Are they worth it - BBC announces high earners

[Mallard60022]

Finding out what other people earn has always been 'difficult' for loads of folk in the UK; don't know why. Seems like some sort of historic thing that most people accept.

I find it diffcult,  when hearing about them, to accept huge 'incomes' and that's just me. I find it shocking to discover just how little many people actually earn and again that's just me. I believe that this sort of thing just causes divisiveness and activates the green eyed monster far more than the ".......they only earn how much?" rsponse.

Phil

 

These are organisations established and paid to serve the public and they do not have rights.

If we are to give public service bodies 'rights' then we really will be under the cosh of the unfettered state.

So, do you mean that Government don't have rights then? Interesting one that!

Phil

[beast66606]

Personally I am of the opinion that the BBC produce some good quality dramas and natural world programs (and other stuff no doubt but these are the ones I tend to watch) and I would prefer that CE was only paid £1m (for example, many would argue it should be a lot lower) and the £1m saved was put into producing more of the quality stuff. (others may have differing views on what "quality stuff" means but the principle is the same)

 

I don't believe the BBC simply report news without bias any more (probably never have but not as obvious as it is nowadays), there are plenty of axes being ground with the BBC as the grindstone - they should simply report the news as it is and make sure any opinions are balanced with points from both sides so we can decide, not be lead down their chosen path.

['CHARD]

That is a completely wrong way to look at  the "market". This is precisely the opposite of an open market.

 

Out there, there are literally hundreds (and probably thousands) of people who could present a radio show as competently as Chris Evans and Jeremy Vine and would like the job. If it was advertised, like normal jobs, at, say £50,000 per annum, are you really telling me that there would be no applicants?

 

(And as for Claudia Winkelmann earning that much............)

 

LOL!

 

Unsurprisingly, I totally disagree.  Media is self selecting.  Of course the broadcast companies don't recruit off the street - they would be getting completely unknown quantities.  A better comparison would be football, where scouts look out for the talented players in youth and Sunday leagues.

 

These people, like it or not, have got to their particular rung of the broadcast entertainment ladder through a form of career progression.  This isn't the steady, safe pair of hands progression that most of us in industry or the service sector would recognise.

 

What do you imagine Graham Norton was paid as a bit-part actor in Father Ted?  I have no idea, but I have mates who do similar things and they take home a couple of hundred for a day's acting, with no royalties for every time Dave re-broadcasts their fleeting appearance, and no guarantee of repeat hirings, no matter how good they are, because competition in creative media is extremely harsh.  

 

Claudia Winkelman, hitherto relatively unknown, was a bit-part contributor to the fairly obscure Mark Radcliffe music show from where she was spotted by management and her career built from there.

 

Jeremy Vine was a cub reporter, much like his namesake Clarkson in the freelance market.  Chris Evans, like or loathe him, is a maverick who had the courage or impetuousness to start his own production companies, and as I understand it has gone broke more than once in the process.

 

So I don't think it's entirely sound to base judgement on the more 'normal' mainstream work environment.  Personally, I would take a nought off all those salaries but that's because I think the gulf between the haves and have-nots is socially divisive and destructive, rather than because I harbour a personal dislike of celebrities.

[Nearholmer]

Mallard

 

I've occasionally thought that the best policy on publishing income figures would be to publish all of them, everybody's, the lot.

 

It would provoke a massive round of squabbling, hurt-feelings, self-importance etc initially, but, after a while, we would get used to it, and my guess is that it would lead to a subtle levelling effect, or at least a slight closing of the yawning gaps, over time.

 

It isn't going to happen, at least not in the foreseeable future, but it might be fun. And, after the fuss had died-down, we could find other things upon which to focus envy, inflation of self-perception, and all those other things us humans are so good at in the game of social hierarchy.

 

Kevin

 

PS: the Daily Mail appears to have devoted about ten solid pages to bashing the BBC today, now that it's been given another stick with which to do so. If things go well from their perspective, we can, presumably, all look forward to the day when they are the prime organ by which we are informed, educated, and entertained ........ which will, of course, make the country an even nicer, more harmonious, tolerant, broad-minded, fact-driven place in which to live.

Edited July 20, 2017 by Nearholmer

[Horsetan]

.....PS: the Daily Mail appears to have devoted about ten solid pages to bashing the BBC today....

 

I wonder how much Paul Dacre gets paid.....?

[jjb1970]

Why does what another person is paid matter? When you accept a job you have accepted the pay and conditions, if you don’t consider them to be good enough then you can ask for an increase, try and secure promotion or go and work somewhere else. If you’ve accepted an offer then by definition you’ve accepted the pay and conditions, it’s a bit inconsistent to then complain that they’re inadequate. If it is the best offer available then it reflects your market value and shouldn’t be sniffed at.

