FSU calls for closer look at “rotten core” of banking industry
The Financial Services Union (FSU) has called on the Royal Commission to look more closely at NAB’s remuneration structures, in light of evidence from the back which it says “unveiled some of the worst excesses by any Australian bank which has severely disadvantaged customers”.
The FSU said it and its members had “watched with alarm” as the NAB’s wealth division’s fee structures came under fire.
“The evidence clearly shows that NAB bent over backwards to find a way to maintain fees,” FSU national secretary, Julia Angrisano, said.
“Charging fees for no service is bad enough but when a bank starts charging dead people for financial advice, it represents a new low.”
Angrisano also criticised the Commission, saying that it had “so far failed to examine in meaningful detail the impact of remuneration of senior executives on behaviours and we would like to see a detailed look at this issue before this Commission is over”.
“There is no doubt that there are deep and systemic cultural problems within the financial institutions, most recently at NAB Wealth,” she said. “There is also an urgent need to look closely at governance and cultural practices which are at the heart of the rotten core of Australian banking.”
AUTHOR
Hannah Wootton
Recommended for you
As the industry navigates the fallout from recent product failures, two major AFSLs have detailed their APL selection process and relationship with research houses, warning a selection error could “destroy” a licensee.
The impending retirement of financial advisers in their 50s could see the profession face significant succession challenges over the coming decade and younger advisers may not be the answer.
With a third of AFSLs being solo advisers, how can they navigate key person risk and ensure they are still attractive propositions for buyers when it comes to their succession planning?
A quarter of advisers who commenced on the FAR within the last two years have already switched licensees or practices, adding validity to practice owners’ professional year (PY) concerns.
