Jacqui Smith applies for top BBC job - £77k for 2.5 days work

I'm entirely in agreement with Fox. While I'm not sure Ms Smith is the right candidate for the role, this is in no way an unusual amount for such a post.
Also, I really don't understand why people are so eager to see the back of the BBC. It's about the only thing left in this country that is truly world-class. Imo BBC News is worth the license fee alone, and looking at the status the Beeb has worldwide it seems other countries agree.
 
[TW]Fox;17072226 said:
Why is it the British way to **** things off that we simply do not understand?
Click to expand...

Envy chap. It really is a British thing too, in the State's you'd be applauded.
 
I hope she doesn't get the job, although if she does she's likely in for a major shock as apparently the BBC tend to be rather stingy with expenses (ignore the mail headlines - it averages out at about £20 a week for their top staff, and guidelines are something like £70 for a night for a hotel if they are working away from home).

The wage sounds high (and to be honest it is), but it's effectively a fairly/very senior management position for which £150k a year full time wouldn't be out of the ordinary (especially not in the are of commercial media).
 
magick said:
Disguisting, however this maybe a blessing in disguise as it might encourage people to stop paying there tv license and get rid of the awful state propaganda machine.
Click to expand...
State propaganda? You might want to rethink that, or at least read into what those words mean. Then you might want to look at at the current government, then back to the BBC.
 
[TW]Fox;17072226 said:
It's all about the type of person you wish to attract. I would imagine such a post is likely to be aimed at intelligent, succesful and well balanced older people. People at this level of society generally have a number of different interests, may have retired from a previous top level full time job, and would be unwilling or unable to work 37.5 hours a week.

This is how almost all non-executive director positions work, for example.

Whilst I'm sure we'd all love to get £77k for 2.5 days work, if we work really hard for 40 years of our lives and get to the top of large and complex organisations*, we too can apply for jobs like this.

* I'm not including Ms Smith in this.

Why is it the British way to **** things off that we simply do not understand?
Click to expand...

I fully understand that's how executive positions work, I've seen it in companies I've worked for.
I don't see an issue with it in the private sector.

What I object to, is when it's public funded positions, where you can often wonder just how much value we are really getting out of that person being there to warrant such a wage.
 
Nexus said:
I fully understand that's how executive positions work, I've seen it in companies I've worked for.
I don't see an issue with it in the private sector.

What I object to, is when it's public funded positions, where you can often wonder just how much value we are really getting out of that person being there to warrant such a wage.
Click to expand...

The salary must be comparable to the private sector though or all the talent would never apply for the position and you would end up with the sort of person unable to get a similar private sector job!
 
True.

But what I'm saying is...

Does the BBC Trust really need a Vice-Chairman who does two and a half days work a week? Aside from the status of having somebody who may be respectable in business, what is it really giving us, especially at a time when so many cuts are being made. Also, as this is a vice-chairman position there is obviously still Sir Michael Lyons as the actual Chairman.
 
that implies the bbc has no brand equity or cache associated with it...

when you have on your cv, head of the bbc, im sure this looks good...

do people not work on slightly lesser paid jobs for this kind of reputation any more?
 
[TW]Fox;17072226 said:
It's all about the type of person you wish to attract. I would imagine such a post is likely to be aimed at intelligent, succesful and well balanced older people. People at this level of society generally have a number of different interests, may have retired from a previous top level full time job, and would be unwilling or unable to work 37.5 hours a week.

This is how almost all non-executive director positions work, for example.

Whilst I'm sure we'd all love to get £77k for 2.5 days work, if we work really hard for 40 years of our lives and get to the top of large and complex organisations*, we too can apply for jobs like this.

* I'm not including Ms Smith in this.

Why is it the British way to **** things off that we simply do not understand?
Click to expand...

Although I concur that there are a lot of people that will slate rich people just through envy/naivety you are just as much a fool as them if you think that every person who commands those types of wages deserves it/has worked hard for it.

For example, do you think Jaden Smith landed the role of the Karate Kid because he was the best young black actor in America, or because he is the son of the producer (Will Smith)? And it happens in all industries, just look at the Haymarket Media Group which was previously run by Lord Hesseltine before he retired and made his son the CEO.

It's not just nepitism, a hell of a lot of people get to the top by being totally principled, sleeping with the boss, screwing over other colleagues and sometime just being inept gets you a promotion! I have worked for serveral companies where the "hard workers" stay in their roles forever because they are HARD WORKERS so you would be making a productive loss by promoting them, so the person who isn't great at the actual task in hand is made the manager.

I would love to live in a world where your salary was a direct representation of the work you put in but we are not at that stage at the moment IMO.
 
Nickg said:
that implies the bbc has no brand equity or cache associated with it...

when you have on your cv, head of the bbc, im sure this looks good...

do people not work on slightly lesser paid jobs for this kind of reputation any more?
Click to expand...

These will be people towards the end of a career not in cv building mode. Besides 77k is only what 154k a year so probably much less than a similar full time private role anyway.
 
Nickg said:
that implies the bbc has no brand equity or cache associated with it...

when you have on your cv, head of the bbc, im sure this looks good...

do people not work on slightly lesser paid jobs for this kind of reputation any more?
Click to expand...

They do...the head of the BBC for example is at about 1/5th what the Daily Mail pay their editor, or the head of C4, and much less than ITV despite the BBC being a much bigger organisation.

Many BBC staff positions are also at or below "market rate" but you can't go too far below market rate and still have any chance of getting quality staff (yes having BBC on your CV might look good, but not necessarily worth a huge pay drop).
 
So you accuse the bbc of propaganda after only recently blatantly lying about them censoring the news?
 
Tefal said:
So you accuse the bbc of propaganda after only recently blatantly lying about them censoring the news?
Click to expand...

Although i wouldn't go as far to say the BBC is a 'propoganda machine' they are left-wing biased. Marcus Brigstock and Russell Howard and the amount of TV time they get are proof of that...
 
estebanrey said:
Although i wouldn't go as far to say the BBC is a 'propoganda machine' they are left-wing biased. Marcus Brigstock and Russell Howard and the amount of TV time they get are proof of that...
Click to expand...
I think all it actually proves is that they like to spend a lot of money on people that aren't really that funny.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom