Time for an increase in base pay?

People will continue to be disproportionately well-paid in banking.

Why?

Because the IB Markets model will contiune to generate revenue. Granted, the issues of the last 18m won't go away overnight, and will continue to hurt the bottom lines of institutions as a whole, BUT this simply means that banks NEED to retain high quality staff (appreciate this is a relative, not absolute measure) to generate some of the revenues to offset this (much of this can be low credit risk).

Take flow trading operations: e.g. FX, cash equities, cash bonds, commodities. Mature business models with an established salesforce will continue to bring in the market "organic" business (real money, corporate etc), and cross bid-offer spread. Add to this skilled traders who can further leverage this client business, not to mention revenues from (first generation) derivative business in a similar manner. As well as FO personnel, support staff (IT, Ops, Risk etc) are needed to allow the machine to operate efficiently.

The point i am making is that the business i describe above IS NOT DEAD, and banks will still pay up to hire/retain the right people needed to make it work. Watch and see.

"Banking- a Boring Badly paid job !"

Sounds about right.

Frankly 90% of stafff in investment bankers are not producers, they're either juniors hanging on the coat tails of the experienced, or in true support functions like IT and OPs. Producers generating low -capital, non flow revenue, should be paid well, but the problem comes when banks use capital they haven't got or people think that a client calls them as opposed to the firm. Most of these people couldn't survive in the outside world..I left and survivied and cant find good staff from the banks.

let's face it. most banking services are not really needed by the outside economy as much as by bankers themselves. if we search deep down in our souls and conscience we can secretely admit to ourselves, we can admitt that a lot of financial "innovations" and products/ services are for the primary purpose of creating high fees for the banks and bankers.

If the world economy were to be without investment banks from tomorrow morning on, it would survive (ignore the transitional unwinding and untangling bit for a moment) - that would not be the case for commercial banks.
So while banking in general will always be there, there is actually not really an economic need for the typical reader of this weekly. They were tolerated while increasing GDP numbers in the modern service economy, but once the financial mess attributed to them starts to really hurt mainstream economy, they will inevitably ask the question, why not cut them loose. Sent them off to become wine growers, math teachers and internet entrepreneurs.

Investment bankers work long hard hours, and besides are the drivers of one of the world's major financial centres. Its a lot of responsibility and they have to get it right. Now such an argument suggests that they are worth their weight in gold, but............ Reality Check is 100% correct. Firstly, there is no responsibility to the investor, especially as they are happy to invest in Madoff-type ventures, without doing their homework. Secondly, the level of intellect required to do the job should not command that type of money, believe it or not there several careers which demand more intellect under pressure and pay less. Try Surgeon, Prime Minister, or even the Rocket Scientist and the Neuro-surgeon. So as Reality Check points out, a lot of Bankers need a reality check. For Bankers, 2009 equals, more job losses, no bonuses or toxic asset bonuses, wage cuts..... Bankers will be exposed to the same high risks that have undermined their operations and brought the financial system to it knees. Its going to become less appealing to the money grabbers, only those who genuinely love banking will stick to it...