Paying the piper

Europe's pay populism makes a useful distinction

Image
Christopher Hughes
Last Updated : Nov 28 2013 | 11:26 PM IST
European pay populism is going this way and that. Swiss voters deliver a resounding "no" to limiting executive pay over the weekend and then days later the Dutch strive to outdo even the stingy European Commission in seeking to cap banker bonuses. The distinctions are understandable, though. If there is an instinctive aversion to regulating pay, it isn't strong enough to overcome anger at the rewards that continue to be given to those working in the taxpayer-backed finance industry.

Brussels has taken the lead in post-crisis compensation curbs. It wants almost any banker's bonus to be restricted to no more than 100 per cent of salary. That shocked the industry, but didn't prevent country-level uprisings. Switzerland may not have ratified a referendum to limit salaries of senior managers to 12 times that of a company's lowest wage, but the non-European Union nation has staged a successful clampdown on corporate golden handshakes.

The Netherlands is now aiming to restrict banker bonuses to 20 per cent of base salaries. The messages aren't so mixed, though. The Swiss position is instinctively fair and meritocratic. Commonsense dictates that multimillion-dollar payoffs for doing little to no work are undeserved. Likewise, an executive who takes on the responsibility of leading a company and succeeds in creating wealth and prosperity for owners and workers may deserve to be paid a high multiple of lower earners.

It's easy to understand why finance would remain an outlier in the equation. Reform of Europe's banking system is still a work in progress. Banks generally remain poorly capitalised and hard to resolve in a crisis, meaning they remain a big potential burden to their respective citizenries. And yet pay in investment banking remains much higher than other industries, even if compensation-to-revenue ratios have ticked down slightly.

The banking sector has shown little self-restraint compared to its outsized role in a near-systemic collapse. If financiers are unwilling to self-regulate their pay more stringently, they'll have to keep fighting off those who will see the need to do it for them.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Nov 28 2013 | 9:21 PM IST

Next Story