So much for shareholder voting that has no teeth. Last year Obama raised the issue of shareholder voting on compensation plans for executives yet he promoted non-binding votes. As I said back then, such a plan or worthless and this RBS example shows why. (I'm hopeful that Obama might see this differently today. Unless the Rubin/Summers camp gets to him first, at least.) Shareholders at RBS - one of the worst hit UK banks and now alive only thanks to the government - voted against Fred Goodwin's $1 million per year retirement plan and Goodwin has decided to ignore the non-binding vote and do as he pleases. Perhaps the new CEO can reflect on this problem before he asks for an end to the "public flogging" of the troubled bank.
Sir Fred Goodwin was defiantly refusing to last night hand back any of his £703,000-a-year pension even though Royal Bank of Scotland's shareholders voted decisively against the bank's pay policies at a hostile annual meeting in Edinburgh.To his credit, Fred "the shred" Goodwin is a "Sir" after all and he probably knows proper etiquette in the presence of the Queen. We all know how critical that is, especially for someone who ought to be the target of a massive fraud investigation and heading to prison. Better still, he's a Harvard MBA so clearly he's part of the best and brightest along with George Bush. Maybe we ought to think more about his pedigree and let it all blow over.
Goodwin was said to be unrepentant even though the chairman, Sir Philip Hampton, made fresh efforts this week to convince the former RBS chief executive to reduce the size of his £16.9m pension pot which was doubled during the October weekend the bank was bailed out by the taxpayer.
As Hampton called for an end to the "public flogging" of RBS bankers, he revealed he had once again phoned Goodwin this week to point out the damage the pension row had caused the reputation of the bank. "I wouldn't want to suggest he's becoming warmer to the idea," Hampton said.
