I have to take issue with finanance with the whole statement-
“senior staff pay is at or below the London average for their positions.”
Firstly, the statement implies that there is some statistical basis for this statement, unfortunately, because of the diversity of the senior management teams in London Boroughs, no such comparison is feasible , the statement is merely subjective opinion.
However, what we do know is that the Chief Executive is the 5th Highest Paid in all London Boroughs, with the Finance Director about the same.These figures are on exactly the same basis,and are verifiable from the London Boroughs’ Annual Accounts, if Finanace is unaware of the rules applying to the publication of Senior officers pay, I will gladly point them in the right direction, preferably before they publish this years Accounts.
So - For Homework- D -Minus
For Disinformation - A -Star
“Some of the comparisons of officers’ salaries that have appeared on this thread are misleading as they do not compare salaries on a like-for-like basis. Some of the external salaries compared do not include pension contributions and other on-costs.”
As no one has actually asked me how I arrived at these comparisons, Finance
is not in a position to make any comment as to whether the figures are misleading, These figures are Veriifiable and on the same basis.
So –For Homework- D- Minus
For Misinformation-A- Star
The external salaries i.e. Barking /Dagenham an d Havering quoted are on exactly the same as that of Redbridge, and include all the same components, and would take two minutes to check.
So For Homework F- Minus (Complete Fail)
For Misinformation- A- Double Star
Why am I not surprised that Finance Claim £2 million of savings with absolutely no figures to support it, nor, any explanation as to whether, it includes redundancy payments, pension contributions,early retirement costs etc.We still have the anomaly of all these costs being removed, but the number of Officers earning £50,000 p.a has risen ( whereas in most London Boroughs it has fallen).
So- For Homework -F -Minus
For Lack of Information- A- Star
From the previous post
“We believe that we offer good value for money especially when these salaries are compared to those in the private sector”
We already know from previous research that the Senior Officers are all career Public Service employees,and a comparison with the Private Sector is a specious argument ,however as you have introduced it, the following has been published by The Office of National Statistics (nov 2011)
Directors and chief executives of major organisations - Average Annual Salary-£112,157p.a.
Redbridge Chief Executive Annual Salary £245,555 p.a.
Corporate managers and senior officials- Average Annual Salary-£77,679p.a
Redbridge Finance Director Annual Salary£170,003p.a.
It is debatable whether “we offer good value for money”
So For Homework – F Minus
For Disinformation –A -Double Star
I am disappointed that Finance Officers have failed to check figures, have failed to check with me,sources of figures ,and have made scurrilous and mischievous statements as to my ability to present figures on a comparable basis,whilst ,themselves, making all sorts of unverifiable claims as to the amount of savings made.
Despite 2 posts from Finance, we still do not have answers to two questions posed,
1 Why the Chief Executive’s salary rose by £10,000 whilst all Officers above £21000 have not had a rise?
2. Why after all these supposed savings why the number of £50,000 p.a., Officers rose?
I leave it to Councillors to ponder, that we have the 5th highest paid Chief Executive in
London, do we have the 5th most effective Borough in London?
