AIB Not giving a toss as usual

msg11

So far we have the green giving money to climate change outside of Ireland, now AIB which recived money because they said they had none.

This is really off the chart. Some people have a massive cheek I hope someone steps in here to save the tax payer €40 Million.

Court action for bonuses ?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1209/aib.html

IDA Ireland Chief Executive Barry O'Leary has said it is 'bizarre' that AIB is paying €40m in bonuses to executives at the bank.

Mr O'Leary told RTÉ Radio that he wished the IDA had that sort of money to repair the country's tarnished reputation on the international scene.

AIB will give the bonuses to around 2,400 staff after several of them took court action to secure the payments.

The bonuses are part of contracts signed before the financial crisis began in 2008.

It is believed that cheques will be posted to executives on 17 December.

The bank has so far received €3.5bn of recapitalisation funds from the State.

Shares in the bank have plummeted from €23.95 to just 50c over the last two years.

The €40m represents a large part of the €572.9m the bank is worth on the ISEQ today.

Almost €55m was paid to staff in bonuses last year.

Kimono-Girl

oh wow, i think its time i make a stand and move my account to
anglo ...
Permanent Tsb
Bank of Ireland...


Aib? ...


...oh wait

Biggins

It's great how all these new banking rules and law regulations have made such a difference isn't it?
You know, the ones we brought in since our banking crises!

O' wait... what banking new rules!
Sorry, my mistake. we're still using the same old systems/procedures that exist and that still have got us to the mess we are in.

I'm must have been dreaming for a sec'

DrumSteve

if it's part of their contract I don't see how they can refuse to pay them.

I know its morally wrong but sometimes the law's an ass.

sensibleken

Kimono-Girl wrote: »

oh wow, i think its time i make a stand and move my account to
anglo ...
Bank of Ireland...

Aib? ...


...oh wait

Ulster bank?

Biggins

DrumSteve wrote: »

if it's part of their contract I don't see how they can refuse to pay them.

I know its morally wrong but sometimes the law's an ass.

I would have said their employers an ass more like.

Lando Griffin

AIB & BOI should be joined as 1 entinty "Allied Bank of Ireland" and hence making these contracts void.
Any town with the 2 banks in them one shut down and sold and the other fully functional.

listermint

DrumSteve wrote: »

if it's part of their contract I don't see how they can refuse to pay them.

I know its morally wrong but sometimes the law's an ass.

Surely bonus is based on some form of performance. Em, frankly the banks havent really eh performed !!!

I know far too many people who have had bonus entitilements removed basically because the situation is dire in their company. What is the difference here. explain???

Kimono-Girl

sensibleken wrote: »

Ulster bank?

Forgot about them

Dravokivich

Lando Griffin wrote: »

AIB & BOI should be joined as 1 entinty "Allied Bank of Ireland" and hence making these contracts void.
Any town with the 2 banks in them one shut down and sold and the other fully functional.

Isn't that how AIB started up?

Great idea that...

Penn

Lando Griffin wrote: »

AIB & BOI should be joined as 1 entinty "Allied Bank of Ireland" and hence making these contracts void.
Any town with the 2 banks in them one shut down and sold and the other fully functional.

Surely Allied Irish Bank and Anglo Irish Bank should be merged instead?

TobyZiegler

Fair enough its hard to get out of contractual obligations and all that. But what kind of contract allows for performance related bonuses when the company is screwed and needs to be bailed out ffs.

How well can these managers have performed in 2008 - the year of the banking crash. The mind boggles.

COYW

The precedent for this was set in late August when the AIB staff took the High court case relating to outstanding bonuses from 2008 and they won. The judge agreed and said that their bonuses which came to about €10m in total had to be paid. Im guessing that the same result would arise from the €40m in the article.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2010/0830/1224277854718.html

Dravokivich

TobyZiegler wrote: »

Fair enough its hard to get out of contractual obligations and all that. But what kind of contract allows for performance related bonuses when the company is screwed and needs to be bailed out ffs.

How well can these managers have performed in 2008 - the year of the banking crash. The mind boggles.

1 person an entire company does not make...

...you're all making assumptions based on the overall performance of the company, when empolyees are paid out with bonus', it's related to their individual performance stats and requirements met.

phasers

Kimono-Girl wrote: »

oh wow, i think its time i make a stand and move my account to
anglo ...
Permanent Tsb
Bank of Ireland...


Aib? ...


...oh wait

Wait, what's wrong with Permanent TSB?

DrumSteve

listermint wrote: »

Surely bonus is based on some form of performance. Em, frankly the banks havent really eh performed !!!

I know far too many people who have had bonus entitilements removed basically because the situation is dire in their company. What is the difference here. explain???

