ECCOnoob Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 No. The parliamentary legislation called the Communications Act 2003 allows the BBC to collect the licence fee to fund ALL of its services not just television. Its a government act. A law. A statute. What has any of that got to do with salaries anyway? The BBC is not the only public money organisation that has a selection of high earners. Have you seen the NHS, Police, Fire services and even the Civil Service Departments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Car Boot Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Mark Freeland, Controller of Fiction and Entertainment. Salary: £227,000 Total yearly remuneration: £234,800. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 19:34 ---------- Janice Hadlow, Controller, Seasons and Special Projects. Salary: £227,250 Total remuneration: £235,050. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) All these chiefs that you are highlighting, what exactly would you do with their vacant posts? Are you one of those who thinks a massive organisation with multi million pound budgets can just be self managed? Perhaps some kind volunteers could pop in and run it part time eh? I really don't see your point. Yes the BBC has some highly paid staff just like any other big organisation. BUT, their salaries are well below their commercial competitors so..... ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 19:37 ---------- Here, I will save you the effort.... http://www.bbc.co.uk/corporate2/insidethebbc/managementstructure/biographies/#heading-a-to-c Edited March 21, 2016 by ECCOnoob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Car Boot Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) Dale Haddon, HR Director. Salary: £190,000. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 19:49 ---------- Lisa Opie, Controller of Business, Knowledge and Daytime. Salary: £207,800. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 19:50 ---------- James Purnell, Director, Strategy & Digital. Salary: £295,000. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 19:53 ---------- Ralph Rivera, Director, BBC Digital. Salary: £295,000 Total remuneration: £307,000. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 19:56 ---------- I dread to think of the number of BBC TV licence fee's required to pay all of these parasites their high salaries, so that they can live lavish lifestyle's at the expense of the vulnerable and disadvantaged. There are many more BBC staff on very high wages... ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 20:00 ---------- Peter Salmon, Director, BBC Studios (formerly Director, England) Salary: £375,000 Total yearly remuneration: £387,900. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 20:02 ---------- Bal Samra, Commercial Director BBC and Managing Director TV. Salary: £315,000 Total remuneration: £322,800. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 20:05 ---------- Bob Shennan, Director, Music. Salary: £236,765 Total remuneration: £244,565 ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 20:20 ---------- The less well off in our society are targeted by wealthy BBC parasites who see the poorest households as a pot of money to fund their extravagant lifestyle's, even though these household's may not watch BBC programmes. ---------- Post added 22-03-2016 at 15:38 ---------- It should be noted that up until fairly recently the BBC insisted that it's 'talent' set up personal service companies as a legal way of reducing tax and pension liabilities for both the BBC and it's celebrity on air talent. This only changed after the BBC was exposed. Reducing costs to the BBC means allowing high earners to pay 20 to 23 per cent in corporation tax on their income instead of the 45 per cent top rate of income tax. The BBC saves money by not paying any generous pension contributions. Edited March 21, 2016 by Car Boot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asaw Posted March 22, 2016 Author Share Posted March 22, 2016 Saw morning Glory where they had new ways to improve the breakfast program weather by putting the presenter on the following: Big Dipper, Water skiing, Free fall parachuting etc. Ideal for Kirkwood on Breakfast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Dale Haddon, HR Director. Salary: £190,000. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 19:49 ---------- Lisa Opie, Controller of Business, Knowledge and Daytime. Salary: £207,800. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 19:50 ---------- James Purnell, Director, Strategy & Digital. Salary: £295,000. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 19:53 ---------- Ralph Rivera, Director, BBC Digital. Salary: £295,000 Total remuneration: £307,000. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 19:56 ---------- I dread to think of the number of BBC TV licence fee's required to pay all of these parasites their high salaries, so that they can live lavish lifestyle's at the expense of the vulnerable and disadvantaged. There are many more BBC staff on very high wages... ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 20:00 ---------- Peter Salmon, Director, BBC Studios (formerly Director, England) Salary: £375,000 Total yearly remuneration: £387,900. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 20:02 ---------- Bal Samra, Commercial Director BBC and Managing Director TV. Salary: £315,000 Total remuneration: £322,800. ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 20:05 ---------- Bob Shennan, Director, Music. Salary: £236,765 Total remuneration: £244,565 ---------- Post added 21-03-2016 at 20:20 ---------- The less well off in our society are targeted by wealthy BBC parasites who see the poorest households as a pot of money to fund their extravagant lifestyle's, even though these household's may not watch BBC programmes. ---------- Post added 22-03-2016 at 15:38 ---------- It should be noted that up until fairly recently the BBC insisted that it's 'talent' set up personal service companies as a legal way of reducing tax and pension liabilities for both the BBC and it's celebrity on air talent. This only changed after the BBC was exposed. Reducing costs to the BBC means allowing high earners to pay 20 to 23 per cent in corporation tax on their income instead of the 45 per cent top rate of income tax. The BBC saves money by not paying any generous pension contributions. Are you saying that these positions shouldn't exist or that the salaries are not commensurate with the job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biotechpete Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 There are a few BBC "stars" who annoy the wits out of me but I don't understand people who object to the license fee for BBC services in general. Sky is far far more expensive than the BBC and funds hardly any original programming. We used to get all sports like the cricket, rugby, football, F1 etc 'included' on terrestrial TV basically part of the licence fee. Now, commercialisation means that you pay loads more for that same thing via Sky or BT. The sport isn't necessarily any better, and arguably English football has suffered from vast wages leading to importing foreign players. And the key here; where does all that extra money go? It sure as hell doesn't 'trickle down'. It just means rich people getting even richer off the back of inflating prices for our cultural activities, that are largely paid off the back of relatively poor people. The whole thing feels like a stitch up to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 No. The parliamentary legislation called the Communications Act 2003 allows the BBC to collect the licence fee to fund ALL of its services not just television. Its a government act. A law. A statute. What has any of that got to do with salaries anyway? The BBC is not the only public money organisation that has a selection of high earners. Have you seen the NHS, Police, Fire services and even the Civil Service Departments. can itv collect it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECCOnoob Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) Why should it? ITVs revenues come from adverts. It is allowed to undertake product placement, sponsorship, branding and reap the rewards of the associated bias that comes with such things. ITV is not compelled by an Act of parliament to to provide a range of disability access services, minority interest, education, children's, religious, parliamentary and state broadcasting. ITV does not fund 56 different national and local radio stations. ITV does not have to provide specialist regional broadcast services in Gaelic and Welsh language. Not even in the same camp. The public service bindings on ITV and Viacom (C5) are nothing compared to the obligations pushed upon the BBC. It might seem trivial but people might start complaining if the BBC chased what sells and only put out what their corporate masters wanted. Kiss goodbye to all your BBC ad free radio. Kiss goodbye to any specialist, religious and even parliamentary broadcasts. Kiss goodbye to free at source subtitled, AD and language services. Those are the parts of the TV licence that the whinging brigade always forget about. Don't want pay your 40p a day? Stop receiving and watching live broadcasts. Stop listening to BBC radio. Edited March 22, 2016 by ECCOnoob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spilldig Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 There are a few BBC "stars" who annoy the wits out of me but I don't understand people who object to the license fee for BBC services in general. Sky is far far more expensive than the BBC and funds hardly any original programming. We used to get all sports like the cricket, rugby, football, F1 etc 'included' on terrestrial TV basically part of the licence fee. Now, commercialisation means that you pay loads more for that same thing via Sky or BT. The sport isn't necessarily any better, and arguably English football has suffered from vast wages leading to importing foreign players. And the key here; where does all that extra money go? It sure as hell doesn't 'trickle down'. It just means rich people getting even richer off the back of inflating prices for our cultural activities, that are largely paid off the back of relatively poor people. The whole thing feels like a stitch up to me. I personaly would not put one penny in Mr Murdochs pocket but you can choose to watch TV and not subscribe to SKY. That's the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now