News, reports and opinion from the UK and Global insurance marketplaces
Thanks to a Freedom of Information request from the Taxpayers’ Alliance it’s been revealed that councils have dodged a duty of giving details of all their high earners in case they get set upon by members of the public.
The TA has accused council chiefs of resorting to “emotional blackmail” and “scare-mongering”. The Government wanted councils to list the names and salaries, as well as pensions, perks and pay-offs, of everyone paid more than £50,000 a year.
Councils have since persuaded ministers that they should only have to disclose the full details of staff earning more than £150,000 a year. Councils will only have to list the number of staff and the job titles of those employees getting more than £50,000.
Where’s the logic in this? Do councils think it’s OK for tax payers to know the whereabouts of council fat cats in order to get deep down and personal with them in an aggressive way?
I suspect it’s because the best paid council execs live well away from potential aggressors and their off-spring do not attend crap state schools.
In any case why did the Government think £50,000 a year is big money? It’s but a fraction of what ex England soccer ball team captain John Terry pays his strumpets to keep schtum and would barely pay the mortgage on a bolt hole in a half-decent area.
As it stands just 114 council staff, most of them chief executives, will have to disclose their pay and be named and shamed, as it were.
Also on the topic of pay, more evidence emerges of HR’s peripheral role in setting it.
David Coats, associate director of think-tank The Work Foundation has said that banks which insisted on paying huge bonuses and rewards in the aftermath of the financial crisis were risking ruining their reputation – wrong Dave they lost that in 2008 – and employer brand. But HR had little boardroom influence in reward decisions.
“If you take the financial crisis – the approach being taken to remuneration at the top is doing nothing to remedy the reputational damage at all. HR is peddling furiously but frankly doesn’t have the clout inside organisations to make the difference that will overcome risk to reputation.”
Oh dear – HRniks had better stick to rolling out benefits packages and P45s, and steer well clear of the board room.