Persimmon boss stops interview with BBC when asked about his £75 million bonus. Nice work if you can get it.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/business- ... -75m-bonus

he is going to give some to charity though so its ok........

"Public backlash" and he still gets £75m. It's obscene. What, for doing his job? It beggars belief.

Their houses used to be very shoddy .

His original bonus was £50m more but it got reduced due to shareholder pressure.

Totally obscene for someone who is not an entrepreneur in the true sense of the word and has never had to put in risk capital or mortgage his house.

Totally understandable that general public get hacked off

beddie wrote:"Public backlash" and he still gets £75m. It's obscene. What, for doing his job? It beggars belief.

Directors' incentive scheme - bonus paid based on rise in share price. The scheme didn't anticipate that Gov't would introduce "Help to buy" and Persimoon shares have risen from £4 to £24 (I think). There should have been a cap. There should have been something about bonus from the directors' actions, not from external "gifts." The scheme should have been written better....

But, would we rather have a number of directors getting large awards - or some guys who kick footballs around for a living?

And, let's remember - the employer will pay 13.8% national insurance on the award and employee will pay 47% income tax and ni. So, collects a little over 60% - approx. £45 million (less whatever is paid to charity).

Assuming the guy is UK resident/domiciled...

Paul Waine wrote:Directors' incentive scheme - bonus paid based on rise in share price. The scheme didn't anticipate that Gov't would introduce "Help to buy" and Persimoon shares have risen from £4 to £24 (I think). There should have been a cap. There should have been something about bonus from the directors' actions, not from external "gifts." The scheme should have been written better....

But, would we rather have a number of directors getting large awards - or some guys who kick footballs around for a living?

And, let's remember - the employer will pay 13.8% national insurance on the award and employee will pay 47% income tax and ni. So, collects a little over 60% - approx. £45 million (less whatever is paid to charity).

I should think he will be employed as a self employed person so will be contracted out of Class 1 NI and PAYE thus saving Persimmon the 13.8% (not that that matters when you have just seen the bonus cut by 40%. He will also have the best advisors and experts to guide him on minimising his own contribution to the Exchequer!

I’d answer all the questions they wanted for £75m

I don't quite understand why we vilify the recipient of bonuses. What is he supposed to do? Not take it and led his employers have the money instead?
We do the same to footballers. We **** on them for getting paid tens of hundreds of thousands per week when the alternative is that that money just stays in the company anyway.

Maybe he doesn't deserve it. Maybe footballers don't deserve their ridiculous wages either. But we're the idiots who fund it all so what the **** are we whining about when we know we're not going to stop?

He's still a pussy for walking out of the interview though.

He is being paid what somebody agreed to pay him.

Not really anyone’s business.

If there is a problem with it the the question should be raised with the people who agreed it as part of his package.

Get a bit sick of the public enquiries on things like this. Yes, it’s a very different matter if it’s a civil servant.

It is of course an enormous amount of money but why should the general public be angry about this?

I'm not angry about this, why would I be? This isn't public money, it does not affect me on the slightest.

I suspect the only reason why anyone is angry about this is purely down to jealousy.

Worth every penny. That, gentlemen, is cspitslism in all it's glory. If he can do it, you can too.

BennyD wrote:Worth every penny. That, gentlemen, is cspitslism in all it's glory. If he can do it, you can too.

The most successful lie ever told.

bfcmik wrote:I should think he will be employed as a self employed person so will be contracted out of Class 1 NI and PAYE thus saving Persimmon the 13.8% (not that that matters when you have just seen the bonus cut by 40%. He will also have the best advisors and experts to guide him on minimising his own contribution to the Exchequer!

Two changes to tax regs reduce the chances of the arrangements you describe:

1) IR35 - the guy was CEO. If Persimmon and he both argue that he was self-employed, IR35 will collect the Employer's NI from him;
2) Both CEO and accountants have to declare to HMRC if they have been involved in any schemes that aim to avoid tax....

I'd also expect that £75 million bonus if more than enough for HMRC to take a "closer look" and make sure they collect their full share - just like with BBC "stars" and footballers (and others) film schemes.

Shares go up aswell as down, it's a one way bet for him in terms of bonus.

Will he pay it back if it falls, don't think so.

I am all for incentives for people who work hard, create wealth etc but even the City think this bonus is ridiculous.

Fuel to the fire for Corbyn

Tortoise you tw4t, as you know, I've blocked you. For the hard of thinking, like you, this means I can't read your reply. Derrr!

Btw, as luck has it, I don't want to read your drivel.

TheFamilyCat wrote:It is of course an enormous amount of money but why should the general public be angry about this?

I'm not angry about this, why would I be? This isn't public money, it does not affect me on the slightest.

I suspect the only reason why anyone is angry about this is purely down to jealousy.

Imploding Turtle wrote:I don't quite understand why we vilify the recipient of bonuses. What is he supposed to do? Not take it and led his employers have the money instead?
We do the same to footballers. We **** on them for getting paid tens of hundreds of thousands per week when the alternative is that that money just stays in the company anyway.

Maybe he doesn't deserve it. Maybe footballers don't deserve their ridiculous wages either. But we're the idiots who fund it all so what the **** are we whining about when we know we're not going to stop?

He's still a pussy for walking out of the interview though.

The anger stems from an inequality between labour and reward. Mr. Fairburn may work a 60 hour week, but so too do many others. They earn a fraction of his pay, so, the, argument runs, his higher pay must be justified due to his particular talents. Yet how do we quantify these talents? How do we determine that Mr. Fairburn spending one hour in a business conference deserves 50x the pay that say an electrical engineer or a copywriter receives? What is it that is so special about his talent that means he can command such high wages but others cannot?

The market? Certainly! But when did the market become a law of nature? Why should it have such influence?

I am genuinely puzzled why so many of you are prepared to defend the exorbitant pay of a man who works no harder than you, is, in the grand scheme of things, no different to you; oh, perhaps he is a little more driven, he is a little more business savvy, but is he 75 times more driven? 100 times more savvy?

The talents that are rewarded by the market at any given time are, in the historical sense, arbitrary. Your skill with C++ would mean nothing in the Middle Ages - perhaps, if you were lucky, you might become a bean counter to the local lord.

I could continue but I am well aware that I'm wasting my breath and due for a ribbing.

HieronymousBoschHobs wrote:The anger stems from an inequality between labour and reward. Mr. Fairburn may work a 60 hour week, but so too do many others. They earn a fraction of his pay, so, the, argument runs, his higher pay must be justified due to his particular talents. Yet how do we quantify these talents? How do we determine that Mr. Fairburn spending one hour in a business conference deserves 50x the pay that say an electrical engineer or a copywriter receives? What is it that is so special about his talent that means he can command such high wages but others cannot?

The market? Certainly! But when did the market become a law of nature? Why should it have such influence?

I am genuinely puzzled why so many of you are prepared to defend the exorbitant pay of a man who works no harder than you, is, in the grand scheme of things, no different to you; oh, perhaps he is a little more driven, he is a little more business savvy, but is he 75 times more driven? 100 times more savvy?

The talents that are rewarded by the market at any given time are, in the historical sense, arbitrary. Your skill with C++ would mean nothing in the Middle Ages - perhaps, if you were lucky, you might become a bean counter to the local lord.

I could continue but I am well aware that I'm wasting my breath and due for a ribbing.

I understand why people are angry, i just don't understand why the recipient of the bonus is the target of the anger. It's dumb.

HieronymousBoschHobs wrote:The anger stems from an inequality between labour and reward. Mr. Fairburn may work a 60 hour week, but so too do many others. They earn a fraction of his pay, so, the, argument runs, his higher pay must be justified due to his particular talents. Yet how do we quantify these talents? How do we determine that Mr. Fairburn spending one hour in a business conference deserves 50x the pay that say an electrical engineer or a copywriter receives? What is it that is so special about his talent that means he can command such high wages but others cannot?

The market? Certainly! But when did the market become a law of nature? Why should it have such influence?

I am genuinely puzzled why so many of you are prepared to defend the exorbitant pay of a man who works no harder than you, is, in the grand scheme of things, no different to you; oh, perhaps he is a little more driven, he is a little more business savvy, but is he 75 times more driven? 100 times more savvy?

The talents that are rewarded by the market at any given time are, in the historical sense, arbitrary. Your skill with C++ would mean nothing in the Middle Ages - perhaps, if you were lucky, you might become a bean counter to the local lord.

I could continue but I am well aware that I'm wasting my breath and due for a ribbing.

I would be angry if I worked for Persimmon, worked hard and earned a **** wage. But I don't. It has no impact on my life, so feel completely ambivalent about it.

Rarely have I seen so many uninformed people post on one thread......congratulations.

Wirvine wrote:Rarely have I seen so many uninformed people post on one thread......congratulations.

You must not read this board very often then.