Solving The Compensation Quagmire A Total Rewards Approach In Today’s Banking Environment

Posted on by blogger

By any measure, the banking industry is facing challenging times. From a financial perspective, there has been a

dramatic decline in the performance of the banking marketplace. From a human capital perspective, it’s more important than

ever to have an engaged and high performing workforce. Banks are competing for talent at all levels of the organization and

must be diligent in developing compensation programs that attract, motivate and retain a high performing workforce. How can

banks develop and manage compensation programs that reward employees for the bank’s financial performance in this challenging

banking market and, at the same time, be effective in recruiting, motivating and retaining the key talent necessary for the

bank’s success?

A successful total rewards program should be designed to balance the needs of the organization with the needs of the

workforce. While designing a program can be challenging, it does not have to be daunting. Leaders must first identify the

needs of its workforce and then work to develop a total rewards approach that best meets these needs and fits with the

culture of the organization. To start, employers should take a holistic view of compensation, while considering the following

steps:

Step 1: Develop Compensation Philosophy a clearly defined compensation philosophy is the foundation from which a

compensation program should be built. In defining a philosophy specific to your organization, ask:
Where does the bank want to stack up relative to its peers?
What is the right “mix of the total compensation package?
Does it support the business strategy?
Is it aligned with shareholder and stakeholder interests?

Step 2: Determine which total rewards components best fit the organization and the workforce consider salary, bonus,

benefits, awards and recognition programs. What do employees really want? Employees want to feel valued, fairly compensated

and distinctly rewarded and recognized for their contributions to the organization.

Step 3: Review the effectiveness of current pay-for-performance programs. Are they achieving the desired results and

behaviors? In developing or reviewing your existing incentive plan(s) consider the following:

Objective of the plan(s) (e.g. reward for short-term vs. long term-performance)
Is it aligned with the bank’s strategic and business plans?
What are the internal and external influences?
What performance should it reward?
Does it reward high achievers significantly more than others?
Goal setting do the goals still make sense?
Are individual and department goals aligned with the overall strategic plan?
How will performance be assessed? What are the right measures?

It is also important to review the organization’s performance evaluation process to ensure that it is consistent across the

organization, accurate and objective. Employees want equitable evaluations. Again, it’s about employees feeling that they are

valued and treated fairly.

Step 4: Communicate, communicate, communicate. Make certain that all compensation programs are easily understood and well

communicated. Demystify plans so that employees understand how compensation is determined. Employees care just as much, if

not more, about how their pay is determined as what their pay is. When compensation plans are openly and frequently

communicated, employees tend to feel that they are being fairly compensated.

Specific to pay-for-performance plans, make certain that managers and employees have a solid understanding of how the plans

work:

Are the goals clear? Is there a clear line of sight?
Do employees feel empowered to meet goals?
Are there rewards for achieving individual and department goals?
Do employees understand the connection of their contribution to the bank’s success?
Is there a system to track results and provide feedback on a regular basis?

Meeting the needs of employees is not only about compensation. Other highly valued components include career development

opportunities, employee recognition and non monetary rewards, such as flexible work arrangements. In fact, it can be argued

that without these important components, even the most rewarding compensation package is not enough to recruit, motivate and

retain your valuable human capital.

Get All the Latest Banking News on Bank Jobs

Posted on by blogger

You are one who wishes to keep yourself update with all banking news because there may be something in you for which you want to keep such a close watch on banks. To learn about the banks and banking news you need to check the webpage of bankingonly.com. This is the place to learn all new things about banks. You will find information from bank loans to interest rates and also the new RBI guidelines and rules for banks.

As the name suggests this webpage is something where you will get all news regarding banks. The bank market shares, the rise and fall of rupee value, the banking deals and much more about the banks are all discussed and notified at this webpage. Bnakingonly has been around for few years and it tries to point out each and everything related to banks. The source is also useful to people who are in the lookout for bank jobs.

The bankingonly will lead you to the major banks or also the small local banks of the states likely grameen banks to tell you about the news and new things happening in these banks. Moreover it brings in the latest news of employment, vacant positions and recruitment drive of the banks. In short this is the most pleasant site to find all information regarding banks and banking related affairs.

Banking is one of the safest professions you can hope to get into. Jobs are aplenty, plus, banking jobs always look impressive in the resume.

Banking is one of the fastest growing sectors with lots of scope for employment. While recent mergers between banks mean a lesser number of manager level jobs, entry level banking jobs keep opening up. The salary is good and if you are ready to take on the responsibilities that they come with, here is how you can get started.