They were probably personal performance bonuses not company bonus...and I'm guessing they had a tight legal case for them or they would not have brought them to court.

ciagr297

while i agree on the contractual obligations to pay a bonus, isn't it normally only a percentage of the total bonus which is related to employee performance? i know mine is structured this way

and a chunk of it then is performance of the company.....unless there is something AIB is hiding under the valance balance sheets

Son Of A Vidic

I'm sick of listening to this sh1t repeatedly "It's in their contract."..or.."for contractual reasons.".....stop talking bullsh1t, call their bluff and meet them in court. The national interest holds greater sway than any 'alleged' contract for any individual. Especially when this involves an organisation that has cost the taxpayer billions. Rewarding incompetence should not be tolerated and must be resisted to the last.

dearg lady

DrumSteve wrote: »

if it's part of their contract I don't see how they can refuse to pay them.

I know its morally wrong but sometimes the law's an ass.

haven't many people, in spite of their contracts, (even the public sector!!) had their pay cut, surely non payment of a bonus is the same???

i wonder if the individuals who instigated this feel the slightest amount of guilt

dearg lady

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Rewarding incompetence should not be tolerated and must be resisted to the last.

+1

Turnstyle

the company is practically bankrupt and had to be bailed out, no bonus for anyone regardless of their position, these people work for a defunct company so tough Sh!t..

did AIG not pull a similar stunt in the US over a year ago after being bailed out, due to legalities the bonus had to be paid but O'Bama had new tax legislation rushed in overnight that basically took it straight back from them..

ciagr297

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Rewarding incompetence should not be tolerated and must be resisted to the last.

i wonder if it would spur action if only the bonuses at the very top level were cut completely?

wes

If our government weren't completely worthless, they would come up with a new tax (as suggested above) to hammer these idiots bonuses.

Cookie_Monster

sigh

Its a legally binding contract that the bank already tried to bail on but got taken to court over. most of it relates to AIB capital markets which still made quite a lot of money during the last number of years to 2008 to which these bonuses relate


tl;dr: rabble rabble rabble banks are bad :rolleyes:

DrumSteve

dearg lady wrote: »

haven't many people, in spite of their contracts, (even the public sector!!) had their pay cut, surely non payment of a bonus is the same???

i wonder if the individuals who instigated this feel the slightest amount of guilt

true but as I said they must have a tight legal case or they wouldn't go to court. Beside's who really cares about public opinion when there is potentially €40m there for grabs... i think a little guilt is easily offset but a large bank balance.

irishgrover

Dravokivich wrote: »

1 person an entire company does not make...

...you're all making assumptions based on the overall performance of the company, when empolyees are paid out with bonus', it's related to their individual performance stats and requirements met.

yea but normally, most sensible companies will link the bonus pool to overall company performance. That is, if the company is in the ****s then no money gets paid regardless of personal performance.
If the company is doing very well, then the bonus pool increases accordingly, and people are rewarded proportionately based on individual performance results.

In reality the banks probably never envisaged a scenario where they would not be making profits hand over fist, so may not have accounted for this situation.
Given their track record for risk assessment and management, this is not surprising...

Thedogsgone

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

sigh

Its a legally binding contract that the bank already tried to bail on but got taken to court over. most of it relates to AIB capital markets which still made quite a lot of money during the last number of years to 2008 to which these bonuses relate


tl;dr: rabble rabble rabble banks are bad :rolleyes:

They kind of are (not morally bad but if they were a normal business they would have been let go to the wall long before bankrupting the state).

They now occupy that lovely position where they have all the security of the public sector with all the rewards of the private sector.

Executives at AIB -- the bank taxpayers have bailed out to the tune of €3.5bn so far -- will share €40m in bonuses just before Christmas.

In a move certain to spark fury, the bank has decided about 2,400 staff must be paid the bonuses for legal reasons after several of them took court action.

Cheques for an average of €16,700 are likely to be sent out to executives on December 17. Staff last year received €54.9m in bonuses.

How can a company with, what, @ 15,000 employees (?) have 2,400 "Executives"??

The €40m bonus is a significant chunk of the bank's market value these days. The stock exchange values the entire bank, which was once the largest Irish bank until it was eclipsed by Bank of Ireland, at just €540m.

The mind boggles.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/bailedout-aib-to-pay-top-staff-euro40m-bonus-2454086.html

Run_to_da_hills

A run on the hills would soon sort these bastards out.

Woops, the Government would only bail them out again with taxpayers money. :rolleyes:

smk89

sensibleken wrote: »

Ulster bank?

Best bank by far. They gave me 200 for joining in the north and another 200 in the next few weeks for joining down here.

Ooh and they sometimes have sweets for those waiting in line!

Run_to_da_hills

smk89 wrote: »

Best bank by far. They gave me 200 for joining in the north and another 200 in the next few weeks for joining down here.

Ooh and they sometimes have sweets for those waiting in line!

Im with the Ulster long before the Henry Hippo days, no intention of moving.

Shanegggg

Nice to know the bankers still live in lala land and probably haven't heard about the recession yet and the cause of it! (Shhhh careful now!)

Surely the bonuses would be related to personal/comany performance and anyone coming out of a playschool could tell you how bad the banks are these days.

Can they honestly justisfy themselves a bonus??......running the entire country into the ground!! Must have been very hard work! :mad:

Johnny Bitte

Been with AIB for almost 10 years now.

Switching to Ulster bank.

SICK OF THIS ****!

ciagr297

Shanegggg wrote: »

....running the entire country into the ground!! Must have been very hard work! :mad:

i'm sure it was even harder work trying to cover the mistakes and scapegoat others

The Waltzing Consumer

The Guardian covers this story. It names the employee who took the court case over bonuses. It is a Mr. John Foy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/dec/08/allied-irish-banks-pay-bonuses-despite-bailout

I think he should take his bonus and leave the country.

Absolute scum

Cookie_Monster

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

The Guardian covers this story. It names the employee who took the court case over bonuses. It is a Mr. John Foy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/dec/08/allied-irish-banks-pay-bonuses-despite-bailout

I think he should take his bonus and leave the country.

Absolute scum

yes, how dare he stand up for his rights against big business :rolleyes:

mikemac

If you were owed €161,000 I doubt anyone here would meekly give it up
You can buy a house for that money!

Or would you say "no keep the money in the national interest" :rolleyes:

Easy to judge when it's somebody elses money

The Waltzing Consumer

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

yes, how dare he stand up for his rights against big business :rolleyes:

Standing up for his rights against big business? He is the big business!

miseeire

Surely the 1 decent thing this useless government should do is create a bill and pass it immediately where bonus payments in excess of 2,000 euro is taxed at 90% or would that not be allowed under the constitution?

ghostdancer

they're entitled to bonuses based on performance under their contract.

they clearly performed and met those targets that were set out.



no great surprise the general joe duffy-listening idiocy of AH can't understand this.

ghostdancer

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

I'm sick of listening to this sh1t repeatedly "It's in their contract."..or.."for contractual reasons.".....stop talking bullsh1t, call their bluff and meet them in court. The national interest holds greater sway than any 'alleged' contract for any individual. Especially when this involves an organisation that has cost the taxpayer billions. Rewarding incompetence should not be tolerated and must be resisted to the last.

no, it doesn't.

"Rewarding incompetence" - i'm quite sure the vast majority of those getting bonuses had nothing to do with the recession, and performed as they were supposed to.


if you did your job perfectly well, but your boss's boss's boss had made a balls up, you shouldn't suffer for it.

jpm4

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

sigh

Its a legally binding contract that the bank already tried to bail on but got taken to court over. most of it relates to AIB capital markets which still made quite a lot of money during the last number of years to 2008 to which these bonuses relate


tl;dr: rabble rabble rabble banks are bad :rolleyes:

Good lord....an informed voice of logic and reason in AH? Careful you don't get kicked to death on the way out by the Joe Duffy brigade.

Do people seriously think that AIB wants to pay this??? That makes no sense.

mikemac

After Hours is no better then Liveline some days

DrumSteve

feelingstressed wrote: »

After Hours is no better then Liveline some days

We got standards...




....And we never go above them.

ciagr297

feelingstressed wrote: »

After Hours is no better then Liveline some days

did someone mention the swans???

Shanegggg

ghostdancer wrote: »

they're entitled to bonuses based on performance under their contract.

they clearly performed and met those targets that were set out.

Must have been a some extremely low targets to get a bonus for all 2,400 employees to the get the nod.

aib-record-losses-of-euro2bn

Where do they even get the money to pay them if their recording 2bn losses!

paperwork

DrumSteve wrote: »

They were probably personal performance bonuses not company bonus...and I'm guessing they had a tight legal case for them or they would not have brought them to court.

Of course they had a tight legal team, they're bleeding the country dry. The only difference between this guy and the guys queuing for "free" money at the atms is that this guy clearly doesnt need it.

melekalikimaka

ghostdancer wrote: »

they're entitled to bonuses based on performance under their contract.

they clearly performed and met those targets that were set out.



no great surprise the general joe duffy-listening idiocy of AH can't understand this.

politics forum is just as bad

ricman

the government should bring in a law ,if the government owns 90 per cent of a bank, all bonus s are taxed at 90 per cent rate.The banks were taken to court by employees, the bonus s are written into their contract.

Biggins

miseeire wrote: »

Surely the 1 decent thing this useless government should do is create a bill and pass it immediately where bonus payments in excess of 2,000 euro is taxed at 90% or would that not be allowed under the constitution?

You mean the same government (and main opposition too!) that is still wining and dining banks heads, big businesses, etc on the golf courses of Ireland, the race tracks with their VIP tents and elsewhere?

Naa. Won't happen. They are too busy looking after their backers!

melekalikimaka

ricman wrote: »

the government should bring in a law ,if the government owns 90 per cent of a bank, all bonus s are taxed at 90 per cent rate.The banks were taken to court by employees, the bonus s are written into their contract.

i would arguee since the p.s. is owned by the governemnt, esb, bus etc, they should all have similar rules implemented, and social welfare cut across the board to reflect the loss of earnings incurred by the banks... just to be fair like :rolleyes: