What the BBC pays its 'stars'

[RailwayRowdy]

You would need also to know the ratio of applicants too..if 80% of the applicants are male then it's likely that a higher number of the successful candidates would be male. That would lead on to asking why 80% of the applicants are male.

Fair point. But also it is not unheard of for candidates to be "invited" to apply for positions which possibly muddy's the waters further.

 

Sent from my GT-I9195I using the onevalefan mobile app

[Andyregs]

1. You haven't shown the BBC pays men and women differently. It actually shows that they pay men and women the same when they do the same jobs. (Like Dan Walker and Louise Minchin)

2. I never said the sample size was too small. My point was that when you get an industry such as broadcasting it is not going to represent society at all. You can't use the BBC, or Wimbledon tennis to show that woman are paid less in this country.

3. "professional" isn't an industry. The figures are completely meaningless unless you can tell once and for all that a man and a woman doing the same job at the same company are paid differently because of gender.

 

Do you not think that if there was a pay gap that at least some of the companies would have clocked on, and only employed women to reduce costs? They don't because they have to pay them the same as men for the same work.

 

One shoe, newsnight and even the breakfast show you mention are all examples. But I feel it's a pointless argument with you to be honest.

[JOHNNYAITCH]

What's the example on the Breakfast Show? Dan Walker and Louise Minchin are paid the same for the Breakfast Show and he is paid more in total cos of the other shows that he does. I don't know about Newsnight.

[For Us All]

And proudly so.

 

I don't know how much turd polishing you expect the BBC to do re: Brexit

 

None and even less ****-stirring.

[Regal Beagle]

One shoe, newsnight and even the breakfast show you mention are all examples. But I feel it's a pointless argument with you to be honest.

 

I'm sorry you feel that way, I thought it was an interesting debate. Feel free to not reply.

 

 

 

 

 

As I say, the absolute best evidence we have (Dan Walker) is that men and women are paid the same. There might be some sort of pay scale based on experience/years served and there might be some additional bonuses depending on viewing figures.

 

I just don't agree that the most likely, and first place you should look is gender. It's something that's been unacceptable for over half a century in the eyes of the majority. It's been in law since 1970. I think it's a pretty batty conspiracy theory to suggest that women are paid less for the same work (with no evidence).

[For Us All]

Gary Lineker, second highest - FOR WHAT ? - He is an Amateur puny pundit - I've seen better in the Railway Stand, & Bycars & Lorne Street, & Hamil End when we were allowed to use it !

 

He received roughly £300 a minute for his efforts in 2016.

[Regal Beagle]

I think all that reasonable thinking people would agree that female executives have the same level of skills/expertise etc as their male counterparts. Therefore if jobs were awarded on pure merit, then you would expect the male/female ratio in the top jobs to be 50/50. But this is not the case, which would tend to indicate other forces are at play. Discrimination being the most likely reason.

 

 

Sent from my GT-I9195I using the onevalefan mobile app

 

I'd agree that there's no reason women can't be as successful as anyone else and in theory a 50/50 split should be expected, but in reality there are a lot of variables that could explain why there are less women in high paid jobs than men. Life choices being the obvious one, and career choices.

 

If applications for managerial jobs are 60-40 male (for example) then you should expect a 60-40 split in successful candidates over a big enough sample. I'm not saying that this is the reason, but it is a plausible explanation in my opinion.

 

 

I've just found this: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours/bulletins/annualsurveyofhoursandearnings/2016provisionalresults

 

It shows that 41% of woman are part time, compared to 12% men. Overall, men work 135.2 hours a year more than women.

 

I can't apply this to the BBC, but generally speaking, men work longer hours. This could explain why more men get promoted than women, and it does explain why men earn more on average than women.

[Erniemossrules]

He received roughly £300 a minute for his efforts in 2016.

Did you know that Gary Lineker flies up each week from London to Manchester on a private jet to present his match of the day program then flies back again.

BBC pick up the bill so it is paid by the licence payer.

[whotobeakiller]

Did you know that Gary Lineker flies up each week from London to Manchester on a private jet to present his match of the day program then flies back again.

BBC pick up the bill so it is paid by the licence payer.

 

Tip of the iceberg...so many 'top jobs' are going to the over privileged and expenses are paid to the point that they do not even have to touch their salary....the country is a joke

[whotobeakiller]

 

 

 

It shows that 41% of woman are part time, compared to 12% men. Overall, men work 135.2 hours a year more than women.

 

I can't apply this to the BBC, but generally speaking, men work longer hours.

 

Many women in the workplace married up just do the job to get extras like Holiday's and cars...many rely on the main breadwinner. But on the other side of the coin many men out there not in similar positions have to work long hours just to make ends meet because the wages that they are on are so poor.

 

The EU mantra of work life balance means nothing unless you have a good income that you can enjoy your life on. Many opt out of the 48 hour week because to do otherwise would mean living in relative poverty