What's Jock Stirrup's Pay? - guess before you read

[Affirmatron]

Between £218,000 and £235,000 per year

It's just been on the BBC's 'What Britain Earns' programme. I was shocked!

[Glass Half Empty]

Is that all - peanuts for such a fine upstanding fellow!

[JFZ90]

What was interesting is the the DG of the BBC gets £700k. I would have thought this should have been more equitable to senior officers and the Prime Minister (£188k), rather than so high - given that we all (have to) fund the BBC. It should therefore attract a salary more like those of public servants (police, forces etc.), rather than the CEO of the biggest banks.

[soddim]

At the higher levels of achievement pay has to be related to the risk versus reward culture. I would not describe Sir Jock's job as high risk.

[SlopJockey]

in response to Peter Snow How do you think the pay and conditions that they have to put up with matches the job we are asking them to do?


It can never be what I believe is their intrinsic worth because frankly I think their intrinsic worth is far more than anyone can pay. You cannot buy with money the worth of the sort of people we are talking about.

So we are getting a huge pay rise and a significant change to our conditions.

Yeah right on.
:suspect:
SJ

[Chris Kebab]

Bit confused by your "shock" Affirmatron?

Do you think it's too high or not enough?

[teeteringhead]

Not enough!

IMHO our middle management - commissioned or not - are reasonably well paid for what they do. What stinks is the two ends - the blighters in the trenches and the airships/admirals/generals.

Not only does Sir Jock get paid less than for example Sir Ian Blair (£245k I believe), but tiny amounts compared to others - as the example of the BBC DG shows.

And what's more there are no "post retirement perks" in terms of share options, cars, houses or anything.

IIRC when the SH force dined out Sir John Day on his retirement, High Wycombe refused to provide transport to Benson (where the dinner was) ....

"Sorry - he's no longer in post - not entitled ........"

despite the fact he was still living in the Big House at HW ..... if pressed I'm sure they'd have given him a self-drive Corsa!

edited to add: .. and isn't CDS' pay set to equate to MoD's top Sir Humphrey (or is it Sir Kev) - I must say I too thought it was less than £200k - the argument still holds tho'

[Affirmatron]

To be honest, I thought it was around £120-150k. Same goes for those sat around me. It must just be my poor service knowledge.

I guess some people's intrinsic value IS reflected in their pay. It's strange because I can't imagine it's a job that would need such a high level of financial motivation to fill. I wonder if there's a performance-related element?

[teeteringhead]

Have done some quick research - and the BBC - quelle surprise - is being very selective by quoting CDS .... as the following table shows (from open source - the 2007 Senior Salaries Review) other stars are pretty poorly paid for what they do/control/are responsible for...

Table 4.5: Recommended pay scales from 1 April 2007 (Note1)

Value of scale points

Scale...CDS..........4 Star........3 Star........2 Star
Point

6..........-..........£167,114.....£139,295.....£107,060
5..........-..........£163,836.....£134,827.....£104,811
4....£230,889.....£160,625.....£130,357.....£102,561
3....£226,362.....£157,475.....£125,889.....£100,310
2....£221,923.....£154,387.....£118,822.....£98,060
1....£217,572.....£151,370.....£111,754.....£96,175

1. This table assumes the removal of the lowest point of the 2-star band as proposed in Recommendation 7 above. If it is not removed, the 2-star scale will comprise seven points starting at £94,750.

and btw, I am not and never have been of star rank!!!

...oops - the tabs have gone TU - I'll try and fix! Sorted!

[Chicken Leg]

Have done some quick research - and the BBC - quelle surprise - is being very selective by quoting CDS

How are they being selective? I watched the programme and he said he earns between £215000 - 230000. Your table confirms this. :confused:

[Lurking123]

My wife earns more than that. She certainly doesn't have the same level of responsibility. S'pose that's life in the City. :bored:

[ninja-lewis]

What was interesting is the the DG of the BBC gets £700k. I would have thought this should have been more equitable to senior officers and the Prime Minister (£188k), rather than so high - given that we all (have to) fund the BBC. It should therefore attract a salary more like those of public servants (police, forces etc.), rather than the CEO of the biggest banks.
I expect the justification there is to provide a comparable salary to whoever's in charge of ITV.

edited to add: .. and isn't CDS' pay set to equate to MoD's top Sir Humphrey (or is it Sir Kev) - I must say I too thought it was less than £200k - the argument still holds tho'

Supposed to match the Cabinet Secretary and the Lord Chancellor IIRC.

[anotherthing]

CDS has worked his way up to where he is today.

The CDS job comes with a huge responsibility and decisions made at that level can have a profound effect on every single member of the Armed Forces, it is a position which amongst other things bridges the gap between politics and soldiering.

Although not necessarily ideal, the job entails making decisions that are going to have a detrimental effect on one group within the Armed Forces, whilst benefiting another.

I would go as far as saying that finding the right person for the post is very tricky.
As CDS you are stuck between a rock and a hard place.... if the correct person (as far as Armed Forces personnel are concerned) has been chosen then obviously their concern and aim will be to get the very best for their people.. and they will probably want to fight tooth and nail for that.

However they have to weigh this up with the knowledge that if they are too hard nosed, the politicians will get sick of this and will become even more difficult.

A good CDS is worth every penny they earn, the question should not be whether the position of CDS is worth £235k, but whether the person who holds that position is worthy of being CDS and therefore by default, is worthy of getting the money.

[teeteringhead]

How are they being selective? ....simple. Of the about 200,000 servicepeople (provisionally 187,830 as at 1 Nov 07) they pick one (the only one), who earns £50k (23% ish) more than the next few (very few) in the batting order.

If you haven't got the detail, you might assume a smaller gap in pay grades. Few promotions get that sort of percentage pay rise, let alone a job at the same rank. Alternatively, it quickly becomes in tabloid-speak "Air Marshals get £230k.

I accept the same may be true of (my) criticism of Ian Blair ... I'll do some more research......

....after research:

wef 1 Sep 07 - Commissioner of Met - £240813 (more than Jock!)
......................Dep Commissioner - £193959 (more than CinC Air/LAND/Fleet)


that's a 21% rise, but also on promotion

[elf]

The man deserves every penny and more too. Cf to that rude ranker Woss. Mind you, they're both pitifully paid compared to my builder.

[Union Jack]

Surely it all boils down to the fact that many people are paid more than they should be, and many many more people earn less than they should.

Jack

[Tigs2]

I do not think it is a lot of money at all for someone in overall responsibility for the number of people in the armed forces. As Lurking intimates, it is a pittance compared to some (many) folks in the city, most of whom are paid that amount within 5-10 years of starting the job. I think the position and responsibility warrants around £400K per year. Whether the individual who holds the position deserves that amount for their performance is another argument.

[heights good]

There is one way to look at the argument. How much would you expect a CEO/MD of a company of 40K+ employees to be earning?

Think big companies like Virgin etc. They all earn a lot more than £200k. The RAF is just a big company......

HG

[Wingswinger]

Yes, but it's not in business, it doesn't post a balance sheet, show profits, have share capital and pay dividends. That's the difference. That's one of the reasons for my giving up being a very excited but poorly remunerated fighter pilot to become a bored but acceptably-remunerated airline pilot.

My income these days is about the same as that of CAS, a post to which I don't think I could realistically aspire.

[obnoxio f*ckwit]

As heights good put it:How much would you expect a CEO/MD of a company of 40K+ employees to be earning?


He's not, he's CDS so it's more like provisionally 187,830 as at 1 Nov 07 As a CEO/MD of a company that size, with that amount of assets etc, you could add a zero on and no-one would bat an eyelid.

In 2006, Terry Leahy, Chief Executive of Tescos (about 250,000 ish employees), was paid nearly £4m, all he does is sell food.

http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2006/05/30/35602/tesco-pays-chief-executive-sir-terry-leahy-4m.html

Last year, Stuart Rose, CEO of M&S (about 65,000-ish employees), got £7.8m, all he does is sell posh food and pants.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30400-1269667,00.html

Given the responsibility he has, the post of CDS is deserving of the 200-odd grand a year. Whether individuals are worth it may be a different question....

[Wingswinger]

To which I add: Refer to post 19 above. It has nothing to do with the size of the organisation, its staff numbers, estate and equipment. What profit does Sir Jock post at the end of each year? What dividend has he paid? Has he grown the company? Opened new premises? Has he increased market share? Engineered a take over of a competitor? How much has he added to the value of the shares?

That is what it is all about in the private sector. You cannot compare serving one's country with business and commerce. That is what you turn your back on (for a few years, anyway) when you take the Queen's shilling.

Sir Jock hit the nail on the head:

It can never be what I believe is their intrinsic worth because frankly I think their intrinsic worth is far more than anyone can pay. You cannot buy with money the worth of the sort of people we are talking about.


Few of us here would disagree with that. It is what I felt myself when I was still serving. Serving personnel of all ranks are at the whim of politicians and politicians are a reflection of the population at large. The population at large is stunningly ignorant of, and not in tune with, the standards and ethos of HM Forces. It is only political pressure which will change things for The Forces at all levels. For that to happen The Forces will need to convert and convince large numbers of the population at large.

As an aside, speaking as one who spent 18 years wearing RAF uniform, the people who make outstanding military leaders do not necessarily cut it in business and commerce. Indeed, the opposite is true more often that not.

Don't take it too seriously, folks. It's all a game and, who knows, the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury may yet have the last laugh! Where would Sir Terry Leahy and his ilk be then?

[Zoom]

Wingswinger, presumably you are not with Cathay as was it not the case a few years back that some of their Jumbo pilots had contracts worth about £1m per year?

[Wingswinger]

No, not with Cathay. I've never heard of pilots being on anything approaching that sort of sum. £300k is about the tops anywhere in the world (Japan) to my (probably limited) knowledge.

[teeteringhead]

What dividend has he paid?.... dare one suggest ... your ability to make scathing posts about officials......;)

"It is not the journalist ...." etc etc

You point about making profits etc is well made ....


...... however, I refer again to the BBC DG and particularly Sir Ian Blair .....

..... current uniformed strngth of the Met, about 35 000 I think .... but I'll research .....

[moggiee]

I was surprised to see that it was more than his boss (the PM) gets paid.

[Wingswinger]

Teeteringhead,

Quote:
What dividend has he paid?

.... dare one suggest ... your ability to make scathing posts about officials......


I wasn't being scathing at all, just making the point that comparison with business leaders is not appropriate because there is no market to place a value on Admirals/Field Marshalls/Air Marshalls.

The BBC DG is a dodgy one because, although the BBC is funded by the licence fee, it does have some commercial activity. You could argue that a portion of its profits should be returned to the licence-fee payers, who should be regarded as compulsory share-holders, in the form of an annual dividend! BTW I'd like to sell my "shares" in the BBC!

The Met's Blair, on the other hand, is an appropriate comparison. it would be interesting to see what other Chief Constables are paid.

[minigundiplomat]

I was surprised to see that it was more than his boss (the PM) gets paid.

Performance related pay?

[tablet_eraser]

I don't think it's sensible to compare CDS's salary with that of the CEO of Tesco, M&S, or other retailers. There will always be a candidate for CDS, because he comes from within the senior ranks of the Armed Forces and they have to be there. Appointing a CDS merely entails finding the right officer for the job.

Appointing a CEO is a good deal more complex. The company's board not only has to find a suitable candidate, it has to attract him. To do that, it has to enter a competitive market by effectively saying how much it values an individual's leadership and business acumen; the only visible way to do this is by salary.

Armed Forces senior salaries are not competitive salaries because we have no equivalent competitors; retailers have to offer competitive salaries, especially at the very high levels, in order to attract the people they want or need. Now, the question of whether CDS is being paid a fair salary is, I think, quite different. As the professional head of HM Armed Forces, charged with the ultimate military responsibility for the success or failure of every war - and every death that those wars involve - and for the management of a shamefully dwindling supply of money from the Treasury, I think he deserves a better salary. But whatever that salary is, it should be based on his wider responsibilities, not on a shaky comparison between CDS and the CEO of M&S, whose greatest responsibility goes little further than enriching his shareholders.

[teeteringhead]

Wingswinger

apologies for the "scathing" line!

Chief Constables salaries vary an awful lot. Next after the Met comes PSNI (nee RUC) at £179k, following by the mega-forces (West Midlands and Greater Manc) at £168k which is also paid to thefour Assisstant Commissioners at the Met! West Yorkshire gets £156k, then we are into the £140s with the likes of Merseyside, Hampshire and Kent - and City of London who gets £148k - not bad for a square mile!. In the £130s are inter alia Essex, Sussex and South Wales, and you get more rural in the £120s with Norfolk, Suffolk and Gloucs. At the @rse end are small Jockistan forces, with the CCs of Central Scotland or Dumfies & Galloway struggling along with a mere £117k. These are figures wef Sep 07, full details are here. (http://http://www.knowledgenetwork.gov.uk/HO/circular.nsf/1cc4f3413a62d1de80256c5b005101e4/49C70DFA3008ED40802573A900543637/$file/07-8%20%20CHIEF%20OFFICERS%20PAY%20FINAL.doc)

Blair remains the biggest target, I accept the Met also have Branch and Diplomatic and Royal, but it still seems a lot........

[endplay]

An interesting comparison would be the difference between Sir Jocks pay as a 4 star CAS as oposed to a 4 star CDS. 50k pa in the first year and rising with each year in post. Perhaps this could go some way to explaining his lack of protest at the manpower shafting we got during his CAS tour despite his briefings at CASWOs and the Stn Cdrs conference that an Air Force of 41k was too small. Considering that we are fighting on 2 fronts at the moment his visible impact as CDS is non existent. Perhaps he's hoping to join lord West as a goat when he retires. (that's a member of Gordon's Govt Of All the Talents as opposed to a, but then again...)

[moggiee]

Performance related pay?
In that case, I´m surprised by the small differential!

[HeliAviator]

I would hazard a guess that these venerable leader's of our profession have no problems with the payment of their well earned salary via JPA and if per chance they did they have the means to sort it immediately.

Oh how the other half live. :ugh: