BBC top earners

There will always be a market rate and if employers (in all walks of life) want to pay over and above that they will. It's subjective (and imo Winkleman is not worth what she gets and nor is Lineker) but this is what they can get for the job. Who is wrong. Them for asking or the BBC for paying
 
Dont agree with publishing the figures, it just feeds the monster thats envy. I may not like or know many or all on the list, but I know that many have more than one role with the BBC but that is obviously not shown with the figures as published.
Sky and Murdoch are probably rolling around on thier plush office carpets at it all.
 
meh. Don't really care about the figures. Don't mind myself <£3 a week I know I get great value from the beeb. As for the TAX argument. It's no exactly money that's redirected from other services. Get rid of public funding via the license fee and that money won't suddenly become available for nurses/firemen/police etc. It'll probably end up in the accounts of Sky, Netflix and Amazon instead.

The Gender pay gap thing though. That's a beast that won't be tamed here. Equal pay for equal work but when it comes to entertainment there is so many aspects that can't be quantified easily. Then there is BAME just to further add to the complications.

What I do see coming from this is an increased use of independent production companies to act as middle men and cloud the figures such as the case with Graham Norton.
 
Last edited:
palindromicbob said:
meh. Don't really care about the figures. Don't mind myself <£3 a week I know I get great value from the beeb. As for the TAX argument. It's no exactly money that's redirected from other services. Get rid of public funding via the license fee and that money won't suddenly become available for nurses/firemen/police etc. It'll probably end up in the accounts of Sky, Netflix and Amazon instead.

The Gender pay gap thing though. That's a beast that won't be tamed here. Equal pay for equal work but when it comes to entertainment there is so many aspects that can't be quantified easily. Then there is BAME just to further add to the complications.

What I do see coming from this is an increased use of independent production companies to act as middle men and cloud the figures such as the case with Graham Norton.
Click to expand...

The BAME thing was disappointing, especially in this day and age.
 
Lord Tyrion said:
If Lineker goes he could be replaced by Garth Crooks. Think on that &#63025;&#63025;

Talent is always subjective but I know from work, where we have radio 2 on in the factory, that when the main presenters are away the stand ins are often painful and we will turn over. You often don't appreciate how good presenters, tv or radio, are until someone covers for them.
Click to expand...
Agree with the presenters thing but Shearer that's a waste of money. Phil Nevile is better than him?
 
clubchamp98 said:
Agree with the presenters thing but Shearer that's a waste of money. Phil Nevile is better than him?
Click to expand...

Seriously :rofl: - he has to be the worst pundit since the television was created , Owen comes close but Phil Neville is king of that castle
 
There may well be a Gender pay issue here and that does need addressing. What I find difficult to understand is how Winkleman can be the highest paid Woman, she seems to have nothing to commend her for such an accolade, surely Women like Fiona Bruce must be better value. If any of these top earning people became unavailable for what ever reason the sky would not fall in, someone else would step into the role and in a week of two the previous holder would be forgotten. I would set a cap on earnings for TV presenters at around £150K and most would not be earning above £100K. Let them walk if that's not enough for their questionable talent.
 
SocketRocket said:
There may well be a Gender pay issue here and that does need addressing. What I find difficult to understand is how Winkleman can be the highest paid Woman, she seems to have nothing to commend her for such an accolade, surely Women like Fiona Bruce must be better value. If any of these top earning people became unavailable for what ever reason the sky would not fall in, someone else would step into the role and in a week of two the previous holder would be forgotten. I would set a cap on earnings for TV presenters at around £150K and most would not be earning above £100K. Let them walk if that's not enough for their questionable talent.
Click to expand...

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/...0-and-38000-say-license-payers-20170719132254
 
Some of these salaries are ridiculous. Let's not forget this is a publically funded organisation primarily for entertainment. These are not nurses, police or other vital services, its entertainment, most of which is of a poor standard compared to the competition. We should also remember that the public have no choice in paying for this service, which is probably why they get away with feeding us such rubbish.
Wasn't Evans sacked by the BBC for unacceptable behaviour some years ago? Can you imagine a private sector employer giving someone their job back on such a huge salary?
Wasn't Linaker found out using dodgy tax schemes? And yet the people he is avoiding paying - the country, that's you and me, employ him on millions.
And £550K for a news reader??? Not even a heavy weight journalist, just a bloke who reads an autocue in a lilting welsh accent.
Next time you are concerned by the low level of public service wages, remember this.
 
Sweep said:
Some of these salaries are ridiculous. Let's not forget this is a publically funded organisation primarily for entertainment. These are not nurses, police or other vital services, its entertainment, most of which is of a poor standard compared to the competition. We should also remember that the public have no choice in paying for this service, which is probably why they get away with feeding us such rubbish.
Wasn't Evans sacked by the BBC for unacceptable behaviour some years ago? Can you imagine a private sector employer giving someone their job back on such a huge salary?
Wasn't Linaker found out using dodgy tax schemes? And yet the people he is avoiding paying - the country, that's you and me, employ him on millions.
And £550K for a news reader??? Not even a heavy weight journalist, just a bloke who reads an autocue in a lilting welsh accent.
Next time you are concerned by the low level of public service wages, remember this.
Click to expand...

Well you don;t seem to like the Beeb do you. Me? perfectly happy with the service provided on TV, Radio and through free Live events - and for £2.80 a week...what a bargain.
 
SwingsitlikeHogan said:
Well you don;t seem to like the Beeb do you. Me? perfectly happy with the service provided on TV, Radio and through free Live events - and for £2.80 a week...what a bargain.
Click to expand...

I love the fact people equate the low level of public wages on the fact a minute handful of BBC employees are paid slightly less then they would get at a commercial station. Nothing to do with government policy.

As someone said earlier, when we have the government suddenly finding a billion that apparently did not exist earlier so they could pay the public sector more, then I'm not 100% sure the fact that Chris Evans is paid well is quite the nub of low public sector pay conundrum. Unless I suppose you are Dacre or Murdoch of course who need to keep their readers enraged about this. For purely altruistic reasons of course :smirk:

In fact the more it annoys Daily Mail and Murdoch the more I will listen to advert free, non advertiser influenced music on 6 Music, great live sport and podcasts from 5 Live and Radio 4 (try out the Seriously podcast or The Infinite Monkey Cage, they really are excellent), watch great music and science documentaries from BBC 4 or crime dramas on BBC 1 and 2. And all for less than the price of a pint a week. Bargain in my book.
 
Last edited:
Sweep said:
Wasn't Evans sacked by the BBC for unacceptable behaviour some years ago? Can you imagine a private sector employer giving someone their job back on such a huge salary?
Wasn't Linaker found out using dodgy tax schemes? And yet the people he is avoiding paying - the country, that's you and me, employ him on millions.
Click to expand...

Evans was sacked and then brought back when he had grown up. As for a private sector company having morals they will employ anyone that brings them money in. It wouldn't take long to look at the private media sector roster to find some naughty people. I'll throw Jonathon Ross and Jeremy Clarkson in for starters.

Regarding Lineker, significant numbers of people in the entertainment and sports world are paid in round about ways in order to avoid tax. I'd hammer all of them. The BBC is actually complicit in this as they employ individuals but pay their companies. This avoids NI and paye. If you remove everyone who was named in the tax issue the screen would be very empty. It is an industry wide problem.
 
Shameful of BBC when you see the massive gender and racial pay gaps in the organisation.

They are total hypocrites as they happily shame other companies gender and race inequalities.


Why we are still forced to pay a TV license is beyond me. BBC content these days is very much second rate.
 
Dasit said:
Shameful of BBC when you see the massive gender and racial pay gaps in the organisation.

They are total hypocrites as they happily shame other companies gender and race inequalities.


Why we are still forced to pay a TV license is beyond me. BBC content these days is very much second rate.
Click to expand...
Where are the Racial inequalities?
 
People can apply to not pay for the Telly License but obviously then you won't be able to use one single BBC service including website , radio , television channels - not bad for £100 a year

The wages being paid to certain presenters im sure will be based on the program's and the amount they present - Linekar i agree shouldn't be paid as much based on one highlight show but it's popular - Winkleman fronts one of the most popular programs on telly and in confident that millions love her being on telly - for me she is worth the money but that's where it's all subjective when people "judge talent" - reckon there are a couple of million out there disagreeing with "questionable talent" remarks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
GOAT 2012 v 2025
3 4 5
Replies
83
Views
2K
Orikoru
Orikoru
P
Eating Out - Pubs & Restaurants
Replies
8
Views
1K
PNWokingham
P
Hobbit
Britain’s longest serving prisoner
3 4 5
Replies
89
Views
9K
Voyager EMH
Voyager EMH
BigJC_H4H
Choosing a Charity
Replies
9
Views
639
kp17
kp17
Don Barzini
Story behind your username and avatar?
3 4 5
Replies
97
Views
4K
SocketRocket
SocketRocket
Top