Right...
That still has no bearing on whether a guy has a duty to discuss it in front of television cameras.
(, Sun 21 Oct 2018, 18:37, Share, Reply)
I agree with where you're coming from, but I think you've got it wrong on this one.
It's a publicly listed company so he does have a duty to answer for it publicly. Obviously to any shareholders directly but also to anyone who has paid into a pension fund that is a shareholder. It's clearly excessive, when the builders Carillion collapsed it cost the taxpayer £150 million, and many of their directors were being paid stupid money, not as stupid as this. But the idea that anyone on double the average wage should be publicly named is utterly batshit. Still, it would be interesting to see how many penpushers at the NHS and BBC are milking it.
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Sun 21 Oct 2018, 19:35,
Share,
Reply)
He might have a duty to discuss it in shareholder meetings.
I don't think that extends to "to anyone at any time".
I also don't think that extends to anyone who paid into a pension fund that is a shareholder, but only to the managers of those funds.
Carillion is a different case entirely, since they were horrifically mismanaged for years whilst simultaneously being paid such large sums, and the result was the tax payer eventually had to foot the bill. I believe that Persimmon has thrived under this guy's effective leadership.
(, Sun 21 Oct 2018, 19:52, Share, Reply)
There's no 'might have a duty', he is absolutely accountable to the shareholders, and can expect to have to justify his renumeration. That's a pretty basic fact, this is not an opinion, it's something that happens, a lot.
Again, it's a publicly listed company. Maybe if he whispered his explanation to the pension fund managers and they sent a written précis in an envelope marked "top secret" to the people paying into the pension fund?
It's always a different case right up until it isn't. I don't know much about Persimmon, but I do know a ridiculous renumeration package when I see one. It would be big for a global player, they aren't even the biggest building firm in the U.K.
(
Prufrock Lucifer, son of the morning!, Sun 21 Oct 2018, 21:47,
Share,
Reply)
The "might" in my sentence was a nod
to the fact you're correct he does have that duty. A pattern of speech. As in... "he might have A, but he doesn't have B".
Maybe Persimmon will turn out to be another Carillion, but then my mates 1 month old baby might turn out to be another Jimmy Savile but it probably isn't fair to treat him like that until he does.
(, Sun 21 Oct 2018, 22:00, Share, Reply)