Willie Walsh story
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where are all you journo's when there is a real story???
WILLIE DID NOT HEROICALLY TURN TURN DOWN HIS BONUS, HE NEVER TRIGGERED IT. Print that.
This man has has no dignity, he's still perpetuating the myth.
Surely nearly everyone is fed up with fat cat bonuses and the drive for mindless huge company profits at the expense of the customer. This glimmer of an honourable act has sadly and predictably turned out to be spin.
WILLIE DID NOT HEROICALLY TURN TURN DOWN HIS BONUS, HE NEVER TRIGGERED IT. Print that.
This man has has no dignity, he's still perpetuating the myth.
Surely nearly everyone is fed up with fat cat bonuses and the drive for mindless huge company profits at the expense of the customer. This glimmer of an honourable act has sadly and predictably turned out to be spin.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Midlands
Age: 59
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you not think it fairer to presuppose:
1. There is so much bias and anti -WW feeling on here that he would not get a fair hearing if St Peter were to post!
2. It's just possible that the journos DID do their research, and hence the rumour of WW having turned down someting which was not on offer is b0llocks.
3. If the above rumour is true, then that would be a huge story, and presumably our investigative journos would be on it.
1. There is so much bias and anti -WW feeling on here that he would not get a fair hearing if St Peter were to post!
2. It's just possible that the journos DID do their research, and hence the rumour of WW having turned down someting which was not on offer is b0llocks.
3. If the above rumour is true, then that would be a huge story, and presumably our investigative journos would be on it.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Tom and Hand Solo,
He was entitled to a bonus.
The £700,000 figure that has been quoted everywhere was the maximum amount it could have been, but that doesn't mean that it was definitely going to be that.
The fact that staff are only going to receive 80 per cent of the bonus suggests that all the targets were not met. This would have applied to Willie Walsh as well, and he also has personal targets to meet on top of the business targets for all staff.
He did turn it down.
He was entitled to a bonus.
The £700,000 figure that has been quoted everywhere was the maximum amount it could have been, but that doesn't mean that it was definitely going to be that.
The fact that staff are only going to receive 80 per cent of the bonus suggests that all the targets were not met. This would have applied to Willie Walsh as well, and he also has personal targets to meet on top of the business targets for all staff.
He did turn it down.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London. UK
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Private Lives...
What we all do behind the privacy of our net cutains in Acacia ave is a matter for our own intergrity. It is sordid and distasteful to delve into these matters; so it sells a few extra copies and then we all forget about it. Max Mosely for example. I really don't care nor do I wish to know. This gossip mongering is pathetic. Get a life people.
What WW does at BA is important since it affects the lives and livelyhoods of many. What he does at home or wherever is up to him.
What WW does at BA is important since it affects the lives and livelyhoods of many. What he does at home or wherever is up to him.
Paxing All Over The World
Irrespective of what the bonus would have been WW did not take it - because it would have shortened his overall contract time at BA, due to the adverse publicity and reaction of shareholders/media.
Remember that he is playing a long and clever game and doing very well at it. He is only 47 years old and will need to earn a bit more yet before retiring in the style he would like.
Whether he leaves BA in one year or five, he will go with a laurel wreath on his head and gold stuffed in his pockets for having 'saved' BA. His contribution to the mess will be ignored. This will happen for all the usual reasons, not least that the main board have to save their faces - and backsides - by pretending that they hired the right man and gave him the right instructions. In all of this, the Board and their principle shareholders (across the last 15 years or so) appear to have got away with it.
Lastly, don't forget that MANY other corporations (across the whole spectrum of enterprise) are in EXACTLY the same situation. Which is to say that they are managing to keep things ticking over but have so badly reduced staff and got rid of the right people that - if a big project or disaster comes along - they will fail. The penny pinching of the past 20 years is now starting to come home to roost.
Remember that he is playing a long and clever game and doing very well at it. He is only 47 years old and will need to earn a bit more yet before retiring in the style he would like.
Whether he leaves BA in one year or five, he will go with a laurel wreath on his head and gold stuffed in his pockets for having 'saved' BA. His contribution to the mess will be ignored. This will happen for all the usual reasons, not least that the main board have to save their faces - and backsides - by pretending that they hired the right man and gave him the right instructions. In all of this, the Board and their principle shareholders (across the last 15 years or so) appear to have got away with it.
Lastly, don't forget that MANY other corporations (across the whole spectrum of enterprise) are in EXACTLY the same situation. Which is to say that they are managing to keep things ticking over but have so badly reduced staff and got rid of the right people that - if a big project or disaster comes along - they will fail. The penny pinching of the past 20 years is now starting to come home to roost.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: England
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately, that
, from the so-called Government down to all the witless fools who have borrowed more than they can afford will affect us all. The oil price alone is going to do for a lot more airlines and the jobs of a lot more of our friends and colleagues along the way. I doubt there is any good news to come out of this - unless it be a Tory win in Crewe. Not for the politics, just to watch Gordon's face and listen to more incoherent mumbling!
Willie is just looking after himself, by looking after his shareholders. The latter is his job, and the former is something I wager we all do.
penny pinching
Willie is just looking after himself, by looking after his shareholders. The latter is his job, and the former is something I wager we all do.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PartickThistleNil - Perhaps you should speak to Keith Williams, the CFO, who said yesterday in Waterworld, categorically, in front of a large audience, that Willie was not offered a bonus and did not turn down a bonus.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
7 Posts
Mr Solo.
The wretched Walsh wears teflon. I like the suggestion that he was never entitled to a bonus but I like to be certain of the evidence. Was this hearsay? Were you present or can the information be reliably confirmed. I read elsewhere that the alleged weekend story about Walsh was delayed because he is basking in excellent publicity over the bonus refusal.
