Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

certainly not actual - ie as of where it all currently stands - but certainly possible verging on probable

Directors pay
name and shame those who over do the take home salaries....

one comes in mind for years... greedy sod.... WPP >>> CEO M.Sorrel

Martin Sorrell, the long time CEO of advertising giant WPP, made £70 million in 2015. That's 1,444 times the average pay of the company's 125,000 employees. Sorrell's basic salary was a relatively modest £1.15 million. On top of that, he was paid a £4.3 million annual bonus. But the biggest chunk of his remuneration came from a five-year bonus program worth £62.8 million


British investment trade body calls on companies to disclose pay ratios

LONDON, Oct 31 (Reuters) - The Investment Association stepped up a campaign on Monday to persuade Britain's top companies to address concerns on boardroom pay by publishing a new set of principles it hopes will shape the way businesses remunerate bosses.

In an open letter addressed to constituents of the FTSE 350 index, the trade body called on companies to disclose pay ratios between the CEO and the median employee salary and to provide investors with greater context to understand the scale of pay and bonuses.

The IA, members of which manage more than 5.7 trillion pounds ($6.9 trillion) of assets, hopes its new principles will pave the way for simpler, more flexible remuneration structures and "clear justification" around CEO pay.

The renewed push follows recommendations from the industry-led independent Executive Remuneration Working Group and a pledge by Prime Minister Theresa May to crack down on excessive executive pay as part of a plan to tackle growing social inequality in Britain.

"Issues surrounding executive pay are a growing concern for investors, politicians and society as a whole," Andrew Ninian, the IA's director of corporate governance and engagement, said in a statement.

"It is vital that companies have the opportunity to choose the right structure for their business and this must be done in close partnership with their shareholders."

The IA has also called for improved shareholder consultation on remuneration issues and demanded that businesses focus on demonstrating to investors how their pay plans fit with company strategy.

To aid compliance, the IA said that its corporate governance research unit, IVIS, will monitor companies against the new principles and highlight areas of concern to investors ahead of voting at company meetings

imo, martin sorrell is one of the very few who fully deserves his large wheelbarrow of loot

it is primarily - some would say almost entirely - thanks to his vision and entrepreneurship that WPP is the significant international force that it is

for some to complain (even if true) that MS's remuneration package is "1,444 times the average pay of the company's 125,000 employees" - i think the workforce may be closer to 200,000, but no matter - ignores the fact that most companies within the WPP network are outside UK (85% of WPP income is non-£)
again (a guess) a large proportion are in 3rd world (developing) countries where salaries, but also cost of living, are very much lower than in UK

The government has no need to give any financial backing to Nissan. Any tariffs have been more than offset by the fall in the £.

Nissan are loving it here and don't Toyota have a big plant in Derby ?

This is a massive boost for our negotiating team.

thousands of americans over the years have been charged and jailed for a lesser crime than HER E MAILS WHICH WERE AGAINST THE USA RULES IT STINKS SHE SHOULD BE CHARGED AND JAILED FOR LIFe , or does the law in the states only apply to the poor

Tanker,

Come on, please! What utter drivel you are spouting! Think about it.

She hasn't even been charged with doing anything illegal yet, or been to trial for it, let alone even been found guilty. And you want to put her in the slammer for life?

Thank goodness you are not in charge of the law.

Marvelous isn't it??.. The French authorities are supposed to have bulldozed
the Calais 'jungle' last week, but it would appear that they have managed to
find 1500 women and children still at the camp...

Its a fecking joke, and subterfuge is at play, and the publics being taken for
fools AGAIN, the UK government after saying they were only going to take a
certain amount and age group, now after being cajoled and bullied by the French
and the bleeding heart liberals have capitulated, but it shouldn't surprise anyone
after all the EU said they wanted all EU countries to take their share, but the UK
wanted to make themselves out to be controlling immigration, when nothing of
the kind is happening, the UK are just doing the EU's bidding and 'taking' their
'share' of these immigrants ...


IN OTHER WORDS..LYING DECIEVING C***!!!

Perhaps, the UK will accept its humanitarian responsibilities.

This is the right time to be getting out of the EU.

As I've mentioned previously how many are Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, U.A.E. taking?
Why does it seem that this is just for Europe to solve?
2517

charity begins at home as is truthfully said

==========

george - taking in shia refugees?? ...... that is indeed an interesting concept :-)

Most of them aren't even refugees.

Manuel's Charity Home?

The UK does more then enough, and have no reason other then to fulfill the
EU dikdat for eu countries to 'take in their share', the governments original
response of funding the refugee camps near their own countries, where billions
of pounds are spent from the overseas budget on the refugees that remain there,
was the correct response.

These 'refugees'?? are already in a SAFE, FREE country, they HAVE travelled
through SAFE, FREE countries to get to Calais, the reason they don't want to
register in the first free country they arrive in is because they would have to
remain in that country, instead of attempting to get to the land of milk and
honey(the UK)..


And how many of these immigrants are christian, who DO get persecuted
in these muslim countries?.... Not many, if any at all..

Once these 'refugees' reach europe they're no longer 'refugees', they are
then economic migrants...

Or Fifth column islamist....

or shite-hawks as my old dad used to say. Not that I would use such a term...

indeed fred, but more seriously, uk has plenty of genuinely needful cases in all sorts of areas ...... yes, there are some genuine political refugees who deserve asylum, but uk cannot absorb them all ..... and assuredly not just economic migrants and their families who fancy the idea of coming to uk because, as they admit, the benefit system is the tastiest

Manuel,

I am not suggesting a disproportional admission of "immigrants", whether they are fleeing from "oppression", "physical threats" or "economic or political" needs.

(Members of my own and recent family emigrated to America, Australia and Canada on economic "drives" and other members immigrated to this country on political and economic grounds. They all seem to have been economically productive.)

As far "drain" on the "economy" and "structures" of the UK the latter have shown their gratitude to the "structure" and economy and have given more than they have taken.)

I am uncertain to the balance of effects on the benefit system, i.e. how much is taken and how much given back, but would suggest considering the number of immigrants who are doing the low paid and often "dirty" jobs and also the effects of the "black" money on the economy as a whole.

(Would you scrub floors for a living at the usual pay per hour. How much do you pay for a meal when you eat out in comparison with their weekly earnings.)

Nor am I suggesting that the UK should be the only port of call.

That is one of the reasons for me advocating the EU (with its faults) with coordinated disproportion of "immigrants" and a stronger United Nations with not only responsibility but authority as well as ability to address such problems.

As stated before (4-5 years ago) if at the beginning of the recent problems Transit camps with decent "conditions" and administration has been set up, perhaps the problems would be smaller that they are now.

But Nimbyism and scapegoating will always get in the way.

Granny,

You seem to me to be one of the Uk's real 5th column.