I’ve worked in organisations with published pay scales and bands so everybody knew exactly how much everybody else was paid and it didn’t stop the whinging. I used to get third engineers whinging because they weren’t as well paid as second and chief engineers, the stock response was that they could go and do their seconds and chiefs exams and get promoted if they wanted it. In recent years I’ve worked in organisations where everybody is on individual pay levels with no bands or standard tables and for sure there are whispers and whinging but again the answer is to ask for a rise, demonstrate you’re worth more, go elsewhere or accept that actually you’ve got a decent deal.

Where I find this debate gets interesting is with respect to globalisation. Very often the same individuals who are very vocal about those better paid than themselves become very defensive about their right to be paid more than somebody in China, Vietnam, India etc. The argument is always framed in terms of a race to the bottom in the developed world, when if there is a race then it is a race to the middle as millions of people in emerging economies have been lifted out of poverty and have joined the ranks of what we call the middle classes as a result of globalisation. They’re not in a race to the bottom, they’ve been in a race upwards. I’ve spent a lot of time in Asia and been asked the question – why should a European be paid more than us for doing the same job? And the answer in one sense is because that’s what the market has to pay in Europe and in another sense there is no good reason (especially when you consider skills and productivity in Asia which are often well in advance of the developed world now in engineering industries). Which indicates that the underlying concern is less about altruistic desires for an equitable distribution of wealth and more about a combination of resentment towards those with a better deal and defending the right to be better paid than those lower down the pecking order.

Resentment is bad for the soul.

[Horsetan]

.....Where I find this debate gets interesting is with respect to globalisation. Very often the same individuals who are very vocal about those better paid than themselves become very defensive about their right to be paid more than somebody in China, Vietnam, India etc. The argument is always framed in terms of a race to the bottom in the developed world, when if there is a race then it is a race to the middle as millions of people in emerging economies have been lifted out of poverty and have joined the ranks of what we call the middle classes as a result of globalisation. They’re not in a race to the bottom, they’ve been in a race upwards. I’ve spent a lot of time in Asia and been asked the question – why should a European be paid more than us for doing the same job? .....

 

Almost by accident, it indirectly becomes a sort of race about race.

[jjb1970]

Almost by accident, it indirectly becomes a sort of race about race.

I hear more xenophobic and racist remarks about Chinese people (which I find is as often as not a generic term for people from half of Asia, including many that'd object to being called Chinese) than probably all other groups combined, with the exception of Muslim's who are unfortunately subject to hateful and generalised remarks almost as a norm.

[Horsetan]

I hear more xenophobic and racist remarks about Chinese people (which I find is as often as not a generic term for people from half of Asia, including many that'd object to being called Chinese) than probably all other groups combined,....

 

Interesting, given that Chinese people can be just as racist and xenophobic about all others. You haven't met my parents, have you....?

[jjb1970]

Interesting, given that Chinese people can be just as racist and xenophobic about all others. You haven't met my parents, have you....?

Indeed, getting a Chinese person onto the subject of Japan can be...interesting. And the mutual prejudices displayed by Japanese and Korean's can be rather eye opening. Not to mention the institutionalised racism towards ethnic Chinese in much of SE Asia. However the fact that racism and xenophobia is prevalent in the rest of the world and amongst minority groups within our own country isn't a justification for us all to indulge in it. I happen to know from my own extended family just how prejudiced Chinese people can get.

[Horsetan]

....I happen to know from my own extended family just how prejudiced Chinese people can get.

 

My parents get more right-wing as they get older. Currently, I estimate that my mother is somewhere to the right of Hitler.

[Arthur]

 

 

So, do you mean that Government don't have rights then? Interesting one that!

Phil

I absolutely mean that.

 

Rights are abstract expectations conferred on individuals with the consent of the general society at any particular time.

 

Organisations have no rights.

 

In a democracy, Governments have authority, and nothing more, conferred on them by the electorate. That authority is not a right.

 

Like every individual and other organisation, they have the obligation to act within the law and then benefit from the protection of the law.

 

'Rights' is a term too loosely used.

 

.

[Nearholmer]

JJB

 

Why does it matter to people what other people are paid?

 

Because we are social animals, with a strong tendency to hierarchy, and each of us has an inbuilt desire to collar as many possible resources as we can for ourselves, in order to give our offspring a better chance, and hence further the propagation of our individual genes.

 

We want to:

 

- make sure we are getting as big a slice of cake as we can secure; and,

 

- make sure that nobody else is getting more, cos, if they are, there is a bit we aren't getting.

 

Of course, we have also evolved collaborative-living, society, whereby we pool our resources and efforts, notionally "for the common good", but probably because, at base, it serves each of our individual interests to do so.

