Pop open the warm Prosecco! Emily Maitlis is getting a pay rise!
According to the Daily Mail, Our Emily is going to get at least £50,000 a year more, putting her on an equal footing with Evan Davis at over £200,000 pa.
That's one large pay rise for BBC woman, one giant pay rise for BBC womankind.
Those fearing that the BBC might cut back on excessive pay for their top male talent rather than increase the excessive pay of their top female talent will be heartily relieved.
The BBC is making welcome strides towards offering excessive pay awards to all of its top talent, regardless of gender.
Emily and Evan are worth every penny of it, of course. I make it somewhere equivalent to the cost of 1,375+ licence fees that they'll each be getting for presenting Newsnight every year. (In comparison, the UK Prime Minister - whose job is far less important and high-pressured than Emily's - costs around 980 licence fees a year.)
It makes you so proud of the BBC!
It's much like seeing a number of overfed goldfish swimming around in an elaborate goldfish bowl. Some get bigger and fatter - during an otherwise pointless existence.
ReplyDeletePersonally I think it will give her that extra bit of moral high ground from which to criticise the Government's failure to alleviate poverty. Anyway it would be churlish of each of us not to want to throw 0.2p into the plastic cup Emily is shaking in our face, in the name of feminism. Who else would employ the gurner on £200,000 pa? Cut his salary by £25k and up hers by that amount. Job done.
ReplyDelete"it will give her that extra bit of moral high ground"
DeleteWell put.
Wouldn't it have been welcome if the Emily and Evan had agreed that their salaries should be equal at £175,000-00 - a proportionate change in order to meet inequality demands.
DeleteYou can just guess at the dialogue: 'I won't agree to any reduction' says Evan. 'I won't accept anything less than parity' says Emily. 'I think you are both right' says the BBC commissioning person, 'that's agreed then!'.
Yes, you get the sense that money is no object. Savings for the long-suffering Licence payer would be the last of considerations.
Delete