Anger over £100,000 pay for council workers

Anger over £100,000 pay for council workers

Anger over £100,000 pay for council workers

First published in News
Last updated
Bromsgrove Advertiser: Tom Edwards by , Political Reporter

EIGHTEEN high-earning council staff across Worcestershire were paid more than £100,000 last year, it has emerged.

The tally of so-called 'fat cats' include eight senior bosses at Worcestershire County Council, with a national pressure group calling the handouts "galling".

But the leadership at County Hall has pointed to a fall in the paying of big salaries in recent years, saying it has reduced by more than a third since 2008.

The new ' town hall rich list' data, published by the Taxpayer's Alliance, shows:

- In the 2012/13 financial year former county council chief executive Trish Haines topped Worcestershire's pay pile by earning £176,678

- Five county council directors took home between £112,998-£124,296 in basic pay including Gail Quinton, who is responsible for children's care, Dianne Tilley, who looked after planning before being made redundant, finance chief Patrick Birch, business director John Hobbs, and former adult services boss Eddie Clarke

- Other big earners include Worcester City Council managing director Duncan Sharkey, who earns £105,824 and Jack Hegarty, chief executive of Wychavon District Council who gets between £101,611 and £107,004

- Malvern Hills District Council boss Chris Bocock was also among the top earners, on £104,999

- Wyre Forest District Council chief executive Ian Miller earns £107,831 and Kevin Dicks gets £124,000 running councils in Bromsgrove and Redditch

- The rest of the list is made up of council employees who earned below £100,000 in basic pay but were made redundant and qualified for pay-offs, taking them over the six-figure threshold

The data does not include new county council chief executive Clare Marchant, who took over the top job in June on £151,000 per year and was paid £75,800 as the deputy previously.

Since the figures were compiled Mr Clarke has retired from County Hall and his old post deleted after his responsibilities were handed to Dr Richard Harling.

Mrs Marchant's old assistant county council chief executive brief has also been scrapped, meaning the figures for 2013/14 should show another fall in big earners, especially as it will not include Ms Tilley.

District councils in Malvern and Wychavon are also exploring sharing one chief executive to save cash.

Despite the fall the Taxpayer's Alliance says it is time for councils to stop "pleading poverty" and whacking up council tax.

In April the county council ended four years of freezes by increasing bills just under two per cent, saying it would help fund extra investment into children's services.

Jonathan Isaby, chief executive, said: "It is good news the number of senior council staff making more than £100,000 a year is falling, although that may only be because many authorities have finished paying eye watering redundancy bills.

"It's particularly galling in places where councils are pleading poverty and demanding more and more in council tax.

"Taxpayers expect their council to be filling potholes, not pay packets."

Councillor Peter McDonald, leader of the opposition Labour group said: "Paying the people at the top these sort of salaries cannot be justified.

"The highest earner is on around 13 times more than the bottom one - I don't think that can ever be right."

Councillor Adrian Hardman, the leader, said: "If you go back seven or eight years we had far more, it was seven directors.

"We've now got four directors and it comes to a point where it would be far more difficult to take more out.

"We've made a lot of savings in this area."

The county council now has five employees earning more than £100,000 per year, which is broadly comparable with similar-sized authorities around the UK.

The rich list shows 20 staff at Birmingham City Council got six figures, 10 at Gloucestershire County Council and seven at Wolverhampton City Council.

There were eight at both Herefordshire Council and Warwickshire County Council respectively.  

Comments (39)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:16pm Wed 6 Aug 14

mrwrighty says...

If these organisations made a profit then by all means pay the salarie's, but these departments are funded by the tax payer. No one is worth more than £100K in a local council, even that is too high. Don't forget that with these high salaries come high pension contributions from our money and high redundancy payoffs from our money. How they can justify paying Trish Haines £176K is beyond me when most of these high earners probably delegate the work anyway.
If these organisations made a profit then by all means pay the salarie's, but these departments are funded by the tax payer. No one is worth more than £100K in a local council, even that is too high. Don't forget that with these high salaries come high pension contributions from our money and high redundancy payoffs from our money. How they can justify paying Trish Haines £176K is beyond me when most of these high earners probably delegate the work anyway. mrwrighty
  • Score: 53

1:21pm Wed 6 Aug 14

Moltaire says...

Totally outrageous and it just shows that council workers were not 'in it together' and still continue to live on a different planet and earn extortionate salaries.

Those chief executives and other directors should realise that they work in local government to oversee the delivery of services to the tax-payer, not to earn large wages. And let us not forget that staff lower down the food chain still earn handsome salaries, far more than jobs of similar skills/responsibilit
ies in the private sector (for example, some admin staff, doing basic duties, are on around £20k at County Hall, roughly £5k more than the average in the private sector). Also, at County Hall there are over 20 department heads (the level below directors) who are earning around £80k each.

