United Kingdom
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
view the rest of the comments
Executive officers get large compensation because they have responsibility over the organisation.
That means that when “accidents happen”, they bear responsibility, and should not receive their bonuses and possibly should be fired.
If a potable water company is unable to deliver potable water to their customers, it’s a gross failure of the leadership to take all measures to ensure that the company does what it exists to do. This means they did not do a “perfect job”.
You clearly and completely misunderstood what I was saying.
It's a charged topic so it makes sense. Frustrating nonetheless.
Can you expand on the point? If they can’t deliver water the CEO shouldn’t be paid out; that’s the point of the salary/bonus ratio.
My point was that their pay is usually structured in a way that the base pay is a small percentage of their compensation and their bonuses are a virtually fixed part of their package and tied to company performance. They tend to not get any bonus when performing exceptionally poorly (e.g. going out of business). This means you get these bonus headlines even if they didn't get a particularly big bonus at all and maybe even had their wage docked. These kinds of headlines are incendiary.
The magnitude of pay really does not matter much at all for this discussion.
Of course it does. Especially so considering this case. In this case not only did the water company plead guilty but the CEO was forced to resign (rightly so). And THEN given a bonus.
In this case, Susan Davy's salary was £561,000 with contracted bonus of £191,000 (in shares, I believe). The bonus for the previous year had been £250k. Again, this factual information doesn't fit the point you keep repeating. Facts get in the way.
Ok, but that does not counter my point.
Now you're just trolling: it LITERALLY contradicts your point. I know politicians think they can get away with it, but simply repeating something doesn't make it true.