BBC transparency

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2017/jul/23/nicola-jennings-on-the-presenter-pay-gap-cartoon

Is she right?

Isn't it funny how discrimination has been tolerated throughout history and yet any proposasl to address the issue in a practical way is deemed to be absolutely unfair and described as "reverse discrimination". It's a shame the same feeling of unfairness did not seem to be of concern to the general public when research evidenced the widespread discrimination that affects black people in the labour market and in general.

I don't go with this gender pay gap thing at the BBC and would not like to see female salaries being raised in order to close this so called gap.

We are not talking about a female pen pusher /cleaner whatever being paid £8 per hour and a male being paid £10 for doing the same job! We are talking about over inflated egos, big mouths, giant personalities and (so called) talent with a few pretty faces or good looks thrown in for good measure thinking they are worth so much more. I could laugh my head off at these women beating on about how hard done by they are..... I mean bless them how do they survive?

No imo the way forward is to bring down the salaries of those at the top to meet those "nearer the bottom" (which is still a huge salary) and if they leave well they bloody well leave.

Equalising upwards is better than discriminating downwards. Kicking the dog because the cat has had some kicks doesn't help heal the cat's bruises, and advocating pay cuts is unrealistic. Getting rid of the general imbalance of some enormous egos commanding astronomic salaries is a separate issue to restructuring the opportunities for achieving personal advancement.

The Beeb needs to do some thinking on their policies.

First, the differential between the highest paid presenters and the rest. Some prima donnas seem able to get a raise by holding them to ransom by threatening to go elsewhere. If they called a few bluffs and let them go, there might not be as many ridiculous pay packets. They could promote others into more prominent positions to fill any gaps, and keep future contracts to a reasonable level. General excellence is better than depending on the top egos.

Non-whites comprise 10.5 of the population in 2015. If there is not roughly this proportion at each level, then they need to think about why. Is it lack of talent? Hardly. Are they not attracting the applicants? If not, why not? Are they attracting applicants with talent but not employing them? If not why not? Are they employing them but not promoting them? If not why not? Do they need to improve their internal training courses?

Then they could publish another table which shows more detail. It should show the salary scales for different grades, and who is in each. That is missing from what we have just seen. Most of them are just names and faces, of people who are seen or heard presenting programmes, reading the news etc etc. We don't know their official job title and description, so it is not clear which of them are in equivalent positions and which are lower down the ranking (that is ranking of job hierarchy. While pay is important, hierarchy is too, and that influences pay.) The proportions of male/female, white/non-white can then be compared to their proportions in the general population.

About that 10.5%, bear in mind that not all other variations in people get equal treatment either. Gender and colour are visible, many other variations are not. For one thing, about 10% of the population is left-handed, but everything is biased toward right-handers.

Crossed posts, Gilly but saying almost the same thing.

Well said Gilly and Elegran and I would like to add, as a left handed I have faced discrimination all my life ?

I am happy to report that as DH is over 75 we do not require a TV licence. Even happier to record that, thanks to a Gransnet trial when we had FreeSat installed and were allowed to keep it for free after the trial, we pay 0, zero, zilch for our TV service.

As my income has recently dropped, I no longer pay any Income Tax either. I suppose I should be upset that I am 'poorer' but find I am inordinately pleased that I no longer have to contribute to the biased BBC, Trident, High speed rail, the DUP, etc. but am still free to donate (albeit small amounts) to the charities and causes which I do support.

You are not saying the same thing at all.
Gillybob says bring down top salaries; Elegran says it's wrong to do that.
"Equalising upwards is better than discriminating downwards" is the exact opposite of "the way forward is to bring down the salaries of those at the top to meet those nearer the bottom...."

Strange that someone can agree with both as well.

granny you are now rather perversely in the same position as those tax dodgers!!

gillybob How can you describe people like Emily Maitlis as having "big egos"? I think she, and other females who front news programmes, is a thoroughly competent member of the team and her contribution is equal to that of her male colleagues. It is, in my opinion, quite right that they should receive the same remuneration for the same or very similar work.

The issue of whether these sort of people merit the pay they get is a different one. Again, whilst I agree that some of the figures quoted are miles away from what the average person earns, they are no different from other high profile jobs and in fact much less than many. I really don't understand why such ire is directed at this relatively small group of people.

I can't see how you can expect an organisation like the BBC - a network that is highly regarded and whose programmes are sold throughout the world - to be run on completely different grounds from its commercial counterparts. My own feeling is that the motivation behind all these measures is to undermine the BBC and eventually do away with it. Obviously, some people on here will be very happy with this outcome, but I think it would be a great shame.

Perhaps we should do what they do in some of the Scandinavian countries - make it mandatory for every person's income, and tax paid, to be listed and available for all to see.

I don't recall mentioning any names in my last posts Eloethan .

Although I think you probably already know the people to which I refer . But why spoil a good argument eh ?

Let's pay everyone the same as Evans then . Will that please you ?

It is quite easy to respect different opinions Jen, it's known as having an open mind and not trying to be a know it all

"Equalising upwards is better than discriminating downwards" is the exact opposite of "the way forward is to bring down the salaries of those at the top to meet those nearer the bottom...."

Difficult to respect both these opinions. It's called sitting on the fence.

What I said is not that "bringing down top salaries is wrong" baldly like that. I said that cutting someone's salary because they are white is wrong. How can you say to someone "You are getting a pay cut because of your skin colour"? They will answer "I was worth that last month, what have I done to deserve less this month? Have I not done my job? My skin is the same colour as it was when we signed my contract. Have I changed since then?"

Cutting "anyone's* salary is wrong because they have commitments which they will be unable to meet, and if you cut for one, you have set a precedent for cutting for another. If you don't want or can't afford to pay very high salaries, then the next time their contract is due for renewal, you change the amount, and if they won't sign up again and you take on a replacement, you set their price somewhere lower.

Gillybob, as Emily Maitliss is one of the women that you are laughing your head off about, one of the ones who is complaining about how hard done by she is in comparison to her male counterparts, it's difficult to see that she is not one of the ones you are referring to.

You said "I don't go with this gender pay gap thing at the BBC and would not like to see female salaries being raised in order to close this so called gap...... I could laugh my head off at these women beating on about how hard done by they are..... I mean bless them how do they survive?"

Your above staement appears to encompass all women working at the BBC and I was merely pointing out that people like Emily Maitlis, Kirsty Walk, etc. etc. are being unfairly discriminated against. You and I might think they are all paid too much but that is a different issue, and not a straight forward one.

You have suggested on other threads that some posters are unduly confrontational. I see your post to me,as being abrupt and quite rude - merely because I have voiced a different opinion from your own.

Have i been rude to you Eloethan ? Have I upset you ? Called you a liar? Been nasty to you ? Directly sarcastic ?

If I have then do accept my apologies . Like you I have a right to opinion . I stand by my post that I have not named individual women . Actually there are a few I have a lot of respect for . But Are they worth millions ? Nope .

The inflated egos of Evans, Ant and Dec, graham norton etc. Make them believe that they are worth that kind of money !
So the top 7 (?) are all men . Guess what ? They are where I work too . Shit happens .

Elegran, Toby Young said it five minutes into the Andrew Marr show yesterday. He recognised that he is a white middle aged man getting more money than he should because of that.
Strange that he can recognise it, but you cannot.
Most of the newsreaders do not have the top inflated salaries. It's the entertainment people whose salaries should be cut.
In fact, many salaries are renegotiated every few years, so now it's out in the open, it will be interesting to see how many salaries are cut in the next round.
If all the white middleclass men's names suddenly disappear from the list, it will probably be because they are no longer paid directly by the BBC.

I agree with your last two paragraphs, Eloethan. If the BBC is undermined and Murdoch gets his way, we will be all the poorer for it.

The women don't get millions, gillybob.

I have never said that they are NOT getting more money than they should! I have said that suddenly cutting someone's salary is not on - and they have a contract which would then be broken and cost a lot in legal fees. The way forward is not to give such contracts in the first place.

The way forward is not to give such contracts in the first place

Completely agree with that Elegran.

BBC contracts are renegotiated all the time. John Humphrys has taken a drop in pay, and does not get as much as stated on the list.

TAs contracts in County Durham are being renegotiated so they are all getting a drop in pay.
I hope you have signed up to get that stopped, Elegran.