header-logo header-logo

25 September 2008
Issue: 7338 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-detail

Deferred bonuses fail in popularity stakes

Financial services industry could be considered too volatile for deferred bonus scheme

Financial institutions which try to defer bonus payments in future could face fierce resistance from employees after the collapse of Lehman Brothers, lawyers say.

Richie Alder, partner at Trowers & Hamlins, says employees may see Lehman’s downfall as evidence that their industry is too volatile for bonus payments to be deferred too far into the future.

He says: “Banks and hedge funds are likely to come up against a great deal of resistance from their employees next time bonus payments are deferred.

“Critics have placed the blame for the City and Wall Street’s current woes firmly at the door of the bonus culture they say has encouraged excessive risk taking and the financial services sector is now under pressure to defer bonus payments for longer and longer periods.”

This, he says, encourages traders to consider the longterm effects of their deals and prevents them from moving on before high-risk deals begin to unravel.

However much banks might like to defer bonus payments to improve their cash flows, he says, those vying to recruit Lehman’s best talent may find that employees who have seen their bonuses disappear overnight will be reluctant to agree these terms. “Other financial services professionals moving into new roles are also likely to be pushing to secure a bonus structure that protects them from the same fate Lehman employees are now facing. They will want to agree a deal that sees any guaranteed bonus schemes paid out as early as possible, or at least at regular intervals.” He adds that bonuses are often discretionary and so Lehman Brothers employees’ chances of recovering their bonuses may be very remote.
 

Issue: 7338 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll