Ex-cabinet secretary says £200,000 job is underpaid
October 6, 2024
Ex-cabinet secretary says £200,000 job is underpaid
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c748we5g359o
by Tartan_Samurai
24 comments
Let’s be real here, he’s right.
We might not like it but he’s right.
And as per history repeating itself time and time again low wages in high pressure/importance roles etc result in corruption, bribes and under table deals.
Government work usually ain’t for the salary, not sure what other benefits they get though, no doubt the pension is off the chain
If 200k isn’t enough to keep you honest, no amount will be
He’d be in for an awful shock if he had to live on an average salary, then.
Considering the gravity of the job, most cabinet ministers (and indeed I would argue MP’s) are underpaid tbh.
Re MP’s more broadly they don’t get nearly enough staff to make informed decisions- the yanks do that specifically far, far better than us.
I feel for him, must be tough working for a pittance, right I’m off to start my 12 hour shift for £11.50 an hour
Try minimum wage with a masters degree if you want to feel shit.
There’s not a single job in the world I wouldn’t put my heart and soul into if you gave me 200k a year. People are far, far too materialistic if 200k isn’t considered good enough.
Yeah I totally feel the guy’s pain. I wonder if he thinks people actually doing proper jobs like our nurses, firemen, cops, teachers etc are underpaid also
Why not tie MP’s salaries to median wage? If they need more money, they have to make the country better for everyone.
(Sorry about the paywall) PwC average UK partner pay falls to £862,000 as sales growth slows https://on.ft.com/3XUFgOn
I know you can say “they should do it for the public service”, but the reality is that at the highest levels you compete for a pool of people who could be off doing work (which often attracts a lot less public scrutiny) for a lot more. The cabinet secretary is the head of the entire civil service in the country, it’s a big job, and some of the candidates for the role aren’t even in the service right now, having gone off to have successful careers outside it already. (Another thing people often complain about: lifers who are institutionalised running the place. But… we don’t want to pay more to get people back in).
Penny wise, pound foolish tends to be the populist way to think about public spending sometimes.
He’s absolutely right but the vast majority of the UK earn peanuts so don’t understand and think it’s a big wage. Any top private sector job in the US is in the realm of millions
He is 100% correct. And this miserable sub is just the comment section on the daily mail website
Putting it into the context he is looking at. In times past a minister would be looking to have a good size family home in London and put all three children through private school.
That isn’t happening today on £200k
Does this excuse Case being absolutely shite at his job?
People in these comments sections struggle to read, don’t they? He’s not saying it’s not a lot of money, he’s saying it’s underpaid for what the role requires, which quite frankly it is. You’d have to pay me a lot more than £200k to do that job.
If they can’t uphold the Nolan principles as part of their role then they have to leave their roles.
£200,000 with literally every day to day cost covered as an expense isn’t an underpaid role. Most of that salary is goes straight to them, whereas is plebs have to pay for everything we need to survive at home on a lot less cash.
Nah, If they don’t like it then find a better paying job, like we all have to do, to match their wanted lifestyles.
Edit : someone has corrected me on this one, I was referring to MPs and NOT civil servants. The main difference is that civil servants have to pay their own day to day living costs
My bad.
In relation to probably less than 5% of jobs, almost exclusively in finance and top level sport he’s right. In relation to what the vast majority of people in this country are earning he’s wrong.
Complaining about £200k is a great example of the inequality that’s built up in the system. The majority need to earn more and top earners probably need to see their earnings grow more slowely.
I’d have no issue with a major overhaul of the pay structure if it came with a total ban on bribes hidden as anything else.
And you don’t get to employ your wife as a secretary and hire an office from your pals. It’s all handed in house by a civil service department.
On top of not being allowed to claim expenses of any kind besides travel.
With how everyone of of our governments have led us off cliff after cliff, I’m starting to think they get paid too much. When someone is bad at their job, they get fired or demoted, yet that never happens with the shitty politicians. Do your job better, don’t be a corrupt, sleazy piece of shit and maybe people might agree you deserve to be paid more
The entire civil service is underpaid. We have to be grown up about this, we can’t complain about their performance and underpay them to the tune of up to 50%. If you accept one, you have to accept the other.
The worst part is when they can’t recruit someone to a role, they end up paying an agency worker 3-4 times the advertised wage. It is very common in digital departments but not exclusive to, across government, who can’t get the staff due to low pay and churn inhouse trained staff to the private sector.
Well my boss makes that, and he’s essentially a middle manager (despite a fancy title) in a mega large company. So yeah if you’re responsible for running the country, £200k is definitely underpaid.
The fact that I make more than a MP, and I’m responsible for one specific process which isn’t even that technical just shows how underpaid politicians are in this country. You’re effectively only ensuring that those who don’t need that money or those who can exploit outside earnings, are the ones who can do it.
He’s right, but I wouldn’t pay the current people in charge that amount.
Higher salaries should attract the best people to lead the country, the best of the best – actual experts, not people who studied “classics, ancient languages..” at uni and face rolled their way through Eaton.
Hes right . A corporate role with that level of accountability would be loads more . Plus bonus etc
24 comments
Let’s be real here, he’s right.
We might not like it but he’s right.
And as per history repeating itself time and time again low wages in high pressure/importance roles etc result in corruption, bribes and under table deals.
Government work usually ain’t for the salary, not sure what other benefits they get though, no doubt the pension is off the chain
If 200k isn’t enough to keep you honest, no amount will be
He’d be in for an awful shock if he had to live on an average salary, then.
Considering the gravity of the job, most cabinet ministers (and indeed I would argue MP’s) are underpaid tbh.
Re MP’s more broadly they don’t get nearly enough staff to make informed decisions- the yanks do that specifically far, far better than us.
I feel for him, must be tough working for a pittance, right I’m off to start my 12 hour shift for £11.50 an hour
Try minimum wage with a masters degree if you want to feel shit.
There’s not a single job in the world I wouldn’t put my heart and soul into if you gave me 200k a year. People are far, far too materialistic if 200k isn’t considered good enough.
Yeah I totally feel the guy’s pain. I wonder if he thinks people actually doing proper jobs like our nurses, firemen, cops, teachers etc are underpaid also
Why not tie MP’s salaries to median wage? If they need more money, they have to make the country better for everyone.
(Sorry about the paywall) PwC average UK partner pay falls to £862,000 as sales growth slows https://on.ft.com/3XUFgOn
I know you can say “they should do it for the public service”, but the reality is that at the highest levels you compete for a pool of people who could be off doing work (which often attracts a lot less public scrutiny) for a lot more. The cabinet secretary is the head of the entire civil service in the country, it’s a big job, and some of the candidates for the role aren’t even in the service right now, having gone off to have successful careers outside it already. (Another thing people often complain about: lifers who are institutionalised running the place. But… we don’t want to pay more to get people back in).
Penny wise, pound foolish tends to be the populist way to think about public spending sometimes.
He’s absolutely right but the vast majority of the UK earn peanuts so don’t understand and think it’s a big wage. Any top private sector job in the US is in the realm of millions
He is 100% correct. And this miserable sub is just the comment section on the daily mail website
Putting it into the context he is looking at. In times past a minister would be looking to have a good size family home in London and put all three children through private school.
That isn’t happening today on £200k
Does this excuse Case being absolutely shite at his job?
People in these comments sections struggle to read, don’t they? He’s not saying it’s not a lot of money, he’s saying it’s underpaid for what the role requires, which quite frankly it is. You’d have to pay me a lot more than £200k to do that job.
If they can’t uphold the Nolan principles as part of their role then they have to leave their roles.
£200,000 with literally every day to day cost covered as an expense isn’t an underpaid role. Most of that salary is goes straight to them, whereas is plebs have to pay for everything we need to survive at home on a lot less cash.
Nah, If they don’t like it then find a better paying job, like we all have to do, to match their wanted lifestyles.
Edit : someone has corrected me on this one, I was referring to MPs and NOT civil servants. The main difference is that civil servants have to pay their own day to day living costs
My bad.
In relation to probably less than 5% of jobs, almost exclusively in finance and top level sport he’s right. In relation to what the vast majority of people in this country are earning he’s wrong.
Complaining about £200k is a great example of the inequality that’s built up in the system. The majority need to earn more and top earners probably need to see their earnings grow more slowely.
I’d have no issue with a major overhaul of the pay structure if it came with a total ban on bribes hidden as anything else.
And you don’t get to employ your wife as a secretary and hire an office from your pals. It’s all handed in house by a civil service department.
On top of not being allowed to claim expenses of any kind besides travel.
With how everyone of of our governments have led us off cliff after cliff, I’m starting to think they get paid too much. When someone is bad at their job, they get fired or demoted, yet that never happens with the shitty politicians. Do your job better, don’t be a corrupt, sleazy piece of shit and maybe people might agree you deserve to be paid more
The entire civil service is underpaid. We have to be grown up about this, we can’t complain about their performance and underpay them to the tune of up to 50%. If you accept one, you have to accept the other.
The worst part is when they can’t recruit someone to a role, they end up paying an agency worker 3-4 times the advertised wage. It is very common in digital departments but not exclusive to, across government, who can’t get the staff due to low pay and churn inhouse trained staff to the private sector.
Well my boss makes that, and he’s essentially a middle manager (despite a fancy title) in a mega large company. So yeah if you’re responsible for running the country, £200k is definitely underpaid.
The fact that I make more than a MP, and I’m responsible for one specific process which isn’t even that technical just shows how underpaid politicians are in this country. You’re effectively only ensuring that those who don’t need that money or those who can exploit outside earnings, are the ones who can do it.
He’s right, but I wouldn’t pay the current people in charge that amount.
Higher salaries should attract the best people to lead the country, the best of the best – actual experts, not people who studied “classics, ancient languages..” at uni and face rolled their way through Eaton.
Hes right . A corporate role with that level of accountability would be loads more . Plus bonus etc