Another bizarre "equality" case

FoxEye

FoxEye

FoxEye

Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-50599080

One presenter presents a show nobody watches (News Watch). Another presents a different, and arguably more prestigious and much longer-running show - Points of View.

Now imagine that both presenters were male. Or both female.

Why would the BBC not be able to pay presenters differently based on the show they are involved with?

It's like saying a Game of Thrones actor should be paid the same as an actor in Poldark. Well maybe they might be, but there's no guarantee of that, because the audience numbers are different, the production budgets are different, everything is different.

But because Samira Ahmed is a woman (and also a minority ethnicity), she has successfully won at tribunal, arguing that her appearance fee should be the same as Jeremy Vine's. Regardless of the programme or type of programme both are involved in.

And now we've got to endure another round of "We should all be paid the same as the (top male earner), because..."

And lol, on the news now, some woman is saying it's discrimination that women pay more than men for hair cuts. I'm not even ****ing you.

/triggered

e: Given that News Watch is utter crap, it would amuse me greatly if the BBC just canned it and laid her off.
 
I mean, Points of View is trash really. Half the time its people writing in chiming in with opinions about something really trivial. It's like everyone has had 50p put in them

What really annoys me is clothing and shoe prices. My partner and I bought more or less the same shoes recently. Cause she has small feet she gets away with buying kids sizes It was something like £145 for me and £60 for her. Furious.
I also hate that my clothes in medium cost the same price as clothes in XXXL despite not using as much material. Life eh?
 
She was paid the same as her male predecessor, I'm really surprised she's won this case based on gender discrimination, that fact should have just killed it off completely.
 
Simple resolution - reduce the wages of every single presenter to that of the lowest earning presenter on the BBC regardless of their sex/gender - then they're all paid the same and there can be no more problems can there - its simple really!

I mean if I was a much lower paid presenter working for the BBC but doing similar work/shows, after seeing this result I'd also be taking them to tribunal for exactly the same reasons and expecting to win!
 
JunglistE said:
What really annoys me is clothing and shoe prices. My partner and I bought more or less the same shoes recently. Cause she has small feet she gets away with buying kids sizes It was something like £145 for me and £60 for her. Furious.
I also hate that my clothes in medium cost the same price as clothes in XXXL despite not using as much material. Life eh?
Click to expand...

Is there still a distinction regarding VAT on children's shoes??
 
There is no sense to it all any more, the BBC may as well pay everyone the same, including the cleaners and cooks!

I'm glad I don't pay the 'tv license' tax any more else this would really really wind me up.. :D
 
What gets paid less but also pays more?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-50691249
It's accepted as a fact of life that women pay more for their haircuts than men. But why are women who want a simple, short cut being turned away by barbers - and is this even lawful?

Actor Georgia Frost says she was recently refused service by two consecutive barbers in west London, something she found humiliating.

"I was working on a show at the Lyric Hammersmith and needed just the back and sides doing, partly for the show," she says. "When I asked to have my hair cut, the barber just laughed in my face and said 'no' and made some remark about me being a woman."

She tried again at a near-empty establishment a short distance away only to be told, "we don't do women here".
Click to expand...
 
I know of barbers that are quite happy to cut women's hair, and speaking personally I've had my hair cut by hairdressers.

I'm always a bit skeptical when I hear claims like the above, if true it's unfortunate but there's two sides to every story.
 
This stuff is like catnip for OCUK :D

I mean if you were whining about someone being awarded equal wages for.. I dunno, local news vs Newsnight then whilst I would question why it bothers you that people should be paid the same for ostensibly the same job I would accept you may have a point..

But newswatch vs points of view? I'm surprised either exist or anyone can have an opinion on them.

But.. equality.. check, bbc.. check.. womens rights... check.. bonus points for ethnic minority.. TO TEH INTERNET!!!!!
 
NVP said:
She was paid the same as her male predecessor, I'm really surprised she's won this case based on gender discrimination, that fact should have just killed it off completely.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's blatantly obvious this isn't about gender. It's just a crap show and nobody gets paid big bucks for presenting News Watch, lol.
ianh said:
Simple resolution - reduce the wages of every single presenter to that of the lowest earning presenter on the BBC regardless of their sex/gender - then they're all paid the same and there can be no more problems can there - its simple really!

I mean if I was a much lower paid presenter working for the BBC but doing similar work/shows, after seeing this result I'd also be taking them to tribunal for exactly the same reasons and expecting to win!
Click to expand...
It's already been said (on the news) that this opens the door for many, many cases to be brought against the BBC and others.

It's going to be another tidal wave of claims.

Basically you have to pay all your female presenters the same as your highest-earning male presenter, or else...
 
matt100 said:
This stuff is like catnip for OCUK :D

I mean if you were whining about someone being awarded equal wages for.. I dunno, local news vs Newsnight then whilst I would question why it bothers you that people should be paid the same for ostensibly the same job I would accept you may have a point..

But newswatch vs points of view? I'm surprised either exist or anyone can have an opinion on them.

But.. equality.. check, bbc.. check.. womens rights... check.. bonus points for ethnic minority.. TO TEH INTERNET!!!!!
Click to expand...

I agree that this sort of thing has been done to death and I'm largely apathetic about it now, but for people who care about equality (real equality, not the 'woke' BS kind that's so popular these days) it's still something that grates.

If you tolerate this, then your children will be next. Thank **** I haven't got children.
 
JunglistE said:
Yeah Children shoes aren't taxed. I am aware of that, but it didn't make me any less furious just cause her feet didn't decide to grow!
Click to expand...


I have always felt that the Child/Adult distincion regarding VAT liability based on shoe size is bizarre.

An "Adult" buying a cheap shoes for £20 because they are poor gets to pay VAT, while little Tarquin down the road with his £150 Nikes gets them VAT free because his feet are small.

I think it should be based on price. Cheap shoes (Up to a certain price point) VAT free, All sizes. Expensive shoes, Pay the damn tax too!

:p
 
R.P.L said:
I agree that this sort of thing has been done to death and I'm largely apathetic about it now, but for people who care about equality (real equality, not the 'woke' BS kind that's so popular these days) it's still something that grates.

If you tolerate this, then your children will be next. Thank **** I haven't got children.
Click to expand...

Why is some equality real and some woke? How do you decide which is which?
 
LOL - TFW you get the judge just inserting their subjective opinion in something totally out of their area:

It added that despite the BBC saying the presenter of Points of View "needed to have 'a glint in the eye' and to be cheeky, we had difficulty in understanding what the respondent meant and how that translated into a 'skill' or 'experience' to do a job.

"The attempts at humour came from the script. Jeremy Vine read the script from the autocue. He read it in the tone in which it was written. If it told him to roll his eyes he did. It did not require any particular skill or experience to do that."
Click to expand...

I love how it's just broken down analytically like that... I mean what skill is there in acting etc.. anyway, they just read the scrip in the tone it was written... if they're given stage directions they just follow them....right???

Presumably Ahmed's show, just being a news show, only requires newsreader/journalistic skills whereas points of view requires a "personality" - as much as I like to scoff at pretentious artistic people even I resale that there is some "talent" in being a good presenter and that can command a different fee.
 
Woke equality is the extreme end, imo as with everything in life there needs to be a balance. I don't agree with people like Gary Linekar getting paid what he does for what he does but at the other end of the spectrum (woke end) you've got people trying to create a system where the guy who works as a cleaner is paid the same amount as a brain surgeon. If that ever happens you can wave goodbye to ever having brain surgery as no-one will be bothered to train and do such a stressful job.
 
mmj_uk said:
Woke equality is the extreme end, imo as with everything in life there needs to be a balance. I don't agree with people like Gary Linekar getting paid what he does for what he does but at the other end of the spectrum (woke end) you've got people trying to create a system where the guy who works as a cleaner is paid the same amount as a brain surgeon. If that ever happens you can wave goodbye to ever having brain surgery as no-one will be bothered to train and do such a stressful job.
Click to expand...

You don't understand the word equal do you?

Its equal pay for equal work. Obviously you can disappear down the rabbithole of 1 meaningless TV program vs another but brain surgeon vs cleaner? lol!
 
matt100 said:
Why is some equality real and some woke? How do you decide which is which?
Click to expand...
It's fairly obvious that in terms of the market, the BBC can only suffer because of rulings like this.

They cannot now pay popular presenters more than no-name presenters.

They cannot pay staff working on popular shows more than presenters on shows that nobody watches.

What do you think will happen to the successful presenters (etc)? They'll get fed up and move to another network.

Either you've now got to pay all your staff at the rate of the highest earners, or cut everyone's pay.

So either they have to cut their output drastically because everything is now super expensive, or pay crap wages and watch their people quit.

And none of this is "equality". Most people won't have even seen Samira Ahmed on TV. She doesn't present any of the big shows. Everyone knows who Jeremy Vine is. Samira wants big bucks for a pathetic show, and now she's got it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom