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

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

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

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

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.

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.

Sir Jock says
 

in response to Peter Snow So we are getting a huge pay rise and a significant change to our conditions.

Yeah right on.
:suspect:
SJ

Bit confused by your "shock" Affirmatron?

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

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'

Still shocked
 

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?

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...

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

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

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

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:

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.

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.

....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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

As heights good put it:He's not, he's CDS so it's more like 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/articl...-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/...269667,00.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....