Zeroed at UBS

30 January 2009

2 minute read

Contrary to hope/expectation, it now appears that UBS has done the deed and paid zero bonuses to a lot of people in its investment bank.

CNBC reports that US managing directors and senior vice presidents at UBS were told yesterday they will be paid absolutely nothing at all as a bonus this year, followed by 100% stock bonuses in 2010, a third of which will vest next year, another third of which will vest in 2011, and the final third of which will vest in 2012.

Even worse, the new bonus arrangement includes a claw back provision so that if UBS incurs a

loss at any time over the three year vesting period, the bonus won't be paid at all.

Headhunters in London confirm that, 'everyone' at director level and above in the investment bank is been paid little or nothing at all this year. "It seems to apply across the business - even in equities, where UBS has done quite well," says one.

UBS did not immediately return a call asking for comment.

Earlier this week, The Times reported that UBS had a 1.3bn bonus pot, down from 6bn last year.

It now appears that the depleted bonus pool is being channeled to the private banking business, which is a strategic priority - unlike the investment bank.

AUTHOReFinancialCareers UK

Insider Comment

Do
Don
6 February 2009
christian,
this prejudice has been going on for centuries. It's how the aristocracy came into being. It's not going to end either......
Reply
ch
christianald
3 February 2009
You can't assume that because someone went to a state school, they are simply foul-mouthed jobs! Just like you can't expect every privately-educated child to be called Tarquin or superbly intelligent. Obviously, by going to a private school, you're going to find it easier to network with people who work in top firms - but it doesn't mean that state-educated children can't be successful. The prejudice on here is unreal, but more importantly doesn't bear up to the facts.
Reply
Go
Govan Branch
2 February 2009
The point is all these winging poms complaining that they do not have enough to live on. Govan is where Gordon Brown's late father was a Minister with the Church of Scotland.
Reply
La
Lancy
2 February 2009
George - you make some interesting, and valid, points. However, like many of the posts on here it is one-sided. Lowly "comp" kids, tend to know more about football. This is a key area of common ground for men. I am not joking, this is a serious point. In fact, privately educated candidates that i have come across TEND to have less of an interest in sport IN GENERAL (obvious exceptions), and typically don't have as broader spectrum in this respect. I am an MD at a Euro IB, on the sales side, and the ability to be able to discuss and enjoy sport, soccer in particular, is key. I totally agree that a private education gives a clear advantage in finding common ground with clients in, among others, the disciplines you mention above. It's all about balance; i have some clients who would indeed regard the approach of some of my staff as uncouth, whilst i have others, equally valuable, who would laugh people out of the room if they didn't have knowledge of the previous weekends' football / cricket / rugby / golf etc without good reason!
Reply
fr
fraser
2 February 2009
george - you have brought clearly into the light what all the other pro- private school posters here have been alluding to but never could say. This shows us starkly the society we live in, where connections and background triumph over ability, ambition and drive. No wonder so many FTSE100 companies perform so badly. The bigger question though is why FTSE 100 companies or the buy-side would want to employ these private school graduates. Do they like their CEOs to go hunting, shooting and wine tasting?
Reply