In my experience the difference between a good and an average manager (let alone a bad one) can save a significant amount of money so believe it very short sighted to not pay rates that will attract good candidates.
Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!
- Thread starter bullybeef
- Start date
- Status
Not a quarter of a million pounds a year, but i don't think anyone is worth that - yeah, footballers included, but we know how much sport in general is a complete outlier.
Would he or other people in similar roles be able to survive on a mere £150k a year. Would that £100k help save a few lives?
Well that's the issue in and of itself I suppose, which is what I've said in my other post to Legs.
Private sector has driven up wages so public sector has to pay more. I still think it's a galling example. Like how I think the last 10 years of austerity is galling.
I wasn’t defending him just curious how you valued a role you know little of. Been on the beers? You seem touchy about something so minor.
Well for a start, they're not in any way funded by the government, as is clear in their accounts, and are not part of the NHS.
Resources
They're simply a membership body for NHS Trusts. If you want to look at what actual NHS Trust CEOs do then this may be a reasonable indicator
Loading…
www.humber.nhs.uk
Woah woah woah.
what do you think a CEO should be paid then?
And by the same token, how would you adjust everyone else’s pay accordingly?
Nah mate i'm not drinking as have the rona. It's the lemsip.
Wasn't aimed at you.
I just think anybody earning that much money is part of a wider problem when it comes to the society we live in really. Like I said, could a portion of that wage have been used by the organisation he works for to help out the Trusts/staff members they represent in some other way? Maybe it couldn't be.
Perhaps comparable is the Chartered Management Institute, which is another membership body. Their boss earns a similar figure
Charity cashes in on MBA apprentices
CMI's income has rocketed as CEO pockets £66,500 bonus
feweek.co.uk
Yes, and could a portion of his wage be better used elsewhere within that organisation?Well for a start, they're not in any way funded by the government, as is clear in their accounts, and are not part of the NHS.
Resources
nhsproviders.org
They're simply a membership body for NHS Trusts. If you want to look at what actual NHS Trust CEOs do then this may be a reasonable indicator
Loading…
www.humber.nhs.uk
He might well give all his bonus and a load of his wage to charity and good for him if he does. I'm sure he's good at his job.
Also, I've skim read that job desc link and I wasn't far off in what I originally said about his role at a guess.
I think £250k for what - forgive me if I'm wrong - seems to be the CEO of a Union, is a lot of money. But I know Union bosses earn a lot of money. Maybe I just didn't know how much. Now clearly I do and apparently that's just fine.
If he was on £150k, that could fund four other relatively decent-paid start up jobs within the same organisation. It could perhaps even go towards helping the organisation's aims in other ways other than staffing?
I'm sorry if that's wrong to think. Like I said, maybe I need to get real. Clearly I didn't know the going rate. I see £250k and think, wow, that's a lot of money isn't it.
BlueStevie35
Player Valuation: £70m
Obsessed with mushrooms aren’t you?
Just to be clear here, the guy you have an issue with is the boss of NHS Providers, who are a non-NHS body who aim to represent and support NHS Trusts, just as all other membership bodies do, such as the BMA. The second link is for the boss of an actual NHS Trust. They're two very different beasts.
Ghost Rider
Player Valuation: £8m
The last Liverpool Foundation trust chief executive left the job a year or so ago to take up a similar role in Dubai.
As important as that job may be , it has a ridiculous turnover depending on location in the country. So in terms of the NHS , even paying so much for the role doesn't necessarily keep job loyalty or even tenure. As far as I know Liverpool are in the process of appointing their 4th chief in 3 years.
Plenty of beurocracy involved at the top that maybe shouldn't be there. @woomy says it perfectly in his post earlier about managers.
Yep I'm aware. Apologies, I thought you meant as in the wider role of being a CEO in general. I mean, I'm sure there's plenty of crossing between being a CEO of one company or another - i.e. they're responsible for overall strategy, lobbying for the companies best interests. That can apply to Mr Hobson or Everton's own CEO Barrett-Baxendale can't it.
Anyway, will leave this argument. I didn't realise how wrong I was. Just think £250k is an awful lot of money to be spending on one role - whether it's public sector, a charity, an NHS Trust...
@woomy 's point was certainly better made and more well-informed than mine.
- Status