No-one in councils should earn more than the private sector. Council staff should be employed solely to do their bit for the community with service provision, not to fleece the tax payer with large salaries. I'm not saying they should work for free, but the ethos of councils should be community focused and where the needs of residents come first, and where working for a council should give a sense of well being and pride which should override the desire to see how much money they can earn.
Totally outrageous and it just shows that council workers were not 'in it together' and still continue to live on a different planet and earn extortionate salaries. Those chief executives and other directors should realise that they work in local government to oversee the delivery of services to the tax-payer, not to earn large wages. And let us not forget that staff lower down the food chain still earn handsome salaries, far more than jobs of similar skills/responsibilit ies in the private sector (for example, some admin staff, doing basic duties, are on around £20k at County Hall, roughly £5k more than the average in the private sector). Also, at County Hall there are over 20 department heads (the level below directors) who are earning around £80k each. No-one in councils should earn more than the private sector. Council staff should be employed solely to do their bit for the community with service provision, not to fleece the tax payer with large salaries. I'm not saying they should work for free, but the ethos of councils should be community focused and where the needs of residents come first, and where working for a council should give a sense of well being and pride which should override the desire to see how much money they can earn. Moltaire
  • Score: 15

2:40pm Wed 6 Aug 14

Norman Hepple says...

What about the head teachers in schools earning over £100,000 who get the holidays as well.

What about the gp's on over £100,000

What about police officers earning over £100,000

Reveal all en
What about the head teachers in schools earning over £100,000 who get the holidays as well. What about the gp's on over £100,000 What about police officers earning over £100,000 Reveal all en Norman Hepple
  • Score: 16

3:00pm Wed 6 Aug 14

GaseousClay says...

Are any of these women fit and single?
Are any of these women fit and single? GaseousClay
  • Score: 9

3:36pm Wed 6 Aug 14

jankersjoe says...

Beats me that with all the meggabucks wages they still have to call in outside consultants to tell them how to do their job.
Beats me that with all the meggabucks wages they still have to call in outside consultants to tell them how to do their job. jankersjoe
  • Score: 33

4:01pm Wed 6 Aug 14

3thinker says...

One of the many reasons why the County and District Council's in Worcestershire should merge to become a Unitary Authority.

To each salary you need to add at least another 30% on-cost for NI pensions etc also a large office and PA.

Herefordshire is a Unitary Council and has only 8 officers being paid over £100k. Simply by merging all the Councils in Worcestershire that probably means they could save over £2M very year and that's just in chief officer fees. There would be at least that and more in other senior management costs and councillor expenses. Add in other efficiencies (e.g. lots of pointless meetings where they agree to disagree) and negotiating better terms with 'suppliers' and the simple step of merging will Save £millions per year whilst also improving service delivery and accountability (with only one council, they can no longer use the excuse that its someone else's responsibility)

The problem is that councillors and senior management want to protect there own positions and prefer to sack yet more staff and reduce more services to balance the budget.
One of the many reasons why the County and District Council's in Worcestershire should merge to become a Unitary Authority. To each salary you need to add at least another 30% on-cost for NI pensions etc also a large office and PA. Herefordshire is a Unitary Council and has only 8 officers being paid over £100k. Simply by merging all the Councils in Worcestershire that probably means they could save over £2M very year and that's just in chief officer fees. There would be at least that and more in other senior management costs and councillor expenses. Add in other efficiencies (e.g. lots of pointless meetings where they agree to disagree) and negotiating better terms with 'suppliers' and the simple step of merging will Save £millions per year whilst also improving service delivery and accountability (with only one council, they can no longer use the excuse that its someone else's responsibility) The problem is that councillors and senior management want to protect there own positions and prefer to sack yet more staff and reduce more services to balance the budget. 3thinker
  • Score: 27

4:07pm Wed 6 Aug 14

badge73 says...

who actually appoints the salary to the positions? they are the ones who should get the flak.
who actually appoints the salary to the positions? they are the ones who should get the flak. badge73
  • Score: 14

6:54pm Wed 6 Aug 14

redtail says...

Norman Hepple wrote:
What about the head teachers in schools earning over £100,000 who get the holidays as well.

What about the gp's on over £100,000

What about police officers earning over £100,000

Reveal all en
yes but teachers can go on strike ,,,,yet you take your kid out of school in term time you get fined cos they say it intterupting their education ,,what about teachers on strike is that just as bad for kids education
[quote][p][bold]Norman Hepple[/bold] wrote: What about the head teachers in schools earning over £100,000 who get the holidays as well. What about the gp's on over £100,000 What about police officers earning over £100,000 Reveal all en[/p][/quote]yes but teachers can go on strike ,,,,yet you take your kid out of school in term time you get fined cos they say it intterupting their education ,,what about teachers on strike is that just as bad for kids education redtail
  • Score: 2

7:01pm Wed 6 Aug 14

Steve118 says...

