No. What is pathetic is threads like this with absolutely no context in it all all and bascially boils-down to "that's a large number".
The most directly comparable is that other publically-owned broadcaster, Channel 4.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010.../channel-4-pay
Quote:
|
Channel 4 paid a total of £3.851m in salaries, bonuses and benefits to 14 executive and non-executive board members last year, a rise of nearly 13% compared with 2008's £3.418m.
|
Yes, okay. That was in 2010; the same year in which their own "DG"
received a pay-off of nearly £1.5m.
And, whilst not a "public sector", when
Rebekah Brooks resigned from her "DG" post, she received around £7m.
Try looking at other "public sector" pay. The
leader of Brighton & Hove Council gets £150k per year; and I'm sure there are others.
Although, of course, the BBC isn't really a "public sector" company at all as they have to live, work and survive in a
commercial world. However, it has been proved, time and again, that they do almost always pay less than their commercial rivals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by colin25
That is the BBC, not same in a lot of public service areas.
|
Exactly.
---------- Post added at 11:59 ---------- Previous post was at 11:53 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius
The BBC, they should never be trusted with the tax they get from us. They only waste it on themselves. Having seen the inside of mediacity in Manchester i can assure you they have nothing but the BEST, i wish my office was as plush  |
1. The move to Manchester (and elsewhere out of London) was
forced on them by the then Labour Govt.
2. The BBC neither built nor own
Media City so what it looks like is nothing to do with them.