金融业的薪水或将下降

It is a matter of fierce dispute why banker pay swelled. Financiers are apt to blame it on the increased importance and complexity of finance: in a world of technological change and globalisation, so the argument goes, you need bright, highly skilled bankers. Many economists such as Mr Philippon, however, reject that. He reckons at least half of the pay jump represents "rent seeking" (skimming off fees), not innovation. "The technological development of the past 40 years (with IT in particular) should have disproportionately increased efficiency," he observes, noting that in companies such as Walmart, "efficiency" has reduced wages.

人们就银行家薪酬大幅上升的原因展开了激烈的争论。金融家们倾向于将薪酬激增归因于金融业的重要性和复杂性提高了。他们论证道，一个以技术变革和全球化为特点的世界，需要聪明、技能高超的银行家。但许多经济学家，例如菲利蓬，却不认同这种观点。菲利蓬认为，至少有一半的薪酬上升反映的是“寻租”（即攫取费用），而不是创新。他说：“过去40年中的技术发展（尤其是IT领域的发展），应当已经在很大程度上提高了效率。”他指出，在沃尔玛(Walmart)等企业，“效率”压低了工资水平。 

The crucial question, though, is whether history might repeat itself and produce a big pay swing, as in the post-war years. Right now, it seems hard to imagine; after all, the experience of the past few decades has made it seem almost normal for bankers to be highly paid.

但关键问题是，历史会不会重演，会不会像战后的若干年那样再次出现大幅的薪酬波动。就目前而言，这一点似乎还难以想象；毕竟，过去几十年的经验说明，银行家拿高薪几乎是再正常不过的事情。

But as this year's bonus round comes to an end, there are some hints of change. The sector is shrinking: an estimated 60,000 jobs were cut last year. Staff are being paid in stock deferred over a longer time, and pay appears to be falling. Morgan Stanley, for example, has declared plans to cap the amount of bonus that its staff can receive immediately at $125,000; Goldman Sachs has announced that it is cutting 2011 compensation by 21 per cent; JPMorgan Chase has cut the total pay pool for its investment bankers by 36 per cent year on year. Indeed, the consensus among bank executives in Davos last week was that total compensation for mid — to senior — level employees in 2011 was about 30 per cent lower than 2010 – and perhaps 60 per cent below the 2007 peak. "There is a big change now," claims one Wall Street CEO.

不过，随着本年度发放奖金的周期接近尾声，我们已经看到了一些变化的迹象。银行业规模正在缩小，去年大约削减了6万个工作岗位。银行开始以锁定期更久的股票来支付员工薪酬，与此同时，薪酬似乎正在下降。例如，摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)已宣布计划将员工可立即拿到的奖金上限设为12.5万美元；高盛(Goldman Sachs)则宣布会将2011年度的薪酬削减21%；摩根大通(JPMorgan Chase)也把投行业务的总薪酬池同比削减了36%。事实上，银行业高管上周在达沃斯形成的共识是，2011年度中高级员工的薪酬比2010年大约降低了30%，与2007年的峰值相比可能降低了60%。一位华尔街机构的首席执行官称：“现在局面发生了巨大的变化。”

Now, this decline is still far too small to pacify critics. And it remains tough to calculate the precise squeeze, since banks pay their employees in different ways and — crucially — many financiers are leaving regulated banks for work in shadow banks, where pay is even more opaque.

就目前而言，这样的降幅还过于微小，不足以平息批评意见。而且，因为银行向员工支付薪酬的方式多种多样，更关键的是，许多金融家正在脱离受监管的银行业，转投薪酬更不透明的影子银行，所以，计算准确的薪酬降幅仍然十分困难。 

But, what is clear is that the squeeze almost certainly has further to go, as regulation bites, deleveraging takes hold and western economies ail. Sadly, it probably will not take the pay ratio to 1950s levels; technology now enables financiers to hop across borders and around rules, skimming fees in opaque ways. But — just as 70 years ago — a cycle has turned; albeit slowly. By 2017, bank pay could look very different from 2007; and modern capitalism will look all the better for it.

但显而易见的是，随着监管效果开始显现、去杠杆化持续进行、西方经济陷入困境，金融家薪酬缩水的幅度肯定还会加大。遗憾的是，金融业与其他行业的薪酬比率多半不会降至20世纪50年代的水平；如今，金融家们凭借技术手段可以跨越国界、规避法规，以不透明的方式收取费用。不过，正如70年前那样，一个新的周期已经到来——尽管运行得有些缓慢。到2017年，银行业薪酬可能会与2007年相去甚远，而现代资本主义的状况却会因此好很多。 

译者:王柯伦