Compensation Watch '16: Worst Paid UK Hedge Fund Employees...Are Still Doing Pretty Well

They're not living pay check to paycheck yet.
Author:
Updated:
Original:
By kloniwotski (Flickr) [CC BY-SA 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons

Photo: kloniwotski, via Wikimedia Commons

To be fair, when you compare the average salary to numbers like $1.7 billion, $1.4 billion, and $1.115 billion, it does feel a bit stingy, but we have faith the hedge fund worker-bees across the pond will survive.

The most lowly worker in Britain's hedge fund sector can still earn over £90,000 ($129,729) a year, according to new data released by salary benchmarking site Emolument. That's over three times the average UK salary. Emolument compiled data from more than 2,200 people in the fund management industry and found that people working as entry-level associates at a British hedge funds earn on average £94,750 per year.

The worst paid hedge fund workers in Britain still earn over £90,000 a year [BI]

Related

News

Vikram Pandit Is Committed To Getting Paid

If you didn't know Chief Executive Officer Vikram Pandit, you might think he enjoyed not being compensated for the work he does at Citigroup because for quite some time, he wasn't. And although the "I will only get paid $1/year until Citi turns a profit" exercise was fun for a while, he was pretty happy when the old jalopy started making money again, in part because it meant he could receive a paycheck. Then last April, his shareholders rejected the bank's executive pay plan, claiming the Big C "lets Chief Executive Officer Vikram Pandit collect millions of dollars in rewards too easily." And while it's possible that Citi shareholders are just a bunch of pricks who chose to overlook the fact that Uncle Vikula didn't collect squat for several years and once had an entire article written about the fact that lieutenants attributed a "new bounce in his step" to him daydreaming "the day when he is going to earn more than a $1 a year,” maybe they just assume that he doesn't care about getting paid either way? Anyway, here's Vickles, reminding anyone who forgot about the sacrifices he made and setting the record straight: “The board has this process with them, they’re going through it, and they are committed, as I am, to making sure that they resolve this,” Pandit said. “I want to get paid what the board thinks is right for me, for the job that I’ve done and for the incentives that they think I ought to have.” Pandit told lawmakers in 2009 that he would take a $1 annual salary until he restored the bank to profitability. Citigroup made a $21.7 billion profit for 2011 and 2010 combined, compared with a $29.3 billion loss for the two preceding years. “When the company was losing money, I stepped up and said I’ll take a dollar a year and I did, exactly for that reason, exactly the right thing to do,” Pandit said. For those having trouble separating the nice guy/don't want to offend anyone statement from what he's actually trying to say, a rough translation of the above would be: get me paid, bitch! Citigroup Will Resolve CEO Pay By End Of Year, Pandit Says [Bloomberg]