Author Bio –

The author is a financer and deals in financial solutions and suggestions. To learn more about Banking Jobs and Interest Rate visit www.bankingonly.com

Race Relations Act Questionnaire Rr65 Demonstrated By Emilio Botin Santander Abbey Banking Group

Posted on by blogger

How to use the Race Relations Act Questionnaire RR65, and its importance, are demonstrated by the high-profile UK case Chagger v Abbey National plc & Hopkins (2006), where the Employment Tribunal found race discrimination and, following Emilio Botin Abbey Santander banking group’s refusal to reinstate Mr Chagger as the Tribunal had ordered to remedy the wrong done, awarded the record-breaking compensation of 2.8 million. In 2006, Abbey Santander Group (the UK retail bank owned by the powerful Emilio Botin Banco Santander Central Hispano Group BSCH, and which is to be re-branded as Santander share price soon) dismissed Balbinder Chagger from employment, stating compulsory redundancy as the reason. Mr Chagger, on the other hand, believed that the actual reason behind his dismissal was racial discrimination. Emilio Botin Abbey Grupo Santander banking group employed Mr Chagger, of Indian origin, as a Trading Risk Controller. He earned about 100,000 per year and reported into Nigel Hopkins.

Aggrieved employees who believe they have suffered racial discrimination in the workplace and are considering initiating legal action may serve a Race Relations Act Questionnaire RR65 upon the employer. The Race Relation Act (Questions and Replies) Order 1977 sets out the procedure for the Race Discrimination Questionnaire RR 65 procedure.

The aggrieved employee serves his questionnaire on a standard form called RR65. The RR 65 form contains some standard questions, like to what extent does the employer agree with the aggrieved employee’s account of events, what is the employer’s account of events, and does the employer accept that the employee has been racially discriminated against (and if not, then why not). The employee serving the questionnaire may append his own specifically taylored questions at the end of the standard questions.

Serving an RR65 Race Relations Act Questionnaire is not necessary in order to process the discrimination through formal legal proceedings; it is an option open to the aggrieved employee. However, it is an important option because it gives the aggrieved employee a unique opportunity to seek evidence in support of his case (by permitting the inclusion of searching questions), as well as, to collect further information useful for deciding whether or not to continue with legal proceeding. So, the aggrieved employee should give serious consideration to serving a Race Relations Act Questionnaire, and deploy questions aimed at uncovering evidence which is known only to the employer and proving the racial discrimination suffered, uncovering fully the employer’s defence, and ascertaining the grounds that are accepted by the employer and those that are disputed.

The employer is expected to reply to the questionnaire in writing within a reasonable time, considered to be 8 weeks from the date the of receipt. However, the employer does not have to reply to it, and cannot be forced to reply by any Employment Tribunal. If the employer does reply, then the reply may be admitted as evidence to an Employment Tribunal. If the employer doesn’t reply within the time limit and/or gives evasive or ambiguous answers, then the Employment Tribunal may hold such responses against the employer. If the Employment Tribunal believes the employer purposely and without good reason didn’t reply within the time limit and/or gave ambiguous and/or evasive answers, then the Race Relations Act 1976 requires the Tribunal to draw any negative inferences it considers just and equitable, including the negative inference that the employer committed the unlawful racial discrimination. This means that an Employment Tribunal can make a ruling of racial discrimination based just on the negative inferences it drew; however, an Employment Tribunal is unlikely to do that in practice, but it may decide to take a highly serious view of the employer’s failure to reply properly and be influenced by it in its decisions. The employee can improve the likelihood of the Employment Tribunal drawing negative inferences by posing reasonable questions in the questionnaire and making efforts to chase and encourage the employer to reply properly. The employer will be disadvantaged in not knowing before it faces the Employment Tribunal the consequences of its failures; by the time the employer is in front of the Tribunal, it may be too late to make good any failures. An employee who deploys the race discrimination questionnaire procedure automatically gains this tactical advantage.

Such was the scenario that Emilio Botin Abbey Santander had got itself into with Mr Chagger. The Tribunal decided that Emilio Botin Santander Abbey had failed to answer Mr Chagger’s questionnaire properly. Mr Chagger had asked Abbey Santander to provide details of the legal actions of race discrimination that had been brought against it since 1 January 2001. Grupo Santander Abbey answered with 17 citations of incidents. With regards to 6, Abbey Santander simply asserted that it didn’t know the results of the actions and that it was unable to find out during the time period in which the race discrimination questionnaire had to be answered; it never provided any further or follow up answers to Mr Chagger. The Employment Tribunal ruled that Abbey Santander’s answers were evasive. Santander Abbey’s failure to properly answer the questionnaire, contributed to the Employment Tribunal’s finding that Emilio Botin Abbey Santander and Mr Hopkins had racially discriminated against Mr Chagger in his dismissal.

The serving of an RR65 questionnaire does not by itself begin any legal action; legal action is started with a separate procedure. If no legal action is ever begun, then the questionnaire and the reply remain a private correspondence between the employee and employer. If there is sufficient other evidence that suggests race discrimination and the employee is giving serious consideration to taking legal action, then serving an RR65 questionnaire would be appropriate; because the employer’s answers may help the employee to make a final decision. However, if the employee does not seriously intend to pursue legal action, then serving the RR65 questionnaire would be inappropriate; because it may unnecessarily aggravate the employer and/or the employer’s reply may emotionally affect the employee into taking legal action he had not intended.

The Chagger v Emilio Botin Abbey Santander case did not end at the Employment Tribunal stage. Emilio Botin Abbey Santander and Mr Hopkins escalated the case to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) by appealing against the original Employment Tribunal’s rulings of racial discrimination and the record-breaking 2.8 million compensation. In 2008, the EAT upheld the original Employment Tribunal’s ruling of 2006, that both Emilio Botin Abbey Santander and Mr Hopkins had racially discriminated against Mr Chagger. The EAT did, however, accept Abbey Santander’s appeal against the 2.8 million compensation and sent it back to the original Employment Tribunal for reconsideration. In 2009, the case was escalated even higher, to the Court of Appeal (the 2nd highest court in UK). The Court of Appeal’s List of Hearings showed the appeal hearing was held on 7/8 July 2009. The Court of Appeal’s judgement and transcription were not available when writing this article. The 11KBW set of barristers’ chambers (who represented Emilio Botin Santander Abbey and Mr Hopkins in the Court of Appeal hearing), had reported that the hearing was to be only about quantum (i.e., the compensation) and not about liability also (i.e., not race discrimination also). That would appear to suggest that the wrongful act of unlawful discrimination committed by Emilio Botin Abbey Santander and Mr Hopkins was finalised by the EAT when it upheld the original Tribunal’s ruling that Abbey Santander and Mr Hopkins had racially discriminated against Mr Chagger, and that Mr Chagger had appealed against the EAT’s ruling to send back the compensation award for reconsideration.

The Banking Sector in the UAE

Posted on by blogger

The global economic crisis in 2008 had a great impact on the U.A.E. Several banks reported that there were high non-performing loans from 2009 to 2011. Thankfully, the economy recovered well and quickly after the financial meltdown. The reason that the U.A.E. could recover so quickly, was because they immediately set up an additional liquidity facility of around 14 billion dollars, which was available to the banks should they need it, but was luckily not really used. This crucial move stabilized the banks, and prevented further repercussions from the financial crisis. With the proactive steps taken by the government, as well as the blessing of natural crude oil, the economy of the U.A.E was able to bounce back quite effortlessly from what seemed like complete bankruptcy to most people.

There are around 23 local banks in the U.A.E., as well as 28 foreign banks operating there. These banks also have special Islamic banking, which has become increasingly famous in recent years. There are different kinds of accounts available, and foreigners have the option of opening their bank accounts either in the local currency, or in a foreign currency. Almost all the banks in the U.A.E. allow their customers to avail of personal Internet banking. The country in general is technologically savvy, and almost everything can be done over the web. Apart form this, all banks have ATM facilities, and customers of one bank can use the ATM of another bank. There is also a number of business banking facilities available to the large number of businessmen in the country. Current account holders can make cheque payments for all of their day-to-day expenses. Based on the credit of the account holder, overdraft facilities are also available to current account holders.

Whether you having personal or corporate banking needs, the banks in the U.A.E. are more than capable of helping you reach your goals. Even though they did meet with a slight set back due to the financial crisis, they have showed great power in being able to recover so fast, when most of the world is still reeling from the aftermath of the economic meltdown. The Central Bank of the U.A.E. has laid down several guidelines in 2011 to regulate loans and other banking services offered to individuals in an attempt to control all the banking to ensure stability. The export of oil from the entire gulf region has doubled since the year 2009. They exports have now reached 1 trillion Dollars. It is expected that by 2020, the figure will reach 2 trillion Dollars. With such promising figures, it is evident that the banking sector in the U.A.E. is really very strong.

ChexSystems Banking vs. Consumers

Posted on by blogger

Today, more than 20 million US citizens are living without a bank account. The primary reason is due to ChexSystems’ dominating presence within the consumer banking world. It is estimated that over 80% of all banks and credit unions in the United States, use ChexSystems to verify new customer accounts. Most individuals listed in the ChexSystems database were reported due to mishandling of their checking accounts, while the rest were attributed to abuse, fraud, or errors.

Within recent years, many websites have sprung up on the internet offering help for people listed on ChexSystems. Services vary among these sites, ranging from free information to paid memberships. No matter where you turn, there are countless numbers of “victims” venting their frustrations through the use of public forums and message boards.

Most of the frustrations shown by “victims” of ChexSystems seem justified, but even then there are always two sides to every story. Most “victims” feel that 5 years of being “blacklisted” is punishment beyond justification. And if reported in error, even worse a punishment. In addition, many have complained that the banks give no breaks when it comes to consumer mistakes, but are quick to cover up their mistakes when the banks are at fault. Banks, on the other hand, justify using ChexSystems to protect their assets.

Either way you look at it, ChexSystems is a much needed organization in the banking industry. Without ChexSystems, banks would go bankrupt without this type of asset protection against con-artists and account abusers.

The real question is how fair is the punishment for the consumers who innocently have fallen into tough financial situations, and as a result defaulted on their bank account. Is it fair to “blacklist” all consumers the same way regardless of their banking history? These are just a few of the questions that need answering before any proper reforms can be reached.