The wretched Walsh wears teflon. I like the suggestion that he was never entitled to a bonus but I like to be certain of the evidence. Was this hearsay? Were you present or can the information be reliably confirmed. I read elsewhere that the alleged weekend story about Walsh was delayed because he is basking in excellent publicity over the bonus refusal.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The information was revealed in a staff presentation on the financial results. I was not present but got the information from someone who was. Apparently the CFO was questioned on this specific matter by several attendees to be sure there was no misunderstanding but he was quite clear that the press had got hold of the wrong end of the stick and Willy hadn't turned down his bonus. The CFO is Keith Williams.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Manchester
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was not present.....but got the information from someone who was
Perhaps we should all contact Keith Williams?
Dear Keith, I am an interested contributor to PPrune. My fellow contributor, a Captain (?) Hand Solo says that a mate of his told him that you said Willie Walsh was never offered a bonus this year, so apparently he didn't actually turn one down. Please can you confirm this?
Perhaps you could supply Keith's email, or better still, since you are so knowledgeable about the intricacies of BA policy, email the man yourself and then cut and paste his reply?
I shan't hold my breath.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wasn't 'my mate' that he told, it was the assembled crowd of staff who'd all come along for the annual financial results presentation in Waterworld. Or maybe there's just a huge conspiracy.....
I won't be holding my breath waiting for the press to acknowledge that they jumped to conclusions and published the wrong story.
If you want the CFOs email I'll PM it to you, don't really consider it fair to publish it here.
I won't be holding my breath waiting for the press to acknowledge that they jumped to conclusions and published the wrong story.
If you want the CFOs email I'll PM it to you, don't really consider it fair to publish it here.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand Solo,
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I think what Keith meant was that Walsh was not offered a bonus because he went to the chairman a few weeks earlier and said he did not wish to take one. That has been widely reported.
As he was not then offered one, he couldn't turn down that non-existent offer.
He was entitled to a bonus. The criteria is laid down every year in the report and accounts, and much of this criteria was met.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree.
I think what Keith meant was that Walsh was not offered a bonus because he went to the chairman a few weeks earlier and said he did not wish to take one. That has been widely reported.
As he was not then offered one, he couldn't turn down that non-existent offer.
He was entitled to a bonus. The criteria is laid down every year in the report and accounts, and much of this criteria was met.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: cheshire
Posts: 133
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its pretty simple with the bonus figures.
Ba either hit the taget in whichcase he was entitled to a bonus but declined it.
or
BA didn't hit the target in whcih case he wasn't entitled to a bonos and therefore won't be receiving one.
They had an operating margin of 7.1% not the 10% reported?
Ba either hit the taget in whichcase he was entitled to a bonus but declined it.
or
BA didn't hit the target in whcih case he wasn't entitled to a bonos and therefore won't be receiving one.
They had an operating margin of 7.1% not the 10% reported?
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PNL - if Keith meant that then he's been getting some communication lessons from Gareth Kirkwood. Telling the board you are not going to accept a bonus is to all intents and purposes the same as turning down a bonus, in which case the newspapers were essentially correct in their reporting. If he feels it necessary to apologise for the press reporting an incorrect story then it appears something is amiss. I do not know where Willies previous decision not to accept a bonus was widely reported but it was certainly not in the financial press, the mainstream broadsheets or the internal company comms as nobody I know had previously read that. I had read that Standard Life had told the board that paying Walsh a bonus would be unacceptable, which is a different thing.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HS
A quick search reveals,
Daily Telegraph:
"I spoke to the chairman [Martin Broughton] a number of weeks ago and told him I thought it would be inappropriate in the context of Terminal 5 because I'd said I would take responsibility,'' Mr Walsh said.
Guardian:
The chairman said: "Willie and I talked about this a few weeks ago, long before we got gratuitous advice from the media."
Even the Daily Mirror managed to pick it up:
"I told the chairman two weeks before the pay committee was due to meet I thought it would be inappropriate to take my bonus"
A quick search reveals,
Daily Telegraph:
"I spoke to the chairman [Martin Broughton] a number of weeks ago and told him I thought it would be inappropriate in the context of Terminal 5 because I'd said I would take responsibility,'' Mr Walsh said.
Guardian:
The chairman said: "Willie and I talked about this a few weeks ago, long before we got gratuitous advice from the media."
Even the Daily Mirror managed to pick it up:
"I told the chairman two weeks before the pay committee was due to meet I thought it would be inappropriate to take my bonus"
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the dates of those articles are? 17th May for the first two, which is a full day after the press published what Keith Williams now claims is an incorrect story about Walsh turning down his bonus. Having been inadvertently spun in a good light is he likely to correct them?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Again,
I've already said, my interpretation of what Keith said is different to yours.
The only incorrect part of the story is the Walsh would have got £700,000. He wouldn't have, as I've already said.
I've already said, my interpretation of what Keith said is different to yours.
The only incorrect part of the story is the Walsh would have got £700,000. He wouldn't have, as I've already said.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: The first town on the Thames
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
2 Posts
Perhaps we should all contact Keith Williams?
Dear Keith, I am an interested contributor to PPrune. My fellow contributor, a Captain (?) Hand Solo says that a mate of his told him that you said Willie Walsh was never offered a bonus this year, so apparently he didn't actually turn one down. Please can you confirm this?
Dear Keith, I am an interested contributor to PPrune. My fellow contributor, a Captain (?) Hand Solo says that a mate of his told him that you said Willie Walsh was never offered a bonus this year, so apparently he didn't actually turn one down. Please can you confirm this?