You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Philip Green
April 26 2024 5.37pm

Philip Green

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >

 

pefwin Flag Where you have to have an English ... 25 Jul 16 6.07pm

Originally posted by Stuk

Control of pension schemes should be completely removed from the employer.

If your job has a pension scheme it should be in control of the employee and ringfenced so that funds can only be added to it.

BHS, Tata and all the others swanning off and expecting the government to cover the lack of pension funds is ridiculous.

You must wonder what the Scheme Trustees were doing at this time.

 


"Everything is air-droppable at least once."

"When the going gets tough, the tough call for close air support."

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 25 Jul 16 6.14pm

Originally posted by pefwin

You must wonder what the Scheme Trustees were doing at this time.

My imagination turns towards such things as complicity and self interest that borders on criminality

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Cucking Funt's Profile Cucking Funt Flag Clapham on the Back 25 Jul 16 7.54pm Send a Private Message to Cucking Funt Add Cucking Funt as a friend

Originally posted by nickgusset

Green et al have been ripped apart in this report...

[Link]



“Sir Philip Green, Dominic Chappell and the respective directors, advisers and hangers-on who all got rich or richer are all culpable, with the only losers the ordinary employees and pensioners,”
the MPs verdict on BHS.

Compare the news coverage of this proven scandal with the news coverage of alleged but unevidenced practices by Corbyn's supporters.

Green should do time for this but he won't.

Do time for what, exactly? What he's done, whilst being ethically questionable, isn't illegal. As matters stand, living in a corporate moral vacuum isn't yet criminal.

 


Wife beating may be socially acceptable in Sheffield, but it is a different matter in Cheltenham

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View leifandersonshair's Profile leifandersonshair Flag Newport 25 Jul 16 9.11pm Send a Private Message to leifandersonshair Add leifandersonshair as a friend

Originally posted by pefwin

You must wonder what the Scheme Trustees were doing at this time.

I work in pensions. Scheme Trustees can often be fairly clueless, and will go along with whatever the advisers (legal, actuarial or consultants) 'suggest' they do. The advisors are professionals. Most Trustees, especially MNT's, are not.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
nickgusset Flag Shizzlehurst 25 Jul 16 9.32pm

Originally posted by Cucking Funt

Do time for what, exactly? What he's done, whilst being ethically questionable, isn't illegal. As matters stand, living in a corporate moral vacuum isn't yet criminal.

That's exactly what I was alluding to...

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
pefwin Flag Where you have to have an English ... 25 Jul 16 9.45pm

Originally posted by leifandersonshair

I work in pensions. Scheme Trustees can often be fairly clueless, and will go along with whatever the advisers (legal, actuarial or consultants) 'suggest' they do. The advisors are professionals. Most Trustees, especially MNT's, are not.

They would be responsible under s61 of the Trustee Act 1925, let alone any recent legislation. They are normally treated as per se Professionals as they have recourse to the advice you mention and the ability to sue advisors.

I would assume that the £571mn is a deficit that the Scheme Actuary flagged, and that there was a deficit plan in place.

The problem with numbers, so large, as pension schemes; stumping up half a billion cash would put even the bigger advisor companies into "trouble".

*From the press, the pension industry have already fallen in line behind the Trustees.*

Edited by pefwin (25 Jul 2016 9.47pm)

 


"Everything is air-droppable at least once."

"When the going gets tough, the tough call for close air support."

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View MKGlazier's Profile MKGlazier Flag Milton Keynes 25 Jul 16 9.49pm Send a Private Message to MKGlazier Add MKGlazier as a friend

When you have that much money, you feel you can do what you like! Green has always evaded tax in UK by using his wife's companies ! Chappel was a good patsy for him, ego with no business sense.......At the conclusion he will probably get away with it scotfree, with a s*** reputation but millions in the bank !!

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View leifandersonshair's Profile leifandersonshair Flag Newport 26 Jul 16 8.25am Send a Private Message to leifandersonshair Add leifandersonshair as a friend

Originally posted by pefwin

They would be responsible under s61 of the Trustee Act 1925, let alone any recent legislation. They are normally treated as per se Professionals as they have recourse to the advice you mention and the ability to sue advisors.

