BBC pay: Men still dominate star salaries list

antijoke

antijoke

antijoke

Caporegime
Joined
28 Jan 2003
Posts
40,002
Location
England
So the beeb have published their top earners and again it's DOMINATED by men once again.

BBC on-air salary list 2017-18
1. Gary Lineker - £1,750,000-£1,759,999

2. Chris Evans - £1,660,000-£1,669,999

3. Graham Norton - £600,000-£609,999

4. Steve Wright - £550,000-£559,999

5. Huw Edwards - £520,000-£529,999

6. Jeremy Vine - £440,000-£449,999

=7. Nicky Campbell - £410,000-£419,999

=7. Alan Shearer - £410,000-£419,999

=9. John Humphrys - £400,000-£409,999

=9. Nick Grimshaw - £400,000-£409,999

=9. Stephen Nolan - £400,000-£409,999

=9. Andrew Marr - £400,000-£409,999
Click to expand...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertai...breaking&ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter

Claudia Winkleman is still the top woman, on £370,000-£379,999. Mary Berry and Newsnight's Emily Maitlis are among eight women to have joined the list.
Click to expand...

When it comes to this I can't help but think if we were to compare Claudia with Gary (as the top earners) then surely we must break it down to working hours, I mean how many shows a year does Claudia do for the BBC vs how many shows of MoTD (and other games) does Gary do.

This obsession with the "pay gap" seriously needs to go away.
 
Dis86 said:
I can't believe people pay nick grimshaw. He's absolutely dire.
Click to expand...

Yep thats the main story here. Dunno what they were expecting they only did the first review a short time ago. I'm sure and people leave and join and sign new contracts things will become a bit better in terms of gender pay gap.
 
jimjamuk said:
Yep thats the main story here. Dunno what they were expecting they only did the first review a short time ago. I'm sure and people leave and join and sign new contracts things will become a bit better in terms of gender pay gap.
Click to expand...

well they have ruined two perfectly good presenters by tying to shoe-horn Jo Wiley into a prime time slot on Radio 2 because their day time schedules were male dominated so Im not sure any changes will be to the benefit of the viewers/listeners.
 
I hope the BBC has not confused correlation with causation, that would be silly. Just because there are no women in the top 10 list doesn't mean that it is because they are women. The BBC's analysis of the data concluding that "no women are in top 10 list" is just as valid as something like "no under - 25's in the top 10 list" or "no attack helicopters in top 10 list". So many other factors could be at play here. Age, experience, hours worked, skin colour, commitment to the BBC, money / viewers they bring into the BBC...

The BBC should try to work out what that factor is. It might well be that "being a women" is a proxy for a combination of factors.

These people are supposedly at the top of their game. Therefore their careers have spanned 20, 30, 40 years. Attitudes were different back then and the resulting pay / responsibility gap is carried 'up the chain'. In the same way that many that many CEOs are old, white men; non-white people and women would have been less likely to get into said career 30 years ago, so the elites today are all white men. I would be concerned if young, inexperienced team members at the start of their careers, who will be at the top of their game in 30 years, were paid differently today based on gender.
 
think logically and dont be a pc *********.what does gary linekar represent.can a women represent the same have done the same ? no. so stop with the nonscense. he was a legend in football. no women has the same credentials. ********* island i tell ya.

why is snow flake classed as a swear word ?
 
Why can't they just be honest, the male presenters bring in more viewers / listeners and that's the only reason they need to pay them more., why does it even need to be explained?
 
Dis86 said:
Cos...cos...equality!
Click to expand...

the funny thing is all the equality people fighting for equality make seperate groups to complain about equality.its comedy gold.lets make a seperate group to complain about not being equal. pure genius
 
ebilcake said:
Why can't they just be honest, the male presenters bring in more viewers / listeners and that's the only reason they need to pay them more., why does it even need to be explained?
Click to expand...

There's an evergrowing section of society that is vouching for equality of outcome that's why.
 
MooMoo444 said:
1.7m for sitting on a sofa and reading from an autocue once a week is daft regardless of it being male or female.
Click to expand...

Almost as daft as not understanding how the free market works. Gary Linekar is worth £1.7m because other companies would pay him that or more, the BBC aims to be a competitive broadcaster so they need to pay their talent market rate, or at least close to that. I personally think the BBC football team are great, the ITV team is rubbish, so they're doing a good job and worth the money if you ask me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom