Jump to content

BBC wont be ignored!


Scully
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If memory serves me right he's a freelancer and therefore not under employment contract to the BBC. His fee will be billed by his company and therefore will not appear on the list

Yep! and what's the betting they will now all arrange to be paid by the BBC through a separate " company" so their salaries too will not appear in future on the BBC employees salary public disclosure list!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep! and what's the betting they will now all arrange to be paid by the BBC through a separate " company" so their salaries too will not appear in future on the BBC employees salary public disclosure list!

Other than they're not allowed to...

 

The ones that aren't on the list are those whose programme is made for the BBC but by an independent production company which was always the agreement

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other than they're not allowed to...

 

The ones that aren't on the list are those whose programme is made for the BBC but by an independent production company which was always the agreement

I see! So the BBC's (public) money was paid to an independent production company who then paid the artist/presenter?..........so for example, although the likes of Graham Norton only received a paltry £850K to £899K directly from the BBC......he also receives an unknown amount of BBC (public) money via payment for his services by an independent production company.......who are paid by the BBC?

 

Sounds like the way forward to me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think and hope the BBC has commited corporate suicide by publishing the earnings of these untalented parasites. Dont forget they earn on top from other work.

I was off on ESA during cancer rehab and was expected to live on £74 a week. This country is just so divided.

Edited by Red-dot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst I am surprised how much some of these so called 'stars' earn I don't begrudge them it. If that is what they have been able to negotiate then good for them. Very few of us can justify what we get paid other than it's what somebody is prepared to pay you or if they don't somebody else will.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst I am surprised how much some of these so called 'stars' earn I don't begrudge them it. If that is what they have been able to negotiate then good for them. Very few of us can justify what we get paid other than it's what somebody is prepared to pay you or if they don't somebody else will.

While it's a nice earner for them being paid a year what most bladder kickers earn in a week, what IS a royal ****-take is when the same meeka-luvvies front various charity tv ads expecting the minimum wage masses to dig deep for whatever cause they've clocked as a good means of free publicity & a quick route to an OBE or Knighthood....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it's a nice earner for them being paid a year what most bladder kickers earn in a week, what IS a royal ****-take is when the same meeka-luvvies front various charity tv ads expecting the minimum wage masses to dig deep for whatever cause they've clocked as a good means of free publicity & a quick route to an OBE or Knighthood....

 

:yes: If I appear a tad smug, it's because I don't pay for a tv license. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst I am surprised how much some of these so called 'stars' earn I don't begrudge them it. If that is what they have been able to negotiate then good for them. Very few of us can justify what we get paid other than it's what somebody is prepared to pay you or if they don't somebody else will.

 

I agree! If any of us were offered £2.2 mil p/a for a legal job of work..........we ain't gonna turn it down........are we?

 

What I want to know is how do highly paid individuals (not just those in show business) get into that position in the first place? They ain't no different to or more intelligent than a many, many other people!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it's a nice earner for them being paid a year what most bladder kickers earn in a week, what IS a royal ****-take is when the same meeka-luvvies front various charity tv ads expecting the minimum wage masses to dig deep for whatever cause they've clocked as a good means of free publicity & a quick route to an OBE or Knighthood....

 

Yes I agree their smugness and champagne socialist views do grate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think and hope the BBC has commited corporate suicide by publishing the earnings of these untalented parasites. Dont forget they earn on top from other work.

I was off on ESA during cancer rehab and was expected to live on £74 a week. This country is just so divided.

As much as folk on here don't want to.hear it it's a symptom.of the party we have in power, the rich poor divide only heads one way as was shown by their predecessor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other than they're not allowed to...

 

The ones that aren't on the list are those whose programme is made for the BBC but by an independent production company which was always the agreement

 

Not actually correct.

 

Freelancers working for the BBC who have passed the BBC "status assessment test" are still able to bill for their services and be paid directly to their own company and therefore are not included in BBC employees pay figures because they are not contracted employees.

 

What the BBC actually did was to review its arrangement for paying employees via private service companies, which is a completely different thing to paying genuine freelancers who are engaged on a self employed basis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as folk on here don't want to.hear it it's a symptom.of the party we have in power, the rich poor divide only heads one way as was shown by their predecessor

 

Rubbish,. New figs out today (on the BBC, no les) show that the divide has actually narrowed. Labour does f all for the poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think and hope the BBC has commited corporate suicide by publishing the earnings of these untalented parasites. Dont forget they earn on top from other work.

I was off on ESA during cancer rehab and was expected to live on £74 a week. This country is just so divided.

 

"Untalented parasites". I can understand if you don't particularly like those on the list, but to call them untalented is to be wholly unreasonable, they are all talented within their respective fields. Also how are they parasites?

 

As to your second point, what is it that you are driving at? They should earn less because the ESA amount is small, or the ESA should be higher because some people earn a lot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see! So the BBC's (public) money was paid to an independent production company who then paid the artist/presenter?..........so for example, although the likes of Graham Norton only received a paltry £850K to £899K directly from the BBC......he also receives an unknown amount of BBC (public) money via payment for his services by an independent production company.......who are paid by the BBC?

Sounds like the way forward to me!

Further to this it seems Graham Norton owns the independent production company that makes his programs for the BBC! As indeed do many of the "stars" on the BBC's published rich list (and for that reason many that do not appear on the list at all!!)

 

It appears to be a way of hiding their true "earnings" paid for by the BBC (out of public money)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

....they are all talented within their respective fields.

Not much evidence of talent whenever Clamidia Winksatmen is on the idiot box.

You'd think that earning over £400K a year she could afford to get her fringe trimmed to somewhere above her eyeline & have her squint fixed: though she'd need to then work on a new USP - or just make sure her mother pulls the strings again to get her a few more easy jobs....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously you are doing OK? These people should try living on what the government say is the amount a human needs to live on. If the BBC folded tomorrow i wouldn't shed a tear.

How on earth can you assume from me asking you a question that I am doing OK?

 

Is your objection that some people earn a lot?

 

I would be hugely disappointed if the BBC folded, aside from the wages to a very small number of very well paid people the BBC employ 20,000+ people directly and there will be as many people again who indirectly rely on the BBC. The vast majority of that number will be on regular wages.

 

It would be desperately bad news for an organisation that size to fold, but then again maybe the cost is worth it for those who hate the Beeb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...