Forums Forums Local News Wirral Council - Overpaid?

There are 11 employees with a remuneration package that exceeds £100,000 and one greater than £150,000 in Wirral Council.

The Council have challenged this by saying there are only 6 with "salaries" over £100,000 but of course there are many other ways the staff are remunerated than plain salary.

Country wide 3,483 council staff receive more than £100,000

SOURCE1

There is also mention that in the NHS at least 50,137 received more than £100,000, 1,757 of the 50,000 received more than £200,000, 203 more than £300,000, 60 more than £400,000 and 8 more than £500,000

SOURCE2

Wirral Leaks is well worth keeping an eye on for council scandals. And boy are there a lot of them. The amount of OUR money that is wasted by this incompetent shower is incredible. Backhanders and payments to "consultants" who just happen to be ex-council employees and mates of high-ranking council officers. Failure to comply with Freedom of Information requests. And lots more.

Wirral Leaks - CLICKY

Time to think about withholding council tax in protest.

Exactly MikeT. So very true.


quote:
Working out a good remuneration package will help to attract, retain and encourage the right employees."

Almost the exact same words our local labour councillor gave to me a while back, about our new Chief Executive Officer. Up £40,000 a year from the previous one. Unreal !


With that in mind, is it our councillors who agree to these packages ? I assume they must, and then go on to tell us how bad things are, blame the other side and threaten to close libraries. There was a list of salaries on the Council website. but I think we wouldn't be able to find it now.
For goodness sake, these amounts are greater than those who lead the country.

And it could get worse. We could end up being part of this shower:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-34767426

I agree, Liverpool is pushing for this but I can never see Wirral getting a fair share of the money. I'm amazed the smaller councils like Halton, Knowsley or St Helens are risking this.

By population (roughly):

Liverpool 31%
Wirral 21%
Sefton 18%
St Helens 12%
Knowsley 10%
Halton 8%

I haven't found the land areas for all the districts but obviously this should impact on the division of money as well.

At the end of the day these separate councils compete for businesses and other investment, how can it work under a combined region?

I don't remember voting for this! Must have missed it.

Don't remember voting for Police Commissioners either. Must have missed it.

However, no doubt it will provide jobs for unemployed MEPs when we vote to opt out of the EU (er - will that be next year, or perhaps the year after that, depending on events related to the Middle East).

The MEP's are something else. We have our elected Government, we have our respective parties, i.e Labour, Green, Tory, Lib Democrats. The MEP's take up residence in the European Parliament which because it incorporates every other EU country, do not necessarily have the same agendas. So MEP's are then assigned to another political group that covers the whole of Europe. Voices not being heard, in the wider picture and probably why we have to follow certain criteria which seems to be rapidly gaining changes to our own Governments. We have to follow EU policies and all the parties that are involved, because we are part of it. Won't be long before we loose what we recognise as our own i.e Labour, Tory, Green, etc and have (European Peoples party (Christian Democrats)(Tory), European Free Alliance (Green) European United Left - Nordic Green Left (Communist/Socialist) Europe of Nation and Freedoms (Far Right/Nationalists), Europe and Freedom of Direct Democracy (Euro Sceptics) and a dozen others to add confusion. Since it started many parties have constantly been merged or got rid of. The whole set up is bogus in many ways .

We don't even know which direction Europe will truly take us all. So lets get out whilst we can. Quite sure we'd be welcomed back again, at a later date if needed.

Thinking I'm slightly off topic ere, but got carried away...again

The European parties affiliate into Groups to prevent them being minority parties, this way they get more money and more parliamentary time so that they do have a say.

There are 751 MEPs, possibly 250 different parties, there isn't really any other way of doing things, if each had their say it would take up too much time.

Merseyside Chief Constable's salary is £162,024, a totally obscene amount of money for that role in my eyes, I'd expect it to be about £90,000 and only that high to maintain a command structure beneath it.

I think the police and fire services should be integrated to some extent.

Aren't all business deals done behind closed doors and not as you'd expect in council offices?
I reckon most of the council leaders are in the pockets of a lot of developers and business men before they got the position. None of these people are in the job for the benefit of the public.

You have it completely wrong ! If many had worked in the private sector, they would have lost their jobs for various reasons. I have worked for both. In fact , half of them wouldn't have been given a job in the private sector !

I also see many private sector workers that shouldn't be let loose with a plastic duck. In both public and private sectors it is down to poor management and of course the poor management are the ones with the bigger pay packets.

Nearly every department has that guy who manages to sort things out but its the manager who gets the money.

Its common practice to promote the deadwood or bullsh*tters away from the sharp end and yet the companies wonder why they end up with rubbish at the top.

Managers should be assessed on functionality, the same as every other worker. Managers are a support function, there is no reason why they should have more pay just because they are a management grade (some companies do have pay reversal).

Take a nice little 3 person welding business, manager, secretary and Fred the welder and think it through who actually puts what into the business. Which one could never be promoted to a management function? Which one would have the least impact on the business if they left? Which one would be the easiest to replace?

Generally I've found that the longer the management chain the worse they are.

I've probably had about 20% good managers, 30% who were ok and 50% that noticeably reduced efficiency.

Probably my best manager made a good start with the statement "you're here to do the job, I'm here to keep the rest of cr*p away from you", I worked hard for him, he worked hard for me, I pitied him for the rubbish he had to put up with.

I don't understand the attraction of being in management, I've done it against my will a few years here, takes all sorts I guess.

Does that mean you were an uncommitted manager, DD ?


...and what about the other 20% ?

Only joking ...........

Trying again, because granny can't count or her eyes are getting dim. It's one or the other.