"I call on BP shareholders to reject this grotesque pay-off," said Florence.
Well, I call on BP shareholders to reject this grotesque interference.
Yes, I think it acceptable that Meacher the Preacher should raise the existence of the payout, but he is in no position to pontificate on the matter. Considering MPs can and almost always do vote themselves substantial pay rises and other rarely audited cash perks it is a bit rich of Meacher to postulate:
"We need to end the situation where city bosses set each other's rewards. The remuneration committees that decide on chief executive pay should include representatives from the shop floor, to inject a sense of reality."
A "representative from the Shop Floor"? Who will that "representative" be, I wonder? Oh, let me see...a Union representative., I suspect. What will Fred Kite do once involved but use it as a lever for his/her members to get more than they deserve. It is natural for the Union rep to do that, but that does not mean it is right. Thus, it does not "inject a sense of reality".
This comes after a similar outburst by the now rather disappointing Peter Hain over City bonuses. Hain and all those who agree with him really are ibeciles - as if banks would pay someone a penny more than they needed to? Maybe they are so far up their own self-filling troughs they forget how the real world works...UPDATE: I posted a comment on a related story to do with rents vs city bonuses at Tim Worstall.
No comments:
Post a Comment