Why not cut their salaries to say a max of £75K then see how many leave ? Bet not many as these people are almost certainly career local government officials who would attract very little interest from the private sector....... unless of course they moved to another local authority with (tax payer's) money to burn !
Why not cut their salaries to say a max of £75K then see how many leave ? Bet not many as these people are almost certainly career local government officials who would attract very little interest from the private sector....... unless of course they moved to another local authority with (tax payer's) money to burn ! Steve118
  • Score: 13

7:26pm Wed 6 Aug 14

dulon says...

With respect to Gaseous Clays comment ... I happen to think that I would tolerate a 'bulldog chewing a wasp' for £170 k pa !!
With respect to Gaseous Clays comment ... I happen to think that I would tolerate a 'bulldog chewing a wasp' for £170 k pa !! dulon
  • Score: 6

7:41pm Wed 6 Aug 14

skychip says...

This is nothing new, high salaries above £100,000 have been paid at County Hall for years and they still brought in consultants then.
This is nothing new, high salaries above £100,000 have been paid at County Hall for years and they still brought in consultants then. skychip
  • Score: 6

8:15pm Wed 6 Aug 14

Norman Hepple says...

What's your point redtail

I would cut the head teachers salaries first...they don't teach and ponce around as chief executives on mega bucks and school holidays. ....reveal who they are evening news
What's your point redtail I would cut the head teachers salaries first...they don't teach and ponce around as chief executives on mega bucks and school holidays. ....reveal who they are evening news Norman Hepple
  • Score: 2

9:52pm Wed 6 Aug 14

markskoda says...

It's not only the salaries that are inflated, it's the massive sense of importance that these people have. I know. I've worked with them. They trot out politically correct **** such as "Core values" Best Practice"
"Robust mechanisms" and a whole host of meaningless garbage. It's all packaged into reports that are quickly forgotten. At the end of the day they contribute very little. It's the underlings who keep the ship afloat and the hard pressed council tax payers who provide the lavish pension schemes and redundancy payments of the top earners.
It's not only the salaries that are inflated, it's the massive sense of importance that these people have. I know. I've worked with them. They trot out politically correct **** such as "Core values" Best Practice" "Robust mechanisms" and a whole host of meaningless garbage. It's all packaged into reports that are quickly forgotten. At the end of the day they contribute very little. It's the underlings who keep the ship afloat and the hard pressed council tax payers who provide the lavish pension schemes and redundancy payments of the top earners. markskoda
  • Score: 20

10:46pm Wed 6 Aug 14

Steve118 says...

Markskoda...... totally agree. Was at a business talk by a council leader some years ago & he kept saying "I employ X thousands of people" - no you don't mate, you just work there like the rest of them !!
Markskoda...... totally agree. Was at a business talk by a council leader some years ago & he kept saying "I employ X thousands of people" - no you don't mate, you just work there like the rest of them !! Steve118
  • Score: 18

12:04am Thu 7 Aug 14

Jabbadad says...

I was told by Eddie Clarke himself that he did NOT RETIRE HE WAS MADE REDUNDANT. He also felt that he had several more years worth of work to be involved in. And he was a really capable approachable gentlman.
And are we to think that Rchard Harling came FREE??
I was told by Eddie Clarke himself that he did NOT RETIRE HE WAS MADE REDUNDANT. He also felt that he had several more years worth of work to be involved in. And he was a really capable approachable gentlman. And are we to think that Rchard Harling came FREE?? Jabbadad
  • Score: 3

10:55am Thu 7 Aug 14

Casmal says...

Interesting that Councillors at Malvern, which is about half the size of Wychavon agreed a CEO salary in the same range as Wychavon's, yet they are now saying that one person could do both jobs. There seems to be some inconsistency here!

Oh and for the benefit of 3thinker, if you read the full report, you will find that the Taxpayer's alliance have included certain on costs, such as employer pension contributions.
Interesting that Councillors at Malvern, which is about half the size of Wychavon agreed a CEO salary in the same range as Wychavon's, yet they are now saying that one person could do both jobs. There seems to be some inconsistency here! Oh and for the benefit of 3thinker, if you read the full report, you will find that the Taxpayer's alliance have included certain on costs, such as employer pension contributions. Casmal
  • Score: -4

12:32pm Thu 7 Aug 14

green49 says...

