ICO boss Christopher Graham's salary was increased to £140,000 a year in late 2007.
Fairly modest in fat-cat terms. If you pay peanuts you get monkeys ...
The Information Commissioner's Office has told the Cabinet Office to release salary details on 24 people earning more than £150,000 a year who refused to have their details released. Salary details for high-earning civil servants were released in July 2010, but 24 public servants wanted their pay kept secret. Prime Minister …
"Or ideally, even better, the government could set up a recruitment panel for these jobs that's actually filled by some of our brightest and best businessmen to ensure the staff that go into these positions, whatever they're paid, are fit for the job, and not just someone some minister happened to go to Eton or Oxford with with no real regard for their competence to actually do the job."
- Er, no. We'd get better results if it did actually work by ministers' mates. The reason we have a consistent culture in government is because there are extremely elaborate 'fair' selection procedures calculated to reproduce highly qualified and trained.... quangocrats and senior civil servants. Every one of them is highly adapted to the jungles of Whitehall, and has enormous competence in doing what senior civil servants do.
Maybe you're getting exactly what you're paying for, executives who're so far up the food chain there's no-one above them to actually give them the boot when they sit by as things go belly up. We need to have these people a little more motivated so that they actually do something, instead of playing the "Public Sector" joker.
When the obscene pay and bonuses that the bankers and wall street fat cats responsible for the latest financial meltdown in the US came to light many people called for their heads. Their bosses (golf partners) said the same thing, "We have to pay high to attract the best talent." But the best talent had pushed the US economy and perhaps the world economy to the brink of the abyss while lining their own pockets.
Sorry, we see your lie and raise you many pink slips.
the salaries for these high-ranking jobs slashed to about that of a toilet cleaner. That way, the only people who will go for the job are those who seriously want to make a difference and actually do the job, instead of just those who are solely motivated by money. If you pay peanuts you may get monkeys, but if you pay gold you get fat greedy pigs.
If you want to get the fat shits out of government, pay them a maximum of 25,000 quid a year. Then we'd see some real change in how the country is run.
that are funded by a taxpayer.
if you run a profitable business then why shouldnt you get a decent pay? just like when you go into a recession you get a pay cut. public sector seem to think they are above the rest of us. just like with their big pensions and retiring 5 years before the rest of us!
(spawn of Satan) is out of control... Pay cut in recession: don't make me laugh. What happens is they make a few hundred redundancies then award themselves an F off big bonus for making efficiency savings, then when the recession is over award themselves another big bonus for expanding the company again...
Then don't get me on the whole circle jerk thing of offering top quartile pay in order to get top quartile executives... There are, unsuprisingly, not enough top quartile excs to go round, so thats yet more pay inflation for the executives... but funnily enough not for the people who do the actual work...
Executives, public or otherwise, seem to have forgotten they are fundamentally an overhead, a neccesary one, but an overhead, whose only purpose is to help the people who do the real work deliver value to the shareholders...
Bloody hell, its almost enough to turn you into a bloody socialist...
If you build up a profitable business, no problem.
If you 'run' a profitable business by sitting in the committee room half a day a week, and got the job by stint of going to school with someone who's great-great......great-grandmother was shagged by a mate of William the Conqueror that's a different story.
Meanwhile don't forget the public sector - 13 grand a year and plenty of shit, pewk and blood to clean up as a hospital porter. And no, you can't retire '5 years before the rest of us' on your 'big pension of 4,300 p.a.
When I was a Civil grunt four years ago, I earned £14k.
I'm now told I'm under threat of being fired due to my "Gold Plated" pension, which my last pension stated would be £8k at 65 years of age.
I'm of the opinion you should be forced to show your worth if you want the big money; some bosses may be worth it but how about ones who advice on financial matters or other areas which have gone completely down the pan?
"I advised the government on the world economy for the last 6 years..... I deserve the £100k plus....not my fault that we are now bankrupt and firing everyone. Tell you what, just fire the lower grades and keep me!"
(The firing people becaue of pensions is a strange one, but I listen to too many low-grade civil servants moaning about the pension changes as if it's seriously going to affect their pensions, so I'm going to mention this now.)
I was reading the pension changes suggested in the Hutton report (which almost everyone comments on but almost nobody has actually read), and the CARE system appears (or at least can easily be made) to be *better* for the AA and AO type grades, but will always be much worse for the selfish bastards who award their mates £10,000/year salary increases one year before retirement to "top up" their pension.
Of course, there will be some way round it for them, because we can't have top civil servants being forced to choose which of their houses to sell when they retire, can we?
(As an aside, you have to love the BBC's objective reaction to the Hutton report: "Millions of workers in the public sector should work longer for lower pensions, a major report has said." That's not what it said at all, and if people actually read it, they'd see what it actually said.)
ITYM "our most sociopathic businessmen"
It's my opinion that the socio- and psychopaths have commandeered executive suites everywhere, and now that they're in control, they make sure that others of their ilk are the only ones allowed the luxury of a paneled office.
The only solution is to fire the lot, and hire their replacements from among the folks standing outside the building waiting for a bus. Like a blue light special at K-Mart, not quite as good quality, but much, much cheaper.
I'm sure that 99.9% of executives would, if asked "but what about your fiduciary duties?" would piss themselves laughing at such naiveté.
"Waaaaah, I don't get paid that much. Why doesn't the government work for free to make sure nobody earns more than me? I want more pay for me, but less for others, more hospitals and less taxes. It's not fair! Waaaaaah!"
Whenever the public service decides to be honest, every toothless chav/bogan/redneck who thinks they're CEO material gets all uppity about the salaries, how much tax they pay, and how the public service are leeches. Of course, they ignore all the pensions, dole, healthcare and assorted handouts they get themselves every day living in a welfare state.
Do most of the complaining feckless bolsheviks here know how much the private sector gets paid to do the same job as the public sector? No. Do they care? No. If its more than them, they're not happy.
If you're rad-awesome and underpaid, why don't you go and apply for those public and private jobs with the big salaries when they come up? After all, nobody is as hard-working as YOU right?
Or are you just jelly?
You're right! Definitely! Where do I sign up to apply to be an MP? What do you mean, did I do an unpaid internship at <insert political party> central office? No, of course not, I'm not <insert leader of said party>'s neighbour. Oh, so I can't become an MP then? Damn.
OK, can I be head of the ICO? Yes, Christopher Graham's job. Oh, so it helps if my father was a BBC journalist and I went to public school? But mine didn't, he was a builder, and I didn't.
here in Santa Clara County, the local birdcage lining insists on releasing the pay details of ALL county workers, with the pre-tax amounts, job codes and first/last names lined up nicely.
Doesn't matter if you're a high six-figure exec or a probationary office assistant making less than living wage-it's all up there for anyone to peruse who goes to their website.
I think part of the problem might be with the fact that there may be no incentive to hire the best and brightest, per se: as long as candidates meet minimum qualifications, hirers will choose those with whom they'd most like to hang out and not necessarily the hardest- working or best qualified (this happens in the non- profit sector too: as long as candidates meet funders' minimum qualifications, they're good to go even if they're not the best). At least the private sector has an incentive to get the most for their payroll buck (and we see how well that part of the economy works).
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019