Linekers salary

[PodgeyRam]

1 hour ago, David said:

Nick Blackman's scored more than him recently, only a penalty but still, goals a goal.

You won't convince me Chris Evans is worth a fiver a year. Can't stand the bloke, would like have a coffee with him though, ask how he managed to bag Billie Piper. 

Has a face for radio.

I don't know about that. I've heard Gary has become quite a hit with the ladies in recent years.

[StringerBell]

For crying out loud. Without wanting to get into the debate about whether or not BBC presenters are worth the money they’re on it’s ridiculous that some people have accepted a reduction in pay because other employees haven’t negotiated quite as lucrative contracts as they have. A win for the gender communists.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/26/four-male-bbc-presenters-agree-to-take-pay-cut-report

[Doodle]

3 hours ago, StringerBell said:

For crying out loud. Without wanting to get into the debate about whether or not BBC presenters are worth the money they’re on it’s ridiculous that some people have accepted a reduction in pay because other employees haven’t negotiated quite as lucrative contracts as they have. A win for the gender communists.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/26/four-male-bbc-presenters-agree-to-take-pay-cut-report

Nicky Campbell on radio 5 this morning, couldn’t shoehorn enough mentions of his pay cut into the program. He sounded like smashey and nicey doing the charity work sketch. If the sanctimonious tw@t was that bothered about Women’s equal pay, why didn’t he mention it a year ago before it was trendy and take a pay cut then??  At least the BBC are making the overpaid men take a pay cut, rather than making the women overpaid too. 

[StringerBell]

9 minutes ago, Doodle said:

Nicky Campbell on radio 5 this morning, couldn’t shoehorn enough mentions of his pay cut into the program. He sounded like smashey and nicey doing the charity work sketch. If the sanctimonious tw@t was that bothered about Women’s equal pay, why didn’t he mention it a year ago before it was trendy and take a pay cut then??  At least the BBC are making the overpaid men take a pay cut, rather than making the women overpaid too. 

If you take the line they’re massively overpaid to begin with then you can certainly take positives out of this. I refuse to pay the license fee so I’ll not share my opinion on that.

However, stepping outside the fact it’s basically public money, and looking at the bigger picture, it seems pretty odious to me to bring someone down to someone else’s level in the name of equality. It really is communistic in that regard. Everyone is worse off but at least they’re equal.

Having said that I don’t think they should be paying the women who have complained more just to make things equal either. In these high end jobs they negotiate their salary. Everyone, man and woman, is on the salary they have negotiated. They’re on the money they have earned. And fair play if anyone one is able to get a pay rise, just as long as they don’t frame it as men vs women.

 

[Doodle]

16 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

If you take the line they’re massively overpaid to begin with then you can certainly take positives out of this. I refuse to pay the license fee so I’ll not share my opinion on that.

However, stepping outside the fact it’s basically public money, and looking at the bigger picture, it seems pretty odious to me to bring someone down to someone else’s level in the name of equality. It really is communistic in that regard. Everyone is worse off but at least they’re equal.

Having said that I don’t think they should be paying the women who have complained more just to make things equal either. In these high end jobs they negotiate their salary. Everyone, man and woman, is on the salary they have negotiated. They’re on the money they have earned. And fair play if anyone one is able to get a pay rise, just as long as they don’t frame it as men vs women.

 

The BBC’s approach to hard left politics, has been clear for some while now. You are correct in saying they are heading towards a communist philosophy towards pay. Not only do they pay men more than women, they also pay white people more than black. It can only end in 1 of 2 ways. Either, virtually every man takes a pay cut  or they promote women and especially ethnic women’s pay upwards. To be honest, I hope it’s neither. It’s an institution which doesn’t fit in with modern media. It’s not world class any longer, every other media outlet does what they do equally well and in most cases better. Like other dinosaurs it will soon be extinct 

[TimRam]

I record motd anyway and skip Linekers drivel.

[ViewsFromTheMiddle]

27 minutes ago, TimRam said:

I record motd anyway and skip Linekers drivel.

Is there really any other way to watch it?

[needles]

3 hours ago, Doodle said:

The BBC’s approach to hard left politics, has been clear for some while now. You are correct in saying they are heading towards a communist philosophy towards pay. Not only do they pay men more than women, they also pay white people more than black. It can only end in 1 of 2 ways. Either, virtually every man takes a pay cut  or they promote women and especially ethnic women’s pay upwards. To be honest, I hope it’s neither. It’s an institution which doesn’t fit in with modern media. It’s not world class any longer, every other media outlet does what they do equally well and in most cases better. Like other dinosaurs it will soon be extinct 

It's a massive national asset at home and abroad. You'd only realise how important it is if we didn't have it.

Look at the USA to see what happens when you get 'news' with a prior agenda. 

The BBC gets called left wing by the right, and right wing by the left. It's just about spot on. BBC Radio especially is an absolute treasure.

[PodgeyRam]

3 hours ago, StringerBell said:

If you take the line they’re massively overpaid to begin with then you can certainly take positives out of this. I refuse to pay the license fee so I’ll not share my opinion on that.

However, stepping outside the fact it’s basically public money, and looking at the bigger picture, it seems pretty odious to me to bring someone down to someone else’s level in the name of equality. It really is communistic in that regard. Everyone is worse off but at least they’re equal.

Having said that I don’t think they should be paying the women who have complained more just to make things equal either. In these high end jobs they negotiate their salary. Everyone, man and woman, is on the salary they have negotiated. They’re on the money they have earned. And fair play if anyone one is able to get a pay rise, just as long as they don’t frame it as men vs women.

 

Think you might have it the wrong way round there. It's really libertarian of them to give up their extra money in the name of equality.  The BBC haven't forced them to do it, they've done it of their own free will.

[GenBr]

Why don't the female presenters just move to another media outlet and negotiate better salaries if they think they are worth more. There are thousands of media companies out there these days if they want to move on to bigger things.

24 minutes ago, needles said:

It's a massive national asset at home and abroad. You'd only realise how important it is if we didn't have it.

Look at the USA to see what happens when you get 'news' with a prior agenda. 

The BBC gets called left wing by the right, and right wing by the left. It's just about spot on. BBC Radio especially is an absolute treasure.

I associate myself with neither side of the political spectrum, but let's be honest here there is no way anybody could call the modern BBC right wing biased and keep a straight face. Maybe 20-30 years ago that might have been true, but not a chance now.

I don't watch TV, so don't have a TV licence, but the quality of the news stories on their website seems to degrade every time I visit and for a company that has such a huge guaranteed income I can't see how they still manage to produce so much garbage. 

Think you might have it the wrong way round there. It's really libertarian of them to give up their extra money in the name of equality.  The BBC haven't forced them to do it, they've done it of their own free will.

They may very well have done it of their own free will, but you have no idea what goes on behind closed doors. Not really bothered either way since these guys are free to make their own mistakes, but I wouldn't be surprised if their was some pressure from the top.

[needles]

7 minutes ago, GenBr said:

I associate myself with neither side of the political spectrum, but let's be honest here there is no way anybody could call the modern BBC right wing biased and keep a straight face. Maybe 20-30 years ago that might have been true, but not a chance now.

The Remain campaign and Momentum would disagree with you.

A quick google shows articles in Guardian, New Statesman, Independent and Spectator on the topic in the last 12 months.

[StringerBell]

55 minutes ago, PodgeyRam said:

Think you might have it the wrong way round there. It's really libertarian of them to give up their extra money in the name of equality.  The BBC haven't forced them to do it, they've done it of their own free will.

Sure. That’s such a rational thing to do. I bet it was their idea as well.

I mean seriously that’s really unhealthy.

Did you hear the leaked conversation between one of those who has volunteered to earn less money and another who is currently ‘in talks’ to do the same? They didn’t sound particularly enthusiastic about the idea.

[PistoldPete2]

Well the BBC salaries and linekers especially seem ridiculously high, but today's news that humphries, Edwards and Jon sOpel etc have taken pay cuts becaus they are paid more than some women I think is a bit silly. The women I have never heard of , so I can understand why they are paid less. Fiona Bruce I have heard of but I think she must have a freelance thing going as she isn't mentioned. She must be the equivalent of huw Edwards if not the fair enough cut Edwards salary. 

[Rev]

Surely salary should be based on where in the world you work too.

I'd imagine the North American correspondent would have a far higher cost of living in America, for instance the compulsory need for private health care cover etc, than the China correspondent, where surely the cost of living is much lower?

[Sith Happens]

I don't mind what anyone is paid. We all negotiate our own salaries...

Rightly or wrongly Lineker earns his salary because he presents on our most popular sport and is a household name and was before.

Is he worth it, probably not. I would rather question why they need to ship the pundits out to wherever with the associated travel costs and accommodation when they could do the same job from the studio. How many will be over in Russia playing golf on expenses and running up bar tabs that could be at home passing opinions on TV coverage?

 

[Pearl Ram]

Actually, the North American correspondent also has to pay for his hair dye which I gather he uses rather a lot of. See below. 

Who are you trying to kid mate ?

[PistoldPete2]

23 hours ago, Pearl Ram said:

Actually, the North American correspondent also has to pay for his hair dye which I gather he uses rather a lot of. See below. 

Who are you trying to kid mate ?

In fact BBC website had to change their story, they said he had taken a pay cut, when in fact he hadnt agreed to any such thing. What a mess up. he's probAbly overpaid , but so are most BBC staff male and female. 

[McRainy]

On 26/01/2018 at 15:36, StringerBell said:

In these high end jobs they negotiate their salary. Everyone, man and woman, is on the salary they have negotiated. They’re on the money they have earned.

And men consistently get better contracts than women. Do you seriously not understand why this happens or do you actually advocate people being paid less for the same job simply because of what’s in their pants?

[ColonelBlimp]

That there Jon Sopel is rubbish compared to Robert Moore on ITV. 

Just thought I'd mention it, Sopel's report ain't worth tuppence ha'penny to me.

[StringerBell]

36 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

And men consistently get better contracts than women. Do you seriously not understand why this happens or do you actually advocate people being paid less for the same job simply because of what’s in their pants?

I don’t think you’re in any position to imply that I don’t understand why it happens if you think the only biological difference between men and women is what’s in their pants.