RBS pension row: a lesson learnt – but at what cost?

  • Print
  • Comments (5)

Readers' comments (5)

  • infuriating

    i understand what you're saying Faith, but it's just so so so so infuriating. Can't we please bend the rules just this once? No? I didn't think so. Lucky Fred.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Not confidence inspiring

    There are lots of reasonable doubts about the government's commercial acumen - and it having just signed away an enormous pension to an outgoing exec who was a total failure is not an encouraging sign.

    More worryingly, however, is its willingness to try to use retrospective legislation to overrule a legally binding contract that it itself signed. What country is this, Italy?!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Rem committees

    The underlying problem is the notice periods that executives can command. If Freddie could have been dismissed with a very short period of notice his payment on termination would have been lower, and the upfront cost would also have been lower. Freddie also wouldn't have been able to trade off foregoing a payment for failing to give notice .for an enhanced pension.

    It is time that rem committees and investor bodies wake up to this problem and shorten notice period for board directors to, say, a month.

    The directors that approved the arrangement also need to consider whether they have fulfilled their fiduciary duties, and doubtless lawyers acting will consider whether there has been a breach of company law in agreeing a termination enhancement in pension in this manner.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Too early to count chickens

    Retrospective legislation is not necessary as a change in the tax treatment is all that is necessary to cover future payments to the man ,so that most of the pension would go to the government.As no one or very few people have Freds entitlement it is difficult to see who is going to complain

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Can those who approved Sir Fred's pension be sued by shareholders?

    The note from "Frustrated Inverstor" says "The directors that approved the arrangement also need to consider whether they have fulfilled their fiduciary duties ....". This could be a productive line to follow. Even the threat of action against them as individuals would be likely to worry members of remuneration committees. That might have a more beneficial effect than any amount of well intentioned but toothless government warnings.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (5)