Response to consultation on Guidelines on sound remuneration policies

Go back

Q 5: All respondents are welcome to provide their comments on the chapter on proportionality, with particular reference to the change of the approach on ‘neutralisations’ that was required following the interpretation of the wording of the CRD. In particular institutions that used ‘neutralisations’ under the previous guidelines for the whole institution or identified staff receiving only a low amount of variable remuneration are asked to provide an estimate of the implementation costs in absolute and relative terms and to point to impediments resulting from their nature, including their legal form, if they were required to apply, for the variable remuneration of identified staff: a) deferral arrangements, b) the pay out in instruments and, c) malus (with respect to the deferred variable remuneration). In addition those institutions are welcome to explain the anticipated changes to the remuneration policy which will need to be made to comply with all requirements. Wherever possible the estimated impact and costs should be quantified, supported by a short explanation of the methodology applied for their estimation and provided separately for the three listed aspects.

See attached a separate memorandum inlcluding comments covering proportionality.

Q 6: Are the guidelines on the identification of staff appropriate and sufficiently clear?

See attached a separate memorandum inlcluding comments covering indentification of staff.

Q 17: Are the requirements regarding the retention policy appropriate and sufficiently clear?

See attached a separate memorandum inlcluding comments covering retention.

Upload files

Name of organisation

Municipality Finance Plc