OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[Andy_Faber]

I totally agree with your sentiment about University Principles just as I do about others at the top of their little ‘empires’ and as I do about the outrageous sums paid to professional sportsmen etc.

there is a difference though in that University Principles are funded out of the public purse. The ones identified in the press recently must be just the tip of the iceberg, and this excuse about 'avoiding a drain of talent' is just b*****ks, there's a massive pool of talent who could do those jobs earning a fraction of that amount. Jobs for the boys (or in recent cases, girls) IMO.

[ramAnag]

there is a difference though in that University Principles are funded out of the public purse. The ones identified in the press recently must be just the tip of the iceberg, and this excuse about 'avoiding a drain of talent' is just b*****ks, there's a massive pool of talent who could do those jobs earning a fraction of that amount. Jobs for the boys (or in recent cases, girls) IMO.

No disagreement here Andy. On the subject of unprincipled Principals and wasted public money we are in full agreement.
I’m sure there are plenty of other examples of money from the ‘public purse’ being wasted, in fact I could provide you with many from my own experience. Equally there are many examples of chronic deprivation within the public sector.

[Andy_Faber]

No disagreement here Andy. On the subject of unprincipled Principals and wasted public money we are in full agreement.
I’m sure there are plenty of other examples of money from the ‘public purse’ being wasted, in fact I could provide you with many from my own experience. Equally there are many examples of chronic deprivation within the public sector.

So I think the sort of point I'm making is that 'chronic deprivation within the public sector' could be at least partly overcome by a root and branch review of the waste and inequalities therein rather than chasing those doing the same in business (to start with at least). In a different, but still publicly funded, arena: John Humphries, £650k? Je*us wept.

[ramAnag]

So I think the sort of point I'm making is that 'chronic deprivation within the public sector' could be at least partly overcome by a root and branch review of the waste and inequalities therein rather than chasing those doing the same in business (to start with at least). In a different, but still publicly funded, arena: John Humphries, £650k? Je*us wept.

Again I agree entirely. We seem to have lost our sense of perspective and common sense.
I imagine there is also plenty of waste and overpayment within the private sector but looking at extremes seldom, imo, tells the whole story and however much we, quite correctly, bang on about all those from University Principals to John Humpries and even Chris Martin being obscenely well rewarded, it doesn’t ultimately alter the fact that many of our public services are being starved of ***** funds.

P.S. Perhaps one of the best places to begin an assessment of wasted public money might be in Westminster?

[Andy_Faber]

Again I agree entirely. We seem to have lost our sense of perspective and common sense.
I imagine there is also plenty of waste and overpayment within the private sector but looking at extremes seldom, imo, tells the whole story and however much we, quite correctly, bang on about all those from University Principals to John Humpries and even Chris Martin being obscenely well rewarded, it doesn’t ultimately alter the fact that many of our public services are being starved of ***** funds.

P.S. Perhaps one of the best places to begin an assessment of wasted public money might be in Westminster?

I'll just say one more thing on this hobby horse issue of mine then I'll shut up. My observation (through personal expereince not what I've seen on the telly, admittedly based on not an awfully large sample but enough to rile me), is that some of such people are actually no 'better' at their job than any one of a number of their minions getting paid a fraction, and have essentially just 'lucked into' their roles, or clung onto a 'sponsor' for long enough to get traction up that greasy pole.

[ramAnag]

I'll just say one more thing on this hobby horse issue of mine then I'll shut up. My observation (through personal expereince not what I've seen on the telly, admittedly based on not an awfully large sample but enough to rile me), is that some of such people are actually no 'better' at their job than any one of a number of their minions getting paid a fraction, and have essentially just 'lucked into' their roles, or clung onto a 'sponsor' for long enough to get traction up that greasy pole.

Not sure where you’re trying to go with this. Again I can’t disagree with you but is it any different in the private sector?
Circumstances have dictated that I’ve had a few ‘run ins’ with a number of private sector organisations of late. One Internet provider, a furniture company and a kitchen company to be precise. Frankly, in my professional working life, had I ever responded to the parents of pupils as inadequately as these companies have responded to me or provided such an utterly useless service I’d have expected to be in the deep brown stuff.

[roger_ramjet]

The difference between public sector and private sector salary levels would seem to lie in how you measure value added. In the private sector it is financial and linked heavily to shareholder yields. In the public sector its far less clear to see as its measured in service and other intangibles. But I struggle to see how a senior university administrator can add sufficient value to justify the disclosed remuneration levels (plus of course a fat pension contribution and other add ons).

[ramAnag]

The difference between public sector and private sector salary levels would seem to lie in how you measure value added. In the private sector it is financial and linked heavily to shareholder yields. In the public sector its far less clear to see as its measured in service and other intangibles. But I struggle to see how a senior university administrator can add sufficient value to justify the disclosed remuneration levels (plus of course a fat pension contribution and other add ons).

I entirely agree with your comments about ‘senior university administrators’ Rog, but aren’t we all ‘shareholders’ in having an educated, healthy and safe society. That is what most public sector employees are employed to provide. Very difficult to quantify perhaps but essential nonetheless imo.

[swaledale]

The debate about University vice chancellors etc. misses the point as strictly speaking the funding is quasi public sector, in that tuition fees are borrowed from the government by students who are supposed to pay them back (yes I know that the cost of the loans, the debts and the administration thereof actually means they are publicly funded but thats the system). Universities get other funding from a variety of sources both private and public, those who oversee the better ones are more than likely worth the money given the contribution that their research and work does to the overall economy, however doubt those former FE and technical colleges warrant even half the salaries being paid.

