RBS chairman has given up his

"The Royal Bank of Scotland chairman, Sir Philip Hampton, has given up a £1.4m shares reward he was due later this year, the BBC has learnt."

Its a move that will now put pressure on Stephen Hestor to do the same, and all the other terms of business pay and bonusses that Labour agreed three years ago when the RBS was bailed out by the taxpayer

No idea how he'll cope.

It is good news and I hope it encourages others to do the same. I have nothing against the wealthy but for generations it has been acceptable for them to accumulate great wealth with little or no regard for others less fortunate. They are under no obligation to help but I hope we see a change to a society which wants to help.

Good for him...

Good and I hope he ploughs it back into the business to keep it afloat and or uses it as part payment to repay the government for the tax payers money for the bailout the banks all benefitted from.

maybe good ...leading by example...

Wonder what his motivation was?

whatever his motivation was or is...let's hope its genuine and sincere and not superficial.

it's about toime some in powers of position led by example and took some of the pain for the team..The team being the country as whole.

I strongly suspect his motivation was due to the pressure by unions, politicians and public outcry, even though this was a deal negotiated by labour in 2009..maybe certain legalities that we arn't aware of made it difficult to alter,...btw, the header says 1.4 billion , but as the OP later corrected, it is 1.4 million.,

The decision appears to come hot on the heels of Cameron's 'Responsible Capitalism' statement.
So...nowhere left to hide and weather the storm now?

I suppose it could be argued that it's worth paying these bods well if they are turning the bank around and thereby speeding up the rate at which us taxpayer's get all that lovely money back.
And of course the sum of £1.4 million is meaningless really, as Ally so kindly keeps telling us the many millions the government are aiming to save through benefit reductions will make no difference to the deficit, so this few quid wont even register...

I also believe this sum was a three year bonus arrangement , not an annual one.

The evening news throws up the possible differences between the bonuses, apparently the 1.4 million that has been rejected was more a "Labour golden hello in 2009, and not like the one of almost 1 million in shares to Stephen Heston for running the bank since.

While it's good to see I can't help but think this whole bonus culture at the top is just a very expensive joke. Have we now got good, clever bankers who know what they're doing, and those bad, naughty bankers who didn't understand their own companies workings and needed bailing out to the tune of untold billions, they've all gone then? Where did we find these new improved CEO's? Were they not working in the same system that got us where we are?

I dunno, you get some clever chap thinks of these things called derivatives, makes lots of money, all the rest think "ere I'll have some of that" - they start dealing in the same things, don't understand em but hey ho. You get the same ratings agencies that everybodies kow towing to now to give em AAA and off we go, capitalism rules. All goes t*ts up they need bailing out, no money left. But it's ok we've found some cleverer chaps than that previous lot but they don't come cheap, well what does nowadays. Course you, you and you are gonna have to work harder, longer and by the way you're sacked and you oh and you. But it's ok we're all in this together. Erm yeeesss, course we are.

I feel sorry for Hester. His pay arrangements were on the front page of every newspaper. What a fantastic incentive for him to do a great job when everybody says give up your bonus! One cheeky MP even compared Hester's job and pay packet to that of a soldier in Afghanistan. You could also compare an MP's pay packet and expenses and a journalist's to the poor old squaddie but nobody does that.

Hester should tell them to stuff their bonus and their job. It will be interesting to see who is brave/daft enough to take it on.

Dusty,...If you were on a 1.2 million salary, would you give it up easily?,...the bonus is on top of that.

tough at the top ,eh ?

That's the rate of pay for his particular job Pete.

Pay peanuts, get monkeys.

maybe thats what labour put in charge 3 years ago, with the shares at 27pence each now.

I couldn't swear to it but were they not below 20p at one time?

From £1.50 a share a couple of years ago to bouncing around between 35 p and 18 in the last few months , yes .

I don't think he really had a great deal of choice (morally) in the matter. There was so much pressure on him from all directions to give the bonus up.

I don't see much wrong with bonus payments. Even large payments. But I don't agree with large bonuses on top of high salaries. It should be an either/or. A safe salary with no or low bonuses or a very low salary coupled with high, performance based bonuses. But not both!

I cannot believe that this sort of salary is defended by anyone. I don't care how clever he is, it is obscene that ANYONE is paid this sort of money, no matter what they do. And while we are all conned into believing they deserve their salaries we will continue to be mugged through our taxes.

the tax on 1.2 million would be a substantial drop in the taxpayers kitty though, dont you think ?

"it is obscene that ANYONE is paid this sort of money,"

Anyone, no matter who they are or what they do?...