100 in the last 18 months and I struggle to make this payment each month. Why is it ok for me to be inflicted with hikes like this and for the ordinary bank workers on the front line to take severe cuts in their pay when this guy gets away with paying himself this obscene salary PLUS yearly increases PLUS perks like company car allowance and gym membership PLUS another hidden "allowance" I heard Shane Ross mention he gets for some dubious sounding position or appointment he holds.

An annual salary of €843,000 works out at €70,250 per month, which equates approximately to the annual salary of 2 hospital nurses. Nobody needs this kind of money, nor is anyone worth it. Richie Rich Boucher certainly isn't worth it and I'm disappointed that the government didn't insist he takes a salary cut of 50% AT THE VERY LEAST. If Mr Boucher had any honour he would have shown some leadership and VOLUNTEERed to take a cut to his own pay out of solidarity with the thousands of working poor who are working themselves sick just to pay the bills and keep the roof over their heads.

galwayrush

How much would he be 'entitled' to if his bank actually performed.:eek:
That's one impressive reward package for making such a massive loss.:rolleyes:

Quandary

Wasn't Richie Boucher also connected with Sean Dunne? The same Sean Dunne who owes the bones of 500m to the banks?

Nice to see the cosy cartel are still financially raping and pillaging the country.

This country is a fcuking joke.

bmaxi

Colours wrote: »

Richie Rich Boucher's salary is disgusting and I don't care nor see the relevance in these fancy statistics that claim it's not that high comparably. My monthly BoI mortgage has risen by €100 in the last 18 months and I struggle to make this payment each month. Why is it ok for me to be inflicted with hikes like this and for the ordinary bank workers on the front line to take severe cuts in their pay when this guy gets away with paying himself this obscene salary PLUS yearly increases PLUS perks like company car allowance and gym membership PLUS another hidden "allowance" I heard Shane Ross mention he gets for some dubious sounding position or appointment he holds.

An annual salary of €843,000 works out at €70,250 per month, which equates approximately to the annual salary of 2 hospital nurses. Nobody needs this kind of money, nor is anyone worth it. Richie Rich Boucher certainly isn't worth it and I'm disappointed that the government didn't insist he takes a salary cut of 50% AT THE VERY LEAST. If Mr Boucher had any honour he would have shown some leadership and VOLUNTEERed to take a cut to his own pay out of solidarity with the thousands of working poor who are working themselves sick just to pay the bills and keep the roof over their heads.

Richie Boucher is CEO of a Financial Institution, by and large the shareholders in BoI are financial institutions. For them to concede that Boucher's pay package is obscene is to bring into question the pay packets of other CEOs, that was never going to happen. The sickening thing from my point of view is that our and I use the term loosely, Government could not stand with the majority of the citizens of this country and voice outrage publicly.
Sure you had Noonan saying he asked bank executives to voluntarily take cuts but that counts for fcuk all, Noonan should have exercised his right and registered his opposition in a public forum.

RMD

Colours wrote: »

Richie Rich Boucher's salary is disgusting and I don't care nor see the relevance in these fancy statistics that claim it's not that high comparably. My monthly BoI mortgage has risen by €100 in the last 18 months and I struggle to make this payment each month. Why is it ok for me to be inflicted with hikes like this and for the ordinary bank workers on the front line to take severe cuts in their pay when this guy gets away with paying himself this obscene salary PLUS yearly increases PLUS perks like company car allowance and gym membership PLUS another hidden "allowance" I heard Shane Ross mention he gets for some dubious sounding position or appointment he holds.

An annual salary of €843,000 works out at €70,250 per month, which equates approximately to the annual salary of 2 hospital nurses. Nobody needs this kind of money, nor is anyone worth it. Richie Rich Boucher certainly isn't worth it and I'm disappointed that the government didn't insist he takes a salary cut of 50% AT THE VERY LEAST. If Mr Boucher had any honour he would have shown some leadership and VOLUNTEERed to take a cut to his own pay out of solidarity with the thousands of working poor who are working themselves sick just to pay the bills and keep the roof over their heads.

Boucher doesn't "pay himself". His compensation is set by a remuneration committee which is then voted upon by the shareholders. That is the issue at hand. The government is a minority shareholder and without a majority support can't make any demands in what he is paid. Reality is he's head of a bank and will be rewarded a lot of money. Saying he doesn't need it is irrelevant as I don't know anybody who'd turn down such pay. What I'd like to see is a cut in his compensation which will be made up in share options, providing a much greater incentive for him to restore the banks share price and strength.

hfallada wrote: »

It's €800,000. If he manages to turn the bank around a get a return on shares that the tax payer owns he is a bargain. If you go with who ever is the cheapest it maybe false economy.

Let the shareholders deceide his pay. The Irish tax payer only owns 15%

This is what I hate continually popping up in any debate about CEO compensations. CEOs are compensated hugely as they can command this money from elsewhere if it isn't offered to them. If BOI had a cap placed on it's CEO compensation at hypothetically €500,000 you run the risk of getting a poorer CEO. I'd honestly like to see CEO compensation raised significantly with a sizeable options addition at BOI and a banking CEO with a more impressive history given the reigns.

kippy

RMD wrote: »

Boucher doesn't "pay himself". His compensation is set by a remuneration committee which is then voted upon by the shareholders. That is the issue at hand. The government is a minority shareholder and without a majority support can't make any demands in what he is paid. Reality is he's head of a bank and will be rewarded a lot of money. Saying he doesn't need it is irrelevant as I don't know anybody who'd turn down such pay. What I'd like to see is a cut in his compensation which will be made up in share options, providing a much greater incentive for him to restore the banks share price and strength.



This is what I hate continually popping up in any debate about CEO compensations. CEOs are compensated hugely as they can command this money from elsewhere if it isn't offered to them. If BOI had a cap placed on it's CEO compensation at hypothetically €500,000 you run the risk of getting a poorer CEO. I'd honestly like to see CEO compensation raised significantly with a sizeable options addition at BOI and a banking CEO with a more impressive history given the reigns.

This "CAP" thing, to be reeks of scare mongering to be honest.
We've had grossly exorbitant wages paid to many people over the years, yet we've still ended up in one of the worst financial messes (for the size of population) the world has ever seen. From public sector right through to private sector senior figures. You even see it used as an excuse at RTE for paying ridiculous wages to people at the station - sure they'd go elsewhere if we wouldnt pay them what we are paying them - let them off.

What happens when some of these people on major salaries mess up - very little from what I can see........

Cap senior bankers salaries at 500K - perhaps we might get a better standard of person, trying to make a name for themselves before they go for one of these numerous better paid jobs elsewhere in the world.

bmaxi

RMD wrote: »

Boucher doesn't "pay himself". His compensation is set by a remuneration committee which is then voted upon by the shareholders. That is the issue at hand. The government is a minority shareholder and without a majority support can't make any demands in what he is paid. Reality is he's head of a bank and will be rewarded a lot of money. Saying he doesn't need it is irrelevant as I don't know anybody who'd turn down such pay. What I'd like to see is a cut in his compensation which will be made up in share options, providing a much greater incentive for him to restore the banks share price and strength.



This is what I hate continually popping up in any debate about CEO compensations. CEOs are compensated hugely as they can command this money from elsewhere if it isn't offered to them. If BOI had a cap placed on it's CEO compensation at hypothetically €500,000 you run the risk of getting a poorer CEO. I'd honestly like to see CEO compensation raised significantly with a sizeable options addition at BOI and a banking CEO with a more impressive history given the reigns.

This is a myth perpetuated in the higher echelons of the business world, based on the premise 'if you tell a lie and keep repeating it for long enough, it becomes the truth"
The top executive world, both in business and finance, is effectively a closed shop, populated by an elite and selective cadre. New kids on the block are a rare commodity and executives move from position to position commanding higher and higher salaries. The records of the higher executives in business and finance in Ireland is a litany of disasters, there are no magic formulae and no magicians.

RMD

kippy wrote: »

Cap senior bankers salaries at 500K - perhaps we might get a better standard of person, trying to make a name for themselves before they go for one of these numerous better paid jobs elsewhere in the world.

How do you plan on getting a better standard of person at less pay? Cap it at 500k perhaps and offer a large options bonus. Options are only worth a lot to a CEO after they've performed extremely well reflected in the share price.

bmaxi wrote: »

The top executive world, both in business and finance, is effectively a closed shop, populated by an elite and selective cadre.

Who else do you expect it to be populated by? The C-Suite positions have incredible levels of responsibility associated with them, the only way to even be considered for such a position is to have a long successful career in a relevant industry with tangible results. I'm not supporting Boucher or is pay to even hint at opening up the executive world to the average person is ridiculous.

bmaxi

RMD wrote: »

How do you plan on getting a better standard of person at less pay? Cap it at 500k perhaps and offer a large options bonus. Options are only worth a lot to a CEO after they've performed extremely well reflected in the share price.



Who else do you expect it to be populated by? The C-Suite positions have incredible levels of responsibility associated with them, the only way to even be considered for such a position is to have a long successful career in a relevant industry with tangible results. I'm not supporting Boucher or is pay to even hint at opening up the executive world to the average person is ridiculous.

I'm not suggesting that a plumber or a bus driver should be CEO of a bank. What I'm saying is, there are suitably qualified people who will never be offered such a position or even a step up the ladder to such positions because they don't move in, and will never gain admission to, the right circles.

kippy

RMD wrote: »

How do you plan on getting a better standard of person at less pay? Cap it at 500k perhaps and offer a large options bonus. Options are only worth a lot to a CEO after they've performed extremely well reflected in the share price.



Who else do you expect it to be populated by? The C-Suite positions have incredible levels of responsibility associated with them, the only way to even be considered for such a position is to have a long successful career in a relevant industry with tangible results. I'm not supporting Boucher or is pay to even hint at opening up the executive world to the average person is ridiculous.

You're not getting my point are you?
High pay does not equate to quality staff.......... that's as simple as I can put it.

Were the guys at place like this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalisation_of_Northern_Rock or this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehman_Brothers
or closer to home this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo_Irish_Bank on too little money? Was that why these places failed?

What happened the CEO's at the time of these kinds of places?

"Better standard of person" - how do you mean? How do you measure standards at that level? If you measure standards by the amount of money they receive you are heading back to disaster.