2 April 2009

Spare a Thought for the Bankers

I'm about to present a social commentary for which I have no qualification whatsoever. The ground on which I will touch is far beyond my intellectual capacity. Much like sudoku in that respect. In fact, even during the planning for this article, I realised the flaws in my logic. At the same time i will present an egalitarianism where everyone is treated equally, as individuals. So all equal, but different. Not a great start. And if that appears too uplifting I'll go on to blame all the world's economic woes on everyone, as humans. Fantastic, so the world is doomed because we are who we are.

And as if that wasn't enough, I will also fail to offer any alternatives or solutions. The only thing I'm good as seems to be downplaying expectations. If only there was a career where I could be as critical as I like of society - yet offer no ideas on how to make it any better. Oh hang on, jut let me make a note to join the Conservative Party as soon as I finish this.

The reason I have chosen to defend bankers is twofold, both based on personal experience. For a start it isn't really clear what a banker is. Is it all bank workers, city bankers or just the bosses of big investment banks? Whichever of these groups is being blamed, that blame is unlikely to lie at the door of every one of them. For the best part of a decade, until last year, I was a manager at Northern Rock. During the crisis which saw the bank run and a third of the workforce axed (myself included), I experienced similar generalisation first hand. 'Northern Rock's Incompetent Management' cried every MP, newscaster and journalist. If you take that description literally then I'm one of them. Was it my fault, a manager in the complaints department? I don't think so but after hearing that every day for 12 months it was hard to believe that wasn't what other people thought.

Obviously I'm being too sensitive here, but it can affect you. Just as it affects people in groups of other popular news phrases of the moment. Asylum seekers are spongers. Iran is part of the axis of evil. The media is responsible for the sexualisation of young people. Bankers are stereotyped just as much. Having said that, I've a lot more sympathy for any Iranian TV producers currently seeking political asylum.....

Aside from the issue of stereotyping, bankers (however you define them) are only doing what the majority of people would do given the chance. A friend of mine from university (where I clearly didn't study sociology) is a hedge fund manager. He's a perfectly nice man, generous and intelligent. What he did was get into a career where he could use that intelligence to make lots of money. There will be some amongst those judging bankers who wouldn't have done the same, but most would. I know I would.

Everyone can talk about the perfect job, living the dream and the like. The sad fact is, the vast majority of us don't ever get them. It shouldn't stop you striving, but most people just do a job because it pays the bills. How many estate agents, truck drivers or complaints managers dreamed of doing that job when they were young? There's nothing wrong with them and some people get some enjoyment out of them - but if you ask whether you would have been a banker and earned ten times as much? In most cases human nature dictates that you would.

It is human nature that has created a society driven by status and possessions. With notable exceptions we are all part of it. And we'd have managed a hedge fund and made our millions over the last ten years if we could have done. So it's not just the bankers fault, it's mine and yours.

9 comments:

  1. The failure was one of innattentiveness, everyone was so distracted by ever rising house prices and confident bank talk that we collectively failed to see the warning signs... Those few who did, also did not recieve the attention they should have... I suspect people are so angry because we only have ourselves to blame really. That we should know better than to trust our money and livelihoods to a financial system we don't understand.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think you're missing the point a bit. The theory of capitalism is that the greed of people we deal with is supposed to benefit all. The baker wants to make money so he bakes delicious cakes for us. The banker wants to make money so he invests money wisely for us.

    If the banker instead takes your live savings and bets them on the 2:30 at Aintree, because he'll cream off a massive bonus if he wins, and you take all the risk if he loses... that's not the way it's supposed to work.

    And it's particularly annoying when he turns around and says "well that's human nature, you'd have done it too except you're a lazy unambitious loser instead of a thrusting go-getter like me."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Its not supposed to work that way, but if the framework is set up so that can legally happen, it will. He won't have wanted to lose at the 2.30 at Aintree, but he works in a place where you can gamble and its always worked before. In the good days, when he backed winners - those who had invested would be saying 'why didn't you back that horse?'.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I work at RBS in a call centre selling their insurance. We have all been given notice of redundancy and the place is being closed down in a couple of months. Its 'business as usual', in fact they seem to have stepped up a gear would you believe with more impossible targets to reach (business falling off because of credit crunch through people at the top making lousy decisions). What sticks in my craw is the fact that Sir Fred Goodwin is just so arrogant and thought that everything he touched would turn to gold - he bought AMBRO thinking he could acheive world domination in the banking world and it backfired as he didn't do his research properly. Main reason behind RBS downfall - he further heaps shame and embarrassment on all those remaining still working there by his determination to keep his pension he managed to smarm his way into receiving. Anyone can say sorry (it is after all only one little word)but he is still as arrogant as ever which just sucks. He has walked away with a fortune leaving other people to clear up his mess. He wouldn't take advice from other people being such a 'know it all' - the power just went to his head and he became a menace. Shares in this company are practically worthless - a lot of employers bought some on a 3 year deal which ends in September -we asked for an extension to this date which was denied so many people will have lost out (again). There should be some system in place where we can sue for lost income from savings - it is particularly hard for OAP's - across the whole banking spectrum. The rate is now 0.000001% or something just as ridiculous. Everybody complains about this but nothing gets done to right this dreadful wrong. It makes all the difference from being 'comfortable' to 'on the breadline'. We've paid to bail out all the banks in trouble (couldn't we have just said no to a few of them?) but they still aren't helping to bail out small businesses by carrying on with overdraft facilities. Some people on tracker mortgages are better off but most sensible people went for the fixed rate option. Surely somebody out there can do something/anything? MP's are too busy at the moment covering up the truth behind their expenses to be bothered so who on earth is left to protect/defend the savers?

    ReplyDelete
  5. All very familiar, being asked to perform as normal or even greater than normal, while sitting under the threat of redundancy.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Grumpy Old Bankers:As a young, eager and arrogant banking correspondent in the mid 1980s, I was underwhelmed by the calibre of those running our biggest banks... I now, of course, recognise that I couldn't have been more wrong...

    The banks of the 1980s were bumbling and mediocre, with collusive tendencies. However under the stern gaze of a Bank of England - which was a bit-player in steering the economy but was a feared supervisor of banks - they fiercely protected their depositors' precious cash.


    It's not an inevitable aspect of human nature that bankers will gamble away their depositors cash, and then want the taxpayer to bail them out.

    It's jsut that this particular group of bankers are greed-crazed incompetent crooks.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ha! I like the comment about joining the Conservative Party.

    Otherwise generally fair entry. Can't say I really hate bankers actually. I hate the government much more. :P

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thanks Jason

    R Mutt - I think the majority of the incompetent crooks are the same as the high flying trailblazers of the last ten years who put London back at the cutting edge of the financial world. There was just no appetite from anywhere to question the long term effects and consequences.

    Human nature doesn't make people gamble despositors cash away, it makes people gamble because they want to win. If you put people in a testosterone fuelled culture of power and risk taking, they'll take risks.

    ReplyDelete