"Fat cats" get paid enough as it is. So why is it that when someone is appointed a post in a large organisation and they subsequently make a complete mess of things, why are they paid to leave? Like most people if I were to be grossly incompetent at my job I would be fired, so why is it that once people start to earn above a certain amount of money they are no longer fired? Instead they are invited to resign, and as part of their severence they are often paid a huge amount of money.
I would like to make these severence payments illegal. When someone messes up their job and has to leave they should be fired, just like anyone else.
In the commercial sector it is not uncommon to incentivise employees to work harder by offering some kind of bonus scheme. If certain performance targets are met then the staff receive a bonus. This is fine in the commercial sector because if management are irresponsible in their actions the company wont survive and a more successful company will take its place.
If an organisation is publically owned (such as a local council) there is no possibility of another more succesful company taking its place, if the organisation is failing then more money is usually pumped into it, or there some tokenary heads roll to try to convince us that everything will now be different. So with no possibility of complete failure (as there is with a commercial company) why do some government organisations reward staff for doing their jobs by offering commercial style bonuses? These people work for us, why should we pay them extra to do the job they are already paid to do?
I would like to abolish bonuses for staff in nationally owned organisations. This also includes any organisations that the nation has invested money in (bailed out) such as banks. If a bank, for example, has been so poorly managed that it needs to be bailed out not only should their bonus schemes be cancelled but they do not deserve their bonuses anyway!