 

So, we are both selfish, and communitarian, and we have a strong concept of "fairness", until it comes to our own slice of the cake, which we have no trouble at all justifying being bigger than anyone else's.

 

Put another (and shorter) way: it matters, because it is human nature to get worked-up about it.

 

A purely rationalist approach might start with the view that each "human unit" needs the same amount of food, shelter etc to sustain it, so everyone would get paid exactly the same. A bit of spice could be added by awarding a "bonus" to individuals for "above and beyond" efforts on behalf of the community, maybe things like studying for donkeys years to qualify as a GP, or staying-up all night in the dead of winter to grit the roads. But it ain't gonna happen, because we all want a bigger slice than the next chap.

 

(If you profess to be an anarcho-capitalist, I think I would profess to be a cynico-communist)

 

Arthur

 

Thomas Paine nailed the question in the C18th, I think, when he talked about people consenting to be governed, and the right of people to withdraw their consent. So, it's the people that have rights, no the government (or King or Queen).

 

K

Edited July 20, 2017 by Nearholmer

[jjb1970]

My parents get more right-wing as they get older. Currently, I estimate that my mother is somewhere to the right of Hitler.

By way of example, I was listening to Alexi Sayle’s imaginary sandwich bar (btw – fantastic show, well worth listening to) and he did a gag in a stupid Chinese accent where the only joke was “let’s laugh at the Chinese”. Now I don’t think Alexi Sayle is a racist, but the gag displayed the sort of casual racism that was once a common part of our society and which was shown towards all sorts of groups but which is now unacceptable. I suspect that if another comedian did the same basic gag but in a stupid Indian or African accent then Alexi Sayle would not find it especially amusing but he clearly felt comfortable with his own gag. For some reason it still seems OK to display these attitudes towards the Chinese. The word “” is still heard in a way which the equally objectionable “packy” isn’t for example. And it seems to be an embedded part of European culture to dismiss Chinese made goods as shoddily made knock offs regardless of whether there is any evidence to support it. To be clear, a lot of junk is made in China but Chinese industry also has some world class companies working to quality standards and innovating as good as anything you’ll find in the developed world.

[jjb1970]

JJB

 

Why does it matter to people what other people are paid?

 

Because we are social animals, with a strong tendency to hierarchy, and each of us has an inbuilt desire to collar as many possible resources as we can for ourselves, in order to give our offspring a better chance, and hence further the propagation of our individual genes.

 

JJB

 

We want to:

 

- make sure we are getting as big a slice of cake as we can secure; and,

 

- make sure that nobody else is getting more, cos, if they are, there is a bit we aren't getting.

 

Of course, we have also evolved collaborative-living, society, whereby we pool our resources and efforts, notionally "for the common good", but probably because, at base, it serves each of our individual interests to do so.

 

So, we are both selfish, and communitarian, and we have a strong concept of "fairness", until it comes to our own slice of the cake, which we have no trouble at all justifying being bigger than anyone else's.

 

Put another (and shorter) way: it matters, because it is human nature to get worked-up about it.

 

A purely rationalist approach might start with the view that each "human unit" needs the same amount of food, shelter etc to sustain it, so everyone would get paid exactly the same. A bit of spice could be added by awarding a "bonus" to individuals for "above and beyond" efforts on behalf of the community, maybe things like studying for donkeys years to qualify as a GP, or staying-up all night in the dead of winter to grit the roads. But it ain't gonna happen, because we all want a bigger slice than the next chap.

 

(If you profess to be an anarcho-capitalist, I think I would profess to be a cynico-communist)

 

K

Very well put. When people admit that it is based in self interest I can respect it. However usually these arguments are clothed in rhetoric about equality.

[Joseph_Pestell]

LOL!

 

Unsurprisingly, I totally disagree.  Media is self selecting.  Of course the broadcast companies don't recruit off the street - they would be getting completely unknown quantities.  A better comparison would be football, where scouts look out for the talented players in youth and Sunday leagues.

 

These people, like it or not, have got to their particular rung of the broadcast entertainment ladder through a form of career progression.  This isn't the steady, safe pair of hands progression that most of us in industry or the service sector would recognise.

 

What do you imagine Graham Norton was paid as a bit-part actor in Father Ted?  I have no idea, but I have mates who do similar things and they take home a couple of hundred for a day's acting, with no royalties for every time Dave re-broadcasts their fleeting appearance, and no guarantee of repeat hirings, no matter how good they are, because competition in creative media is extremely harsh.  

 

Claudia Winkelman, hitherto relatively unknown, was a bit-part contributor to the fairly obscure Mark Radcliffe music show from where she was spotted by management and her career built from there.

 

Jeremy Vine was a cub reporter, much like his namesake Clarkson in the freelance market.  Chris Evans, like or loathe him, is a maverick who had the courage or impetuousness to start his own production companies, and as I understand it has gone broke more than once in the process.

 

So I don't think it's entirely sound to base judgement on the more 'normal' mainstream work environment.  Personally, I would take a nought off all those salaries but that's because I think the gulf between the haves and have-nots is socially divisive and destructive, rather than because I harbour a personal dislike of celebrities.

"Media is self-selecting". Exactly. Not the open market that someone was claiming.

 

I don't have any personal dislike of the celebrities themselves. One high on the BBC list is an acquaintance with whom I have exchanged political banter. I will admit to not much liking the "celebrity culture" which is fuelling these wages/fees far more than any intrinsic talent.

 

Do Radio 2 listeners all switch to other channels when Evans or Vine are on holiday? I very much doubt it.

 

Would anyone choose not to watch MotD because some unknown presented it rather than the affable Gary Lineker? Can't see it unless said presenter knew nothing about football. Not that that seems to stop some of the pundits.

 

BTW - Claudia Winkelmann was hardly some bit-part unknown. I can only see her position as classic BBC nepotism. Why would she be worth more than Tess Daly?

Edited July 20, 2017 by Joseph_Pestell

[Fat Controller]

I wonder how much Paul Dacre gets paid.....?

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jan/07/daily-mail-editor-paul-dacre-pay

[Horsetan]

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jan/07/daily-mail-editor-paul-dacre-pay

 

Mmm, that was three years ago. Wonder what it is now?

[Fat Controller]

Mmm, that was three years ago. Wonder what it is now?

I'd wager he's had more than a 1% annual increase.

[chris p bacon]

I'd wager he's had more than a 1% annual increase.

 

It's dropped to 1.5M

[Joseph_Pestell]

As much as I think very little of the Daily Mail, it's a private business paid for by those who choose to buy the paper (my mother-in-law!) and advertise in it. As such, it is not really any of our business to comment on Dacre's remuneration (or that of my neighbour Lord Rothermere).

 

The difference with the BBC is that a lot of us are forced to pay for the TV licence that funds it whether or not we use the BBC. So there is legitimate public interest in the earnings of BBC performers and management.

 

And paying the TV licence is not the least of it. Try living without a TV and experience the disgraceful harassment in the form of letters that you get for not having a licence. Having been there, I do find myself being very anti the TV licence fee as much as I agree that John Whittingdale MP raised all this for political reasons.

[PaulCheffus]

I am a licence fee payer, I don't personally like Chris Evans and never listen to or watch his programmes, yet I am not the slightest bit concerned by how much he (and his fellow high earners take home); My own contribution to his pay is a tiny fraction of the annual fee, and is far outweighed by the benefit I get from the BBC. My only complaint is that I should have had a licence fee rebate for the last two weeks when both BBC1 and BBC2 were wall-to-wall tennis, which I can't stand !

Hi

 

Or when they replace regular programs with football. Not everyone cares about twenty two grown men kicking a bag of wind about.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

[Mark Saunders]

Hi

 

Or when they replace regular programs with football. Not everyone cares about twenty two grown men kicking a bag of wind about.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

Please don't start that as my Dad will get back on his soapbox about professional footballers and the maximum wage!

 

Again only a limited career expectancy.

 

Mark Saunder

[runs as required]

Until the mid 1970s I worked in the public sector where everyone was aware of their relative grades and therefore incomes.

 

My first proper job was with British Rail. I was embarrassed to find I was appointed to a grade that was eligible for First Class Free tickets including  Continental travel compared to my step-father in law who had worked on the railway at Peak Forest right through the war years until his retirement.

My Group Leader quickly put me in the picture about how to rate officers in other departments by quickly counting the BR square chequered motifs on their office carpets.  

 

Subsequent appointments were with British local authorities and within various overseas government offices where likewise relative grades were common knowledge.

 

When I eventually transferred into private consultancy (‘in house’ professionals had by now become an endangered species) I received a roasting from the senior partners for naively divulging  my salary details to colleagues in the various offices.

 

It still seems to me bizarre that this most elemental of realities is shrouded in ‘commercial confidentiality’ – especially when professional consultancy fees have rocketed up as a percentage of project costs.

 

dh

 

PS

Private Eye is a good place to check on comparative Media behavior (e.g. Paul Dacre's "double c*****gs" regularly meeted out out to his 'family newspaper' hacks).

[Joseph_Pestell]

Please don't start that as my Dad will get back on his soapbox about professional footballers and the maximum wage!

 

Again only a limited career expectancy.

 

Mark Saunder

Danger of going OT. But some of them are paid so much that even if their career only lasted one season, they would earn a lot more than most of us do in a lifetime.