Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
TIGHTCHOKE

How do the BBC Justify these salaries?

Recommended Posts

Unbelievable as not one of them are worth it over paid and over rated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£1.75 million ! For presenting a football highlights programme ?

And a good few around and above the quarter of a mil mark........for having the depth of talent need to read the news, or play a record ?

And we thought the NI police chief was overpaid !!!!!!!!

 

(Is there an emoji for "puts head in hands, sighs deeply" ?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Total disgrace, fully agree with everyone so far, no presenter is worth a million or even close to it for that matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These BBC employee salaries are an insult to ordinary people........ordinary people who pay these BBC employees salaries, out of a licence fee, they have little choice but to pay! And have no say on how much!............Now the BBC want to start imposing the licence fee charge, for which there was formally no charge, on the over 75's 

Despicable!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should be free licensing and be a commercial entity like others then they can pay what makes sense to them... typical grubby lefty public sector mentality hands in the cookie jar!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While we have the "Establishment" it does absolutely no good to moan.

We either need a government with some real bottle, or,

We storm our "Bastille" - the Tower Of London - remove a few heads and adopt a Tolpuddle mentality of sheer cussedness for at least a couple of hundreds of years.

Then we're in with a chance but as either of the above is totally out out the question, then it's simply a case of 'anyone for more tennis?'

PS Just to add that I hit 75 on May11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was listening to this earlier, seems gary lineker is the highest earner, man from bbc justified his wage saying that, it was the going rate [lineker also works for others] a minister said that he wont rest until half the highest earners are women. left me wondering why do we need the linekers of this world talking about football, when theres millions of experts out there, secondly a nice bit of discrimination re women [what happened to best person for the job] on the positive side women that do the same job as their male counterpart are getting similar money.. Im surprised there arnt loads of women in industry transitioning to men just to get the same wage.😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, oowee said:

Worth every penny. Pay peanuts get monkeys. 

Don't be silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Scandalous.

Many of them havn't any particular talent.

Related to or know the right people I shouldn't wonder in some cases to get a BBC job.

It would be a hard sell to a OAP about to lose their free license.

Edited by redial
Error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, oowee said:

Worth every penny. Pay peanuts get monkeys. 

hello, as John McEnroe once said while playing tennis, YOU CANT BE SERIOUS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a market economy, they get what they can, as would you in their position.

Like it or not the commercial TV/Radio stations pay MORE, Chris Evans got a substantial pay rise when he left and joined Virgin!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dekers said:

It is a market economy, they get what they can, as would you in their position.

Like it or not the commercial TV/Radio stations pay MORE, Chris Evans got a substantial pay rise when he left and joined Virgin! 

It demonstrably isn't.

The BBC, with its guaranteed income, distorts any pretence at market rates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, udderlyoffroad said:

It demonstrably isn't.

The BBC, with its guaranteed income, distorts any pretence at market rates.

I was talking about the EMPLOYEES!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dekers said:

I was talking about the EMPLOYEES!

Not quite sure I understand your point?

In any case the 'talent' is self-employed, as recent court cases of said talent v HMRC has confirmed.

Doesn't alter the fact that an enterprise that is funded by a regressive tax, with no requirement to turn a profit, let alone be held accountable in the same way a PLC would be, has a massive distorting effect on the 'market rate'.

Further, the great unwashed do not care a fig for the precise contractual relationship between the Crisp-Selling-Twitter-sage and the BBC, all they see is the headline rate, and wonder why the BBC is busily engaged in breaking the record for writing the longest suicide note in history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, udderlyoffroad said:

Not quite sure I understand your point?

In any case the 'talent' is self-employed, as recent court cases of said talent v HMRC has confirmed.  Only some at the BBC are self-employed, and that was a one off specific case and was not the BBC if I recall correctly.   There are some people at the BBC who are NOT on the list, for SIMILAR reasons, their salaries are not shown.

Doesn't alter the fact that an enterprise that is funded by a regressive tax, with no requirement to turn a profit, let alone be held accountable in the same way a PLC would be, has a massive distorting effect on the 'market rate'.  YES, they pay less than the Commercial TV/Radio stations so keep ALL payment a bit lower.

Further, the great unwashed do not care a fig for the precise contractual relationship between the Crisp-Selling-Twitter-sage and the BBC, all they see is the headline rate, and wonder why the BBC is busily engaged in breaking the record for writing the longest suicide note in history.   The Great unwashed should be happy the BBC pay less than the Commercial stations, but they have no obligation to publish salaries!

It is a market economy for the EMPLOYEES, they get what they can, as would you in their position.

Like it or not the commercial TV/Radio stations pay MORE, Chris Evans got a substantial pay rise when he left and joined Virgin! 

Let me also add the BBC have been doing a very good job of ******* me off over the last few years with their biased coverage of many things and seemingly high handed attitude, but the salaries they pay are LOW in the market!  If you don't like the BBC then by all means don't watch it or campaign against it, but any suggestion they overpay is naïve!

Does that make my point clearer?

Edited by Dekers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Worth every penny. Pay peanuts get monkeys. 

The problem is that we did not pay peanuts, but still got the monkeys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the presenters are excellent. The salaries are hardly earth shattering and pay any less and the bbc becomes even more a training camp for commercial stations that it is now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, oowee said:

Some of the presenters are excellent. The salaries are hardly earth shattering and pay any less and the bbc becomes even more a training camp for commercial stations that it is now. 

:good:

I am no fan of the BBC but if people want to have a go find something other than salaries, in the market place they are not high.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Dekers said:

:good:

I am no fan of the BBC but if people want to have a go find something other than salaries, in the market place they are not high.

 

I think what irks most is that the salaries are actually very high, certainly compared to the salaries of everyone who are forced to buy a license.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, stuartyboy said:

I think what irks most is that the salaries are actually very high, certainly compared to the salaries of everyone who are forced to buy a license.

I get what you are saying but within the media and compared to commercial stations they are low.

The licence fee ****** me off as well, I see no real reason why it should not be funded out of central taxes if the Government deems it so important we should keep the BBC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, oowee said:

Worth every penny. Pay peanuts get monkeys. 

You already got the monkeys, and pay through the nose for it. Worked there on contract twice (a lot of Beeb output is actually produced by small, private production firms that get bent over), the profligate waste was eye watering. Honestly, it's had it's day. Sky produce better content, with fewer people, for less, as do many, many others. Other than a channel without adverts you wouldn't miss it.

 

Edited by mick miller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mick miller said:

You already got the monkeys, and pay through the nose for it. Worked there on contract twice (a lot of Beeb output is actually produced by small, private production firms that get bent over), the profligate waste was eye watering. Honestly, it's had it's day. Sky produce better content, with fewer people, for less.

 

When I worked for Channel 4, the BBC was the Valhalla that many wanted to attain. 

Share this post


Link to post
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.

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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...