I would assume that the £571mn is a deficit that the Scheme Actuary flagged, and that there was a deficit plan in place.

The problem with numbers, so large, as pension schemes; stumping up half a billion cash would put even the bigger advisor companies into "trouble".

*From the press, the pension industry have already fallen in line behind the Trustees.*

Edited by pefwin (25 Jul 2016 9.47pm)

The Trustees were apparently unhappy with the sale to Chappell anyway due to the position it put the Scheme in. Now it's up to Green how much value he puts on that Knighthood. If he doesn't pay up, the PPF ie the taxpayer (as the Levy I think covers around 20% of liabilities)

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Johnny Eagles's Profile Johnny Eagles Flag berlin 26 Jul 16 11.06am Send a Private Message to Johnny Eagles Add Johnny Eagles as a friend

I don't want to defend Philip Green, but the way the politico-media class has lined up to bash him makes me suspect that there is a bit of scapegoating going on here.

The politicians spewing out humbug on an industrial scale particulary sticks in the craw.

Your average ex-SpAd, safe-seat careerist MP has probably never been in BHS, and almost certainly hasn't given a second thought to its employees until the day before yesterday. But now it's all about the poor "loyal, hardworking" employees and evil Philip Green is to blame.

News flash: if you want to boast about an "open, global, trading economy" you can't also claim to want to protect employees. You can't have it both ways.

Pouring out a load of humbug to avoid a short-term media barrage is a bit rich, too little and too late.

 


...we must expand...get more pupils...so that the knowledge will spread...

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Midlands Eagle's Profile Midlands Eagle Flag 26 Jul 16 11.18am Send a Private Message to Midlands Eagle Add Midlands Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Johnny Eagles

I don't want to defend Philip Green, but the way the politico-media class has lined up to bash him makes me suspect that there is a bit of scapegoating going on here.

The politicians spewing out humbug on an industrial scale particulary sticks in the craw.

Your average ex-SpAd, safe-seat careerist MP has probably never been in BHS, and almost certainly hasn't given a second thought to its employees until the day before yesterday. But now it's all about the poor "loyal, hardworking" employees and evil Philip Green is to blame.

Your post doesn't really make a lot of sense and it reads more like a rant without anything concrete to back it up.

I certainly have an opinion on Phillip Green's behaviour and I don't shop in BHS either and I have certainly never given their staff any more thought than I give employees of other companies in general.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
jamiemartin721 Flag Reading 26 Jul 16 11.19am

Originally posted by Johnny Eagles

I don't want to defend Philip Green, but the way the politico-media class has lined up to bash him makes me suspect that there is a bit of scapegoating going on here.

The politicians spewing out humbug on an industrial scale particulary sticks in the craw.

Your average ex-SpAd, safe-seat careerist MP has probably never been in BHS, and almost certainly hasn't given a second thought to its employees until the day before yesterday. But now it's all about the poor "loyal, hardworking" employees and evil Philip Green is to blame.

News flash: if you want to boast about an "open, global, trading economy" you can't also claim to want to protect employees. You can't have it both ways.

Pouring out a load of humbug to avoid a short-term media barrage is a bit rich, too little and too late.

very true.

 


"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Quote this post in a reply
View Midlands Eagle's Profile Midlands Eagle Flag 26 Jul 16 11.25am Send a Private Message to Midlands Eagle Add Midlands Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Cucking Funt

Do time for what, exactly? What he's done, whilst being ethically questionable, isn't illegal. As matters stand, living in a corporate moral vacuum isn't yet criminal.

Quite, but it may give the lawmakers an indication of what parts of corporate law need to be tightened up.

I see that "The unacceptable face of capitalism" is being trotted out again and it's quite a few years since I heard that expression which I believe was coined by Prime Minister Edward Heath about another corporate rapist Tiny Rowland

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 3 of 5 < 1 2 3 4 5 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Philip Green