Nationwide Building Society’s Bonus Scheme: A Critical Examination
Nationwide Building Society, the UK’s largest building society, has recently announced a second consecutive year of its “Fairer Share” payment. This initiative will see £100 land in the current accounts of approximately 3.85 million members between June 13 and 28. While this payout might seem like a generous gesture, it reveals significant issues of fairness and inclusivity within Nationwide’s membership structure.
The Unfair Distribution of Bonuses
Out of Nationwide’s 12.6 million members, only 3.85 million—just over 30%—will receive the £100 bonus. This leaves a staggering 73% of members without any share in this supposed “fairer” distribution of profits. This disparity raises questions about the criteria used to determine eligibility and whether the payout truly reflects a fair distribution of the society’s financial success.
To qualify for the bonus, members need to have had a current account open as of March 31 and at least £100 in a savings account or an outstanding mortgage. Further complicating matters, additional conditions apply based on the type of current account, its opening date, and the number of transactions conducted. These complex and stringent criteria inevitably exclude a significant portion of Nationwide’s membership, many of whom are loyal long-term customers.
Implications for Savers
The exclusionary nature of the bonus scheme is particularly concerning for Nationwide’s savers. Many savers, who contribute to the society’s stability through their deposits, receive no benefit from the Fairer Share payment. Instead, they face the prospect of lower interest rates on their savings accounts, which are arguably funding these payouts. This can be seen as an indirect penalty for those who maintain savings without meeting the arbitrary criteria for the bonus.
This situation appears to undermine the very ethos of a building society, which traditionally operates for the mutual benefit of all its members. By creating a divide between those who receive the bonus and those who do not, Nationwide risks alienating a substantial portion of its customer base.
Strategic Implications
One cannot ignore the strategic implications behind Nationwide’s bonus distribution. By setting eligibility requirements that many savers cannot meet, the society might be subtly encouraging these members to reconsider their financial arrangements. This could be interpreted as a strategy to streamline its customer base, favoring more active account holders and potentially reducing the number of low-yield savings accounts.
For a building society that prides itself on member-centric values, this approach could be seen as counterproductive. Rather than fostering loyalty and inclusivity, Nationwide’s current strategy may inadvertently drive members away, particularly those who feel undervalued and unfairly treated.
Support Book spoke with one former member who shared their frustration: “I moved away from Nationwide last year when, despite having over £35K in my current account, I didn’t qualify for the bonus because I didn’t have any other products. It was the best decision I’ve made. Anyone staying with Nationwide just to get £100, despite the poor service and low interest rates, is making a mistake. The only reason they’re offering this so-called bonus is because they can afford it after giving customers dismal returns for another year. It’s just a gimmick.”
Nationwide Building Society’s Fairer Share bonus scheme, while ostensibly a reward for its members, highlights significant issues of fairness and inclusivity. With 73% of its members excluded from the payout and facing lower interest rates on their savings, the scheme seems neither fair nor equitable. As Nationwide moves forward, it must reconsider how to genuinely share its success across its entire membership, rather than rewarding a select few. Only then can it truly live up to its mutual values and strengthen its relationship with all members.
About the Author