Since the figures were compiled Mr Clarke has retired from County Hall and his old post deleted after his responsibilities were handed to Dr Richard Harling.

Jabbadad is right,

Mr Clarke was pushed, yet he was a fantastic guy at his job and worth every penny, the guy who NOW has the responsibility has really no proper background in the job at all and yet is getting big bucks? whos back did he scratch i wonder,?

As for the rate for the job? its determined by the PRIVATE sector payments as if the councils dont match the pay scales then they will get no one to do the same type of jobs, its just that in my opinion and experience the WCC do not alweays pick the right people with the right qualifications, it seems its who you know and tory.
Since the figures were compiled Mr Clarke has retired from County Hall and his old post deleted after his responsibilities were handed to Dr Richard Harling. Jabbadad is right, Mr Clarke was pushed, yet he was a fantastic guy at his job and worth every penny, the guy who NOW has the responsibility has really no proper background in the job at all and yet is getting big bucks? whos back did he scratch i wonder,? As for the rate for the job? its determined by the PRIVATE sector payments as if the councils dont match the pay scales then they will get no one to do the same type of jobs, its just that in my opinion and experience the WCC do not alweays pick the right people with the right qualifications, it seems its who you know and tory. green49
  • Score: 2

1:15pm Thu 7 Aug 14

LindaJS says...

This is a bloody disgrace. When so many have fallen well below the poverty line having been bled dry by those put in a position to help them. Lessons are still not being learned and I am not at all surprised. Greed makes people lose all basic common sense. Time for a total overhaul of this gravy train system and put the money back where it belongs, in the taxpayer's pockets.
This is a bloody disgrace. When so many have fallen well below the poverty line having been bled dry by those put in a position to help them. Lessons are still not being learned and I am not at all surprised. Greed makes people lose all basic common sense. Time for a total overhaul of this gravy train system and put the money back where it belongs, in the taxpayer's pockets. LindaJS
  • Score: 4

3:03pm Thu 7 Aug 14

Phil04 says...

This little club of cosy council employees getting paid more than the Prime Minister and actually believing they are fully justified and worth it!
Nevermind the low paid, nevermind the service cuts, nevermind public opinion, nevermind the hypocrisy.
We have elected councillors representing the council tax payers so why are they burrying their heads in the sand?
This wage abuse has been bankrupting the County for decades. It is not only the wage bill, it's the redundancy packages and then the pensions too!!!
Suggested name for this cosy little club of greedy, self important Council employees :- PYOM
PRINT YOUR OWN MONEY
This little club of cosy council employees getting paid more than the Prime Minister and actually believing they are fully justified and worth it! Nevermind the low paid, nevermind the service cuts, nevermind public opinion, nevermind the hypocrisy. We have elected councillors representing the council tax payers so why are they burrying their heads in the sand? This wage abuse has been bankrupting the County for decades. It is not only the wage bill, it's the redundancy packages and then the pensions too!!! Suggested name for this cosy little club of greedy, self important Council employees :- PYOM PRINT YOUR OWN MONEY Phil04
  • Score: 6

3:53pm Thu 7 Aug 14

mrwrighty says...

As the council are spending our money on these salaries, its about time the board that decides remuneration had at least 2 members of the council tax paying public. That way one would hope it could be more open and transparent and the salaries set at an acceptable level.
As the council are spending our money on these salaries, its about time the board that decides remuneration had at least 2 members of the council tax paying public. That way one would hope it could be more open and transparent and the salaries set at an acceptable level. mrwrighty
  • Score: 4

3:54pm Thu 7 Aug 14

skychip says...

Mr. Clarke pushed out like Diane Tilley. Two good people gone.
Mr. Clarke pushed out like Diane Tilley. Two good people gone. skychip
  • Score: 2

4:15pm Thu 7 Aug 14

Steve118 says...

Also worth noting in the "Comments" section the Editor did not criticise these pay award but simply had a dig at the primate sector & openly implied these local govt officials were worth their pay......... not the first time I've noticed how pally this editor is with local govt.
Also worth noting in the "Comments" section the Editor did not criticise these pay award but simply had a dig at the primate sector & openly implied these local govt officials were worth their pay......... not the first time I've noticed how pally this editor is with local govt. Steve118
  • Score: 1

4:52pm Thu 7 Aug 14

3thinker says...

I'd like to make a suggestion.

Last year Cllr Geraghty claimed £25,519.56 in expenses from the County Council as Deputy Leader.

I assume, as Leader at the City, he'll be getting a similar amount (?).

If, like other parts of the country the District and County Council's were to merge into a single Unitary Council this saving alone on one councillors expenses would be enough to give all 73 of the lowest paid workers at the City Council a Living Wage.

Is it going to happen. Of course not. Councillors at the City and County prefer to sack and privatise more workers and cut services to balance the books rather than looking at the major savings a merger could bring and without affecting local services.

There's constant talk in Conservative ranks about operating more like the private sector, yet the most obvious thing to do is ignored as it threatens their ability to be a career politician at the Council Taxpayers expense.

Shame on you.
I'd like to make a suggestion. Last year Cllr Geraghty claimed £25,519.56 in expenses from the County Council as Deputy Leader. I assume, as Leader at the City, he'll be getting a similar amount (?). If, like other parts of the country the District and County Council's were to merge into a single Unitary Council this saving alone on one councillors expenses would be enough to give all 73 of the lowest paid workers at the City Council a Living Wage. Is it going to happen. Of course not. Councillors at the City and County prefer to sack and privatise more workers and cut services to balance the books rather than looking at the major savings a merger could bring and without affecting local services. There's constant talk in Conservative ranks about operating more like the private sector, yet the most obvious thing to do is ignored as it threatens their ability to be a career politician at the Council Taxpayers expense. Shame on you. 3thinker
  • Score: 9

5:20pm Thu 7 Aug 14

Steve118 says...

3thinker - agreed....... the old phrase "turkeys don't vote for Christmas" sums it up.
3thinker - agreed....... the old phrase "turkeys don't vote for Christmas" sums it up. Steve118
  • Score: 4

6:23pm Thu 7 Aug 14

Jabbadad says...

Our County Councillors cost we Council taxpaying mortals almost £900,000 per year plus Ward attendance allowances. So quite probably over £1million per year = BEST VALUE ?????
Our County Councillors cost we Council taxpaying mortals almost £900,000 per year plus Ward attendance allowances. So quite probably over £1million per year = BEST VALUE ????? Jabbadad
  • Score: -1

7:06pm Thu 7 Aug 14

3thinker says...

Jabbadad wrote:
Our County Councillors cost we Council taxpaying mortals almost £900,000 per year plus Ward attendance allowances. So quite probably over £1million per year = BEST VALUE ?????
And that's all replicated in the 6 District Councils.

As budgets are cut, staffing levels reduced and services are privatised and "set in aspic" for years we can no longer justify having so many councillors and senior management teams.

Herefordshire is already a Unitary Council. All if the metropolitan areas are. Leicestershire is looking at it and reckons by doing so they'll save £30M per year.

I know some will be worried about local democracy, but some of our local councillors have already shown that they prefer playing party political games or games on their i-phones rather than serve their constituents. They also have a knack of not being able to agree and pass the buck between themselves. Made easier by the majority of the electorate not knowing whether the District/City or County that needs to be held accountable.

If there's only one (or possibly two) councils for Worcestershire things would be much cheaper and we'd know which councillors to hold accountable.

It makes complete sense.
[quote][p][bold]Jabbadad[/bold] wrote: Our County Councillors cost we Council taxpaying mortals almost £900,000 per year plus Ward attendance allowances. So quite probably over £1million per year = BEST VALUE ?????[/p][/quote]And that's all replicated in the 6 District Councils. As budgets are cut, staffing levels reduced and services are privatised and "set in aspic" for years we can no longer justify having so many councillors and senior management teams. Herefordshire is already a Unitary Council. All if the metropolitan areas are. Leicestershire is looking at it and reckons by doing so they'll save £30M per year. I know some will be worried about local democracy, but some of our local councillors have already shown that they prefer playing party political games or games on their i-phones rather than serve their constituents. They also have a knack of not being able to agree and pass the buck between themselves. Made easier by the majority of the electorate not knowing whether the District/City or County that needs to be held accountable. If there's only one (or possibly two) councils for Worcestershire things would be much cheaper and we'd know which councillors to hold accountable. It makes complete sense. 3thinker
  • Score: 6

7:57pm Thu 7 Aug 14

Europeanist64 says...

Why to we all get in a flap when the Taxpayers' Alliance, a far-right unelected organisation issues a statement?

Our councils are now corporate businesses with very demanding government targets and restrictions. If we want the best management for our public services and the best legal advice for instance, we have to pay for it.

Private sector salaries are much higher at this level of responsibility. Worcestershire County Council is an £800million organisation and that level of spending needs the best management, which costs good money.
Why to we all get in a flap when the Taxpayers' Alliance, a far-right unelected organisation issues a statement? Our councils are now corporate businesses with very demanding government targets and restrictions. If we want the best management for our public services and the best legal advice for instance, we have to pay for it. Private sector salaries are much higher at this level of responsibility. Worcestershire County Council is an £800million organisation and that level of spending needs the best management, which costs good money. Europeanist64
  • Score: 7

8:34pm Thu 7 Aug 14

3thinker says...

