|"Sshhhh! Don't mention the severence deal..."|
In my view he should be hung out to dry.
In exchange for not bothering to pay particular attention to what was going on in Barclays and for being 'unaware' of practices in his organisation despite e-mails alledgedly existing which mentioned them, Diamond Bob gets a 'basic salary' of a quarter of a million quid a year.
In addition to this salary, he has also received bonuses of £10,425,000 in 2006 plus a £4,518,000 award under the bank's executive share scheme. In 2007, he pocketted £6,500,000 and £11,375,000 under the share scheme. In 2008, because the share price collapsed, he had to settle for his paultry quarter mil. My heart bleeds for him. At this time, of course, he was working in the very section of the bank which is now under cruticism.
In 2010, he got a bonus of £6,500,000 carrying on the best traditions of his predecessor John Varley who got a £1,100,000 salary plus a £2,200,000 bonus and a £550,000 cash incentive for performance. Is it just me that thinks the million quid plus salary should have been incentive enough?
Anyway, we have to feel sorry for him because he has been forced to forego the £2,700,000 bonus for 2011 because of the current scandal. Awhh! Shame!....
Although 'shame' maybe isn't the right word, because this man clearly has none. As Peter Mandelson pointed out :
"If you look at Bob Diamond, who took £63m in pay - that to me is the unacceptable face of banking.
"He hasn't earned that money, he's taken £63m by not building business or adding value or creating long-term economic strength, he has done so by deal-making and shuffling papers around.
"If anyone could justify that I'd like to see them do so. Just because somebody is very rich, it doesn't mean to say different standards of morality apply to them"
It's not often that this writer agrees with Peter Mandelson. But the thing that really amazes me is that Mandelson made these comments when he was Business Secretary in April 2010. Since then, bugger all was done to get rid of him or regulate his activities until yesterday, something Ed Miliband should remember whilst he is crowing about a pubic enquiry...
And let's not kid ourselves that his resignation is due to political pressure. You have to ask yourself what's in it for Diamond Bob? Well, he's lost his last two years lucrative bonuses so clearly he'd rather work somewhere else where the pay is better 'cos he's simply not making the dosh at Barclays.
And here's a good question for todays meeting : "How much are you being paid in exchange for resigning?"
Clearly Barclays could afford to give him a few million out of the bonuses they were going to pay him in the first place. They might even consider it a no-cost option...