But then human beings in organisations whether public or private tend to organise matters to their own advantage, "benchmarking" against similar posts in similar organisations in a self perpetuating race to the top.

I disagree Rog that private sector pay is necessarily linked to shareholder yields, that is after all what a great deal of the debate about pay in organisations with shareholders, such as the banks etc has been about - that failure is rewarded just maybe a few million less than success, but then what is a few million when one earns millions?

I've done a fair few reviews in private sector organisations where there is clearly little relationship between salary and performance or even the so called employment market and often in the private sector top jobs pay is masked by bonuses which can and often are twice or three times the stated annual salary and linked to targets that frankly only a complete fool would not be able to meet.

Conversely I've worked with charities and the public sector where very talented and able people are paid a fraction of what an equivalent job with the same breadth of responsibilities would be paid in the private sector.

Of course go lower down the organisational structure and the differential can change.

[Andy_Faber]

Not sure where you’re trying to go with this. Again I can’t disagree with you but is it any different in the private sector?
Circumstances have dictated that I’ve had a few ‘run ins’ with a number of private sector organisations of late. One Internet provider, a furniture company and a kitchen company to be precise. Frankly, in my professional working life, had I ever responded to the parents of pupils as inadequately as these companies have responded to me or provided such an utterly useless service I’d have expected to be in the deep brown stuff.

Whats different is I'm conceptually trying to help you with your cash-starved public sector issue, and exec pay saved in the private sector wont help with that. I've already offered the idea of reducing demand rather than supply, now I'm proposing distribution of cash further down the food chain rather than onto the gravy train

[MadAmster]

University Principals. Can they be compared to CEO's in business? Quite probably yes. The bigger and better known tend to have some faculties that cost a lot of money to run. The actual cost to students would run into tens of thousands or more a year if not for sponsors, bequests and the huge amounts they charge foreign students to study there. If the Principal can be seen as greatly responsible for all this extra "income" then he may well be worth a large stipend.

[ramAnag]

Whats different is I'm conceptually trying to help you with your cash-starved public sector issue, and exec pay saved in the private sector wont help with that. I've already offered the idea of reducing demand rather than supply, now I'm proposing distribution of cash further down the food chain rather than onto the gravy train

And again (is this some kind of record?) I can only agree with your final sentence...but maybe the ‘cash starved public sector issue’ will only be resolved by a rethink on the distribution of money from the Exchequer or, to speak the unspeakable, an increase in Income Tax.
Perhaps, seeing as the electorate were obviously thought capable of reaching an informed decision on something as complex as Brexit we should now have a referendum on what the priorities should be for public spending...multi choice answers...HS2, the Armed Forces, Trident, Education, the NHS, civilised care facilities for the elderly or restoration of the Houses of Parliament etc.

[Andy_Faber]

And again (is this some kind of record?) I can only agree with your final sentence...but maybe the ‘cash starved public sector issue’ will only be resolved by a rethink on the distribution of money from the Exchequer or, to speak the unspeakable, an increase in Income Tax.
Perhaps, seeing as the electorate were obviously thought capable of reaching an informed decision on something as complex as Brexit we should now have a referendum on what the priorities should be for public spending...multi choice answers...HR2, the Armed Forces, Trident, Education, the NHS, civilised care facilities for the elderly or restoration of the Houses of Parliament etc.

And there we disagree. An increase in income tax is the easy way out, driving efficiency is the way to go. And I DON'T mean slashing budgets, that's a crude tool. I mean making things run better and then reaping the time and money benefits of doing that. I've only worked on the margins of process improvement/efficiency, but Mrs F spent a decade in the thick of it and her employers made some startling changes (in the private sector), notably without redundancy impact

As I'm sure you know, the electorate won't be trusted with such decisions, because they would of course be inclined to vote for the return of capital punishment and to slash/remove foreign aid. Ironically, both of these changes would aid your desire of increasing resources available for public services, but I'm sure not in the way you want.

[MadAmster]

I am in favour of foreign aid. Partly because some of those in need are from countries we raped of their natural recources in order to make GB Great. We owe them IMO.

Some are countries with Space programmes and Nuclear arms. If they prefer to spend on those two "projects" rather than on your own people and their futures, then you should not receive aid.

[ramAnag]

And there we disagree. An increase in income tax is the easy way out, driving efficiency is the way to go. And I DON'T mean slashing budgets, that's a crude tool. I mean making things run better and then reaping the time and money benefits of doing that. I've only worked on the margins of process improvement/efficiency, but Mrs F spent a decade in the thick of it and her employers made some startling changes (in the private sector), notably without redundancy impact

As I'm sure you know, the electorate won't be trusted with such decisions, because they would of course be inclined to vote for the return of capital punishment and to slash/remove foreign aid. Ironically, both of these changes would aid your desire of increasing resources available for public services, but I'm sure not in the way you want.

Take your point about taxation, Andy, but I think we have to, at some point, recognise that tax can be a good thing provided that the money raised is targeted properly.
As for the referendum point...it was partly ‘tongue in cheek’, but the serious point is...if, and I agree again, the electorate can’t be trusted with such decisions, then wtf were they ever given the ‘vote’ over our future role in Europe? Totally senseless imo.

Also agree with MA about Foreign Aid.