Europeanist64 wrote:
Why to we all get in a flap when the Taxpayers' Alliance, a far-right unelected organisation issues a statement?

Our councils are now corporate businesses with very demanding government targets and restrictions. If we want the best management for our public services and the best legal advice for instance, we have to pay for it.

Private sector salaries are much higher at this level of responsibility. Worcestershire County Council is an £800million organisation and that level of spending needs the best management, which costs good money.
Agreed.

Its just that we don't need 7 councils to run public services in Worcestershire when in many other areas they only have one.

Perhaps the Tax Payers Alliance should also look at the high costs and inefficiencies of having so many councillors in the rural shires?
[quote][p][bold]Europeanist64[/bold] wrote: Why to we all get in a flap when the Taxpayers' Alliance, a far-right unelected organisation issues a statement? Our councils are now corporate businesses with very demanding government targets and restrictions. If we want the best management for our public services and the best legal advice for instance, we have to pay for it. Private sector salaries are much higher at this level of responsibility. Worcestershire County Council is an £800million organisation and that level of spending needs the best management, which costs good money.[/p][/quote]Agreed. Its just that we don't need 7 councils to run public services in Worcestershire when in many other areas they only have one. Perhaps the Tax Payers Alliance should also look at the high costs and inefficiencies of having so many councillors in the rural shires? 3thinker
  • Score: 4

10:58pm Thu 7 Aug 14

thatwalkingcarpet says...

Moltaire wrote:
Totally outrageous and it just shows that council workers were not 'in it together' and still continue to live on a different planet and earn extortionate salaries.

Those chief executives and other directors should realise that they work in local government to oversee the delivery of services to the tax-payer, not to earn large wages. And let us not forget that staff lower down the food chain still earn handsome salaries, far more than jobs of similar skills/responsibilit

ies in the private sector (for example, some admin staff, doing basic duties, are on around £20k at County Hall, roughly £5k more than the average in the private sector). Also, at County Hall there are over 20 department heads (the level below directors) who are earning around £80k each.

No-one in councils should earn more than the private sector. Council staff should be employed solely to do their bit for the community with service provision, not to fleece the tax payer with large salaries. I'm not saying they should work for free, but the ethos of councils should be community focused and where the needs of residents come first, and where working for a council should give a sense of well being and pride which should override the desire to see how much money they can earn.
Staff at County Hall earn around £20k for basic admin duties.

You just guessed that figure didn't you?

There are no basic admin staff at County Hall earning around £20k

If you have evidence to the contrary please can you let me know their job titles so i can apply for their post should they move on.
[quote][p][bold]Moltaire[/bold] wrote: Totally outrageous and it just shows that council workers were not 'in it together' and still continue to live on a different planet and earn extortionate salaries. Those chief executives and other directors should realise that they work in local government to oversee the delivery of services to the tax-payer, not to earn large wages. And let us not forget that staff lower down the food chain still earn handsome salaries, far more than jobs of similar skills/responsibilit ies in the private sector (for example, some admin staff, doing basic duties, are on around £20k at County Hall, roughly £5k more than the average in the private sector). Also, at County Hall there are over 20 department heads (the level below directors) who are earning around £80k each. No-one in councils should earn more than the private sector. Council staff should be employed solely to do their bit for the community with service provision, not to fleece the tax payer with large salaries. I'm not saying they should work for free, but the ethos of councils should be community focused and where the needs of residents come first, and where working for a council should give a sense of well being and pride which should override the desire to see how much money they can earn.[/p][/quote]Staff at County Hall earn around £20k for basic admin duties. You just guessed that figure didn't you? There are no basic admin staff at County Hall earning around £20k If you have evidence to the contrary please can you let me know their job titles so i can apply for their post should they move on. thatwalkingcarpet
  • Score: 12

7:01am Fri 8 Aug 14

green49 says...

skychip says...

Mr. Clarke pushed out like Diane Tilley. Two good people gone.

I see the mius voters are at it again, TRUTH hurts, what skychip and jabbadad says is correct,

The city council has Bayliss and Gerathey and others on about 50K? then these councillors wonder why the taxpayers complain, they all live in cuckoo land as far as the general workers of this country, our political system needs to change big time and stop these people who are in responsible positions and are supposed to be looking out for everyones interests yet leave us all in deeper debt than ever, they walk away with no comebacks, needs changing.
skychip says... Mr. Clarke pushed out like Diane Tilley. Two good people gone. I see the mius voters are at it again, TRUTH hurts, what skychip and jabbadad says is correct, The city council has Bayliss and Gerathey and others on about 50K? then these councillors wonder why the taxpayers complain, they all live in cuckoo land as far as the general workers of this country, our political system needs to change big time and stop these people who are in responsible positions and are supposed to be looking out for everyones interests yet leave us all in deeper debt than ever, they walk away with no comebacks, needs changing. green49
  • Score: 3

9:06am Fri 8 Aug 14

WorcsBornandBred says...

Why don't we all club together, and submit a Freedom of Information request? That's legal.

Then these big wigs living well off tax payers can be named and shamed.
Why don't we all club together, and submit a Freedom of Information request? That's legal. Then these big wigs living well off tax payers can be named and shamed. WorcsBornandBred
  • Score: 5

9:29am Fri 8 Aug 14

3thinker says...

It'd be interesting to see how much those councillors who are on the County as well as Local District/City Council earn and what that works out at per hour.

Also how they can effectively be dealing with conflicts of interest in situations where the County and Districts interests are different but they are duty bound to represent the best interests of the local communities they serve.

Its difficult to understand how we can hold those we elect accountable when there are occasions when they will be voting one way at a City level and the other way at the County.

Its not uncommon when issues are raised for some councillors at the County to say something is the Districts responsibility, yet they don't do anything about it even though they sit on both Councils. That is of course when they can be bothered to respond.

A single Unitary Council for Worcestershire would not only save £millions, but would actually make the remaining politicians more accountable to the communities they should be representing.
It'd be interesting to see how much those councillors who are on the County as well as Local District/City Council earn and what that works out at per hour. Also how they can effectively be dealing with conflicts of interest in situations where the County and Districts interests are different but they are duty bound to represent the best interests of the local communities they serve. Its difficult to understand how we can hold those we elect accountable when there are occasions when they will be voting one way at a City level and the other way at the County. Its not uncommon when issues are raised for some councillors at the County to say something is the Districts responsibility, yet they don't do anything about it even though they sit on both Councils. That is of course when they can be bothered to respond. A single Unitary Council for Worcestershire would not only save £millions, but would actually make the remaining politicians more accountable to the communities they should be representing. 3thinker
  • Score: 1

10:27am Fri 8 Aug 14

saucerer says...

WorcsBornandBred wrote:
Why don't we all club together, and submit a Freedom of Information request? That's legal.

Then these big wigs living well off tax payers can be named and shamed.
I think the salary of council staff should be publicly available, along with their job description and responsibilities. That way, we'd know if their extortionate salaries are genuinely justifiable and whether they reflect their role.
[quote][p][bold]WorcsBornandBred[/bold] wrote: Why don't we all club together, and submit a Freedom of Information request? That's legal. Then these big wigs living well off tax payers can be named and shamed.[/p][/quote]I think the salary of council staff should be publicly available, along with their job description and responsibilities. That way, we'd know if their extortionate salaries are genuinely justifiable and whether they reflect their role. saucerer
  • Score: 1

11:36am Fri 8 Aug 14

1Parent2 says...

This argument is so old and dredged up every year by left wing dreamers. The local authority has a huge budget which needs to be managed properly by someone paid a wage which competes with the private sector. Otherwise as they say 'pay peanuts you get monkeys'.
This argument is so old and dredged up every year by left wing dreamers. The local authority has a huge budget which needs to be managed properly by someone paid a wage which competes with the private sector. Otherwise as they say 'pay peanuts you get monkeys'. 1Parent2
  • Score: -4

6:48pm Fri 8 Aug 14

WorcsBornandBred says...

1Parent2 wrote:
This argument is so old and dredged up every year by left wing dreamers. The local authority has a huge budget which needs to be managed properly by someone paid a wage which competes with the private sector. Otherwise as they say 'pay peanuts you get monkeys'.
Errr.....I'm smarter than some of these people running the council in different pockets, and I can tell you now I am not paid like they are! Nor are most of the other intelligent and hard working people in Worcester!
[quote][p][bold]1Parent2[/bold] wrote: This argument is so old and dredged up every year by left wing dreamers. The local authority has a huge budget which needs to be managed properly by someone paid a wage which competes with the private sector. Otherwise as they say 'pay peanuts you get monkeys'.[/p][/quote]Errr.....I'm smarter than some of these people running the council in different pockets, and I can tell you now I am not paid like they are! Nor are most of the other intelligent and hard working people in Worcester! WorcsBornandBred
  • Score: 2

6:54pm Fri 8 Aug 14

WorcsBornandBred says...

I'd also be prepared to bet a year of my salary, that, if we were to take these ridiculously paid 'leaders' and co-leaders out of the public sector and into the harsh reality of the private sector, they'd last....a month? At best?!
I'd also be prepared to bet a year of my salary, that, if we were to take these ridiculously paid 'leaders' and co-leaders out of the public sector and into the harsh reality of the private sector, they'd last....a month? At best?! WorcsBornandBred
  • Score: 0

11:31am Sat 9 Aug 14

mijas4@live.com says...

Europeanist64 wrote:
Why to we all get in a flap when the Taxpayers' Alliance, a far-right unelected organisation issues a statement?

Our councils are now corporate businesses with very demanding government targets and restrictions. If we want the best management for our public services and the best legal advice for instance, we have to pay for it.

Private sector salaries are much higher at this level of responsibility. Worcestershire County Council is an £800million organisation and that level of spending needs the best management, which costs good money.
Spending £800m is a lot easier than generating sales of £800m.

These top Public sector employees always compare their roles to CEOs etc of large private organisations. However, in reality they are not in the same league, at the end of the day they are not under the same commercial pressures, the proof can be demonstrated by looking at the average life of a CEO in a private company which is a lot less than a "CEO" who runs a council who generally have a protected position.

If they want to be truly comparable to the Private sector then they should put themselves up in front of their shareholders (the local council tax payers) and be re elected each year and have their salaries and bonuses ratified. This is what happens to real CEOs of public companies.

Somehow, I don't think they would agree to this !
[quote][p][bold]Europeanist64[/bold] wrote: Why to we all get in a flap when the Taxpayers' Alliance, a far-right unelected organisation issues a statement? Our councils are now corporate businesses with very demanding government targets and restrictions. If we want the best management for our public services and the best legal advice for instance, we have to pay for it. Private sector salaries are much higher at this level of responsibility. Worcestershire County Council is an £800million organisation and that level of spending needs the best management, which costs good money.[/p][/quote]Spending £800m is a lot easier than generating sales of £800m. These top Public sector employees always compare their roles to CEOs etc of large private organisations. However, in reality they are not in the same league, at the end of the day they are not under the same commercial pressures, the proof can be demonstrated by looking at the average life of a CEO in a private company which is a lot less than a "CEO" who runs a council who generally have a protected position. If they want to be truly comparable to the Private sector then they should put themselves up in front of their shareholders (the local council tax payers) and be re elected each year and have their salaries and bonuses ratified. This is what happens to real CEOs of public companies. Somehow, I don't think they would agree to this ! mijas4@live.com
  • Score: -1

3:17pm Tue 12 Aug 14

Rita Jelfs says...

WorcsBornandBred wrote:
I'd also be prepared to bet a year of my salary, that, if we were to take these ridiculously paid 'leaders' and co-leaders out of the public sector and into the harsh reality of the private sector, they'd last....a month? At best?!
Rubbish. Anyone can get into the private sector, without any qualifications, but not everyone can get into the public sector. Having worked in both, I know where the highest level skills were required. Its laughable that private sector people think they would know how to spend taxpayers money more efficiently, equitably and effectively too. Just because some private sector jobs pay slave wages too, doesn't mean that public sector wages should follow suit. You might be surprised to know that many high qualified bureaucrats move out into highly paid jobs in the private sector because of their specific experience in running a public sector organisation. If you don't think the elected officials are up to the job, then don't keep voting for them.
[quote][p][bold]WorcsBornandBred[/bold] wrote: I'd also be prepared to bet a year of my salary, that, if we were to take these ridiculously paid 'leaders' and co-leaders out of the public sector and into the harsh reality of the private sector, they'd last....a month? At best?![/p][/quote]Rubbish. Anyone can get into the private sector, without any qualifications, but not everyone can get into the public sector. Having worked in both, I know where the highest level skills were required. Its laughable that private sector people think they would know how to spend taxpayers money more efficiently, equitably and effectively too. Just because some private sector jobs pay slave wages too, doesn't mean that public sector wages should follow suit. You might be surprised to know that many high qualified bureaucrats move out into highly paid jobs in the private sector because of their specific experience in running a public sector organisation. If you don't think the elected officials are up to the job, then don't keep voting for them. Rita Jelfs
  • Score: 1

11:04am Wed 13 Aug 14

trigg70 says...

Although the unitary debate comes up time after time it will never happen whilst the elected members insist on giving leadership jobs "to the boys" thus appointing "yes" people who will not stand up to them. There is no process for monitoring the performance of our elected Councillors, no appraisal process to ensure they are doing what they should be, and certainly no way of ascertaining if they are value for money.
Although the unitary debate comes up time after time it will never happen whilst the elected members insist on giving leadership jobs "to the boys" thus appointing "yes" people who will not stand up to them. There is no process for monitoring the performance of our elected Councillors, no appraisal process to ensure they are doing what they should be, and certainly no way of ascertaining if they are value for money. trigg70
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree