The BBC News site and its wondrous use of English

[melmerby]

20 minutes ago, Torper said:

 

In my view it would have made much more sense and still have achieved parity and a very good income had they reduced the mens' pay rather than increasing the womens'.

 

DT

I agree with you but unfortunately the BBC has competitors willing to pay more to get the "talent" and know exactly what they have to beat.

It's a pity ITV and others don't have to post the salaries they pay (it's confidential business matters)

 

All too often somebody is "made" by the BBC (news, drama, factual, whatever) and as soon as that happens they are poached to the land of even deeper pockets (ITV, Sky etc.)

Some are loyal and give the Beeb many years before going for a big pay hike. Many don't and are off as soon as the cheque book opens, or the BBC stumps up license payer's cash to keep them and are instantly condemmed.

To be honest they can't win. Lose the stars and get roasted for being full of second rate nobodies or pay up and get roasted for big bucks salaries.

The same happens with programmes, they have lost several series recently after they started with them and built up an audience because others can't be bothered and just want to buy ready made successes.

 

Simon Mayo: you may not like him but he built a large following on the BBC radio shows was paid a reasonably high salary for it, but left the Beeb, when his salary was revealed and went to Scala where no doubt his audience is miniscule in comparison but his salary isn't public knowledge.

 

I'm not saying I agree with the BBC's salary policy or their many mismanaged situations, but to a certain extent they are pushed into it by politics both in Parliament and at the Beeb itself.

 

Edited January 29, 2020 by melmerby

[Classsix T]

Chris Evans much the same. "Sacked" from Radio One he then made himself and Virgin a fortune. Returned to Broadcasting House (at much cost) inheriting Wogan's audience and proceeded to do the same old bulb horn guff he'd done in the 90’s. Once his salary was revealed, shock horror, announced he's leaving having done everything he said he wanted to do and a month later signs for Virgin.

 

We're now stuck with a "broadcaster" who sounds like an overexcited Primary School teacher that, when she could be arsed having been on the lash with Fatboy Slim, replaced Chris Evans on the Radio One breakfast show.

 

C6T. 

[JeremyC]

There seems to be a belief in this country that if your job is funded by the tax payer you should work for lower wages than you would get for the same job in outside industry.

Edited January 29, 2020 by JeremyC

[melmerby]

34 minutes ago, JeremyC said:

There seems to be a belief in this country that if your job is funded by the tax payer you should work for lower wages than you would get for the same job in outside industry.

And reflected in policy decisions from Westminster

 

[Bernard Lamb]

1 hour ago, JeremyC said:

There seems to be a belief in this country that if your job is funded by the tax payer you should work for lower wages than you would get for the same job in outside industry.

I think that is a totally unacceptable idea these days. It was a reasonable concept when you had a job for life in the public sector and a good pension scheme. You made a decision at a young age of what you wanted out of life. I took a job in a start up company that was very well paid to attract top class people, but if the company failed you were left with nothing. As the company became established the relative salary level dropped. There were some public sector jobs such as physiotherapy, that at one time were the province of part time middle class women, but fortunately that has now changed. 

 

Today the headline on the London news was about VE day 75th anniversary celebrations to mark the end of the second world war. They did get it right in the body of the report. With dad still in a Japanese POW camp at the time the original celebrations did not go down too well with my mum.

Bernard 

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

2 hours ago, JeremyC said:

There seems to be a belief in this country that if your job is funded by the tax payer you should work for lower wages than you would get for the same job in outside industry.

If 'the electors', who are all pretty much the same set as 'the taxpayers' make that decision, that's our legitimate decision to make. Choose that career, that's the deal.

 

Then again I do have a data point. A relative left a career in private business for a lot more money in the public sector, for what he estimated as a quarter the workload...

[Jonboy]

4 hours ago, melmerby said:

I agree with you but unfortunately the BBC has competitors willing to pay more to get the "talent" and know exactly what they have to beat.

It's a pity ITV and others don't have to post the salaries they pay (it's confidential business matters)

 

 

This is the real laugh, Ant and Dec alone reportedly take home more than the entire beeb list of “talent” that are on over £150k.

Edited January 29, 2020 by Jonboy

[Stephen Rainsbury]

4 hours ago, melmerby said:

Simon Mayo: you may not like him but he built a large following on the BBC radio shows was paid a reasonably high salary for it, but left the Beeb, when his salary was revealed and went to Scala where no doubt his audience is miniscule in comparison but his salary isn't public knowledge.

He and Jo Whiley were sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. 

I used to look forward to listening to him on teh way home from work, but when he was forced to take Joe Whiley(?) on board the programme seemed to scripted and forced so I stopped listening and just play music from my phone. Having said that I stopped listening to Chris Evans almost immediately. I really didn't care what his kids said the previous night or what his wife was doing, and I especially didn't like the way he spoke down to his assistants.

There was an item about something and his sidekick gave him some stats which I seem to remember sounded about right. Evans comment was "Do we really know that? We want t find out, so if you know send us the details.." how must the bloke sitting there who had just told him have felt? That and his pathetic jingles every morning at the same time. I really don't like him and laughed my self silly when he failed dismally on Top gear. 

[Stephen Rainsbury]

5 hours ago, Torper said:

In my view it would have made much more sense and still have achieved parity and a very good income had they reduced the mens' pay rather than increasing the womens'.

I thought that recent studies showed that if yo compared career experience there wasn't that much of a gap. 

It comes back to the old argument, if a man and woman start at the same job, at the same age, at the same time, but she takes a year off for maternity, should she expect to come back on eh same salary as her male equivalent or what she left on? 

How does performance related pay increments come into this?

If the bloke got a promotion during that time, because he was there, should she be able to apply for the same job and expect it to be kept open until the end of her maternity period?