I would imagine Huw Edwards looked like the right candidate when he was appointed. It isn't so much who they appoint but how they deal with issues that come up afterwards IMO. I think Edwards is in his mid 60s and has a great pension I'm sure and might have retired soon anyway. If he escapes jail it looks like he has pretty much got away with it. He shouldn't have been allowed to resign whilst the investigation was taking place.
I would imagine Huw Edwards looked like the right cabdidate when he was appointed. It isn't so much who they appoint but how they deal with issues that come up afterwards IMO.
Surprised about Jon Sopel's comments, and yes I am ex BBC!, perhaps he is trying to get back in there, having been the North American Editor on a very lucrative salary?. I see no real defence for Edwards, he was paid more than the current DG, and as others have already posted, and he also he need's to consider his position!. Edwards pleaded guilty, and has frankly brought disgrace on the Public Service Broadcaster, in my opinion! Too many newscasters, are freelance, and earn far more than there stated income from The BBC, in public speaking and 'events'.
The current DG Tim Davie, is a failed Tory wannabe politician, so not the left winger you might expect!. Always been a contradiction in being the editorial chief, and a policy maker! The BBC needs a radical overhaul, I have long argued it needs to be a subscription channel.
As much as I am supportive of The BBC in theory, it's original purpose as stated by Reith, 'Inform, educate, entertain' needs drastically revising in this age.
I hope to god you wern't a journalist or a proof reader.
This is a disingenuous clip. This was when he went off air for propositioning - still a scumbag, but Jon Sopel's comment was in that context. It was not recorded after Edward's pleaded guilty....
Not had 'Proof readers' or sub editors as they were called well before I left in 2010, and I was a staff member, I worked in 'Internal communication' , it was a running joke on Charlton Life as I commented on BBC events, mainly because I was the Art Director of internal communications'. Nice title, but just a graphic designer. Most of us that are designers, have a better use of headline writers, than sub editors anyway! by some strange quirk I found in working for the national press!. One of my jobs was to design the 'annual report' for the BBC and design the weekly newspaper as was, but that got put on line. Compared to working at the Financial Times, it was not that well paid, but compared to the BMA, not as dull!. In essence I designed magazines and Newspapers. I was not responsible for the editorial. I also designed the Supporters Trust news of this very football club, but not the content, as well as designing the Museum logo, and certain graphics.
Surprised about Jon Sopel's comments, and yes I am ex BBC!, perhaps he is trying to get back in there, having been the North American Editor on a very lucrative salary?. I see no real defence for Edwards, he was paid more than the current DG, and as others have already posted, and he also he need's to consider his position!. Edwards pleaded guilty, and has frankly brought disgrace on the Public Service Broadcaster, in my opinion! Too many newscasters, are freelance, and earn far more than there stated income from The BBC, in public speaking and 'events'.
The current DG Tim Davie, is a failed Tory wannabe politician, so not the left winger you might expect!. Always been a contradiction in being the editorial chief, and a policy maker! The BBC needs a radical overhaul, I have long argued it needs to be a subscription channel.
As much as I am supportive of The BBC in theory, it's original purpose as stated by Reith, 'Inform, educate, entertain' needs drastically revising in this age.
I hope to god you wern't a journalist or a proof reader.
This is a disingenuous clip. This was when he went off air for propositioning - still a scumbag, but Jon Sopel's comment was in that context. It was not recorded after Edward's pleaded guilty....
Not had 'Proof readers' or sub editors as they were called well before I left in 2010, and I was a staff member, I worked in 'Internal communication' , it was a running joke on Charlton Life as I commented on BBC events, mainly because I was the Art Director of internal communications'. Nice title, but just a graphic designer. Most of us that are designers, have a better use of headline writers, than sub editors anyway! by some strange quirk I found in working for the national press!. One of my jobs was to design the 'annual report' for the BBC and design the weekly newspaper as was, but that got put on line. Compared to working at the Financial Times, it was not that well paid, but compared to the BMA, not as dull!. In essence I designed magazines and Newspapers. I was not responsible for the editorial. I also designed the Supporters Trust news of this very football club, but not the content, as well as designing the Museum logo, and certain graphics.
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
It's a stretch to see a story about children being abused and decide that the big issue with the story is how much the perpetrator was paid before pleading guilty.
The story is not about a man and how much he was paid. It's about child victims.
I have a lot of time for the BBC and generally dismiss the left right arguments because I realise that it’s an almost impossible balancing act to report “impartially” and still not find a way to upset one or the other. What I don’t really understand is the way they remunerate their “stars”. The list we see doesn’t include those presenters that are employed through production companies, whose salaries do not need to be published. Many earn more than those headline Gary Lineker salaries. It amazes me that for example a news anchor earns as much as they do. Yes they become familiar faces but is it really a job that couldn’t just as easily be done by someone on half the money ? I know they do more than just read the news and are accredited journalists in their own right, but getting on for £500k for Edwards !!!!! I think a rethink on how the headliners are paid is needed. If they want to leave and go elsewhere then so be it. There’s always some talented and bright young thing to step in and up. I do think the beebs days as is are numbered and the way it’s run needs root and branch change. I hope that it’s able to change and not eventually forced to become a shadow of what it is at its very best.
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
It's a stretch to see a story about children being abused and decide that the big issue with the story is how much the perpetrator was paid before pleasing guilty.
The story is not about a man and how much he was paid. It's about child victims.
The thread us about BBC salaries, so would've thought this is the perfect place to raise the point, and maybe a new thread would be needed if you want to discuss the charges he's facing
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
It's a stretch to see a story about children being abused and decide that the big issue with the story is how much the perpetrator was paid before pleasing guilty.
The story is not about a man and how much he was paid. It's about child victims.
The thread us about BBC salaries, so would've thought this is the perfect place to raise the point, and maybe a new thread would be needed if you want to discuss the charges he's facing
The amount of money he was paid for a few weeks is utterly trivial - to the extent that it should be considered pretty much irrelevant - in the context of the crime he's guilty of.
There are plenty of topics on the subject of BBC salaries that could be discussed. (One of which could well be why the top salaries appear to be reducing over time).
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
It's a stretch to see a story about children being abused and decide that the big issue with the story is how much the perpetrator was paid before pleasing guilty.
The story is not about a man and how much he was paid. It's about child victims.
The thread us about BBC salaries, so would've thought this is the perfect place to raise the point, and maybe a new thread would be needed if you want to discuss the charges he's facing
The amount of money he was paid for a few weeks is utterly trivial - to the extent that it should be considered pretty much irrelevant - in the context of the crime he's guilty of.
There are plenty of topics on the subject of BBC salaries that could be discussed. (One of which could well be why the top salaries appear to be reducing over time).
It's quite simple - why was a BBC top earner suspended on full pay while under investigation, then at the same time given a pay rise.
The fact he was being investigated for the accusations as they were, brings a whole different nuance to it, like it or not, imo. On top of that, it ain't the first time something like this has happened is it. (Which is now stepping away from 'BBC salaries', but still completely relevant imo)
I would imagine Huw Edwards looked like the right candidate when he was appointed. It isn't so much who they appoint but how they deal with issues that come up afterwards IMO. I think Edwards is in his mid 60s and has a great pension I'm sure and might have retired soon anyway. If he escapes jail it looks like he has pretty much got away with it. He shouldn't have been allowed to resign whilst the investigation was taking place.
Was on about the spelling mistakes and typos on the BBC News website these days.
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
It's a stretch to see a story about children being abused and decide that the big issue with the story is how much the perpetrator was paid before pleasing guilty.
The story is not about a man and how much he was paid. It's about child victims.
The thread us about BBC salaries, so would've thought this is the perfect place to raise the point, and maybe a new thread would be needed if you want to discuss the charges he's facing
The amount of money he was paid for a few weeks is utterly trivial - to the extent that it should be considered pretty much irrelevant - in the context of the crime he's guilty of.
There are plenty of topics on the subject of BBC salaries that could be discussed. (One of which could well be why the top salaries appear to be reducing over time).
It's quite simple - why was a BBC top earner suspended on full pay while under investigation, then at the same time given a pay rise.
The fact he was being investigated for the accusations as they were, brings a whole different nuance to it, like it or not, imo. On top of that, it ain't the first time something like this has happened is it. (Which is now stepping away from 'BBC salaries', but still completely relevant imo)
Suspended on full pay because he wasn't - at that time - guilty. (We're all innocent until found guilty). Given a pay rise, before the allegations arose. I don't think that's wildly different from how other employers might handle a similar case.
I won't add more, though. Because I think it's deeply unpleasant to discuss a criminal's pay - and score points over the BBC - over and above giving consideration to his child victims.
I would imagine Huw Edwards looked like the right cabdidate when he was appointed. It isn't so much who they appoint but how they deal with issues that come up afterwards IMO.
When I worked in HR, you always suspended on full pay. Furthermore, we didn't process a disciplinary all the time an offence was subject to criminal prosecution, due to sub judicy protocols.
What I would say is that when benchmarking equivalent jobs across the business sector, without fail the BBC paid top upper quartile salaries. As a job evaluator and remuneration expert, it just appeared to be wrong and unnecessary.
Little wonder they have been required to defend multiple equal pay claims from women employees.
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
It's a stretch to see a story about children being abused and decide that the big issue with the story is how much the perpetrator was paid before pleasing guilty.
The story is not about a man and how much he was paid. It's about child victims.
The thread us about BBC salaries, so would've thought this is the perfect place to raise the point, and maybe a new thread would be needed if you want to discuss the charges he's facing
The amount of money he was paid for a few weeks is utterly trivial - to the extent that it should be considered pretty much irrelevant - in the context of the crime he's guilty of.
There are plenty of topics on the subject of BBC salaries that could be discussed. (One of which could well be why the top salaries appear to be reducing over time).
It's quite simple - why was a BBC top earner suspended on full pay while under investigation, then at the same time given a pay rise.
The fact he was being investigated for the accusations as they were, brings a whole different nuance to it, like it or not, imo. On top of that, it ain't the first time something like this has happened is it. (Which is now stepping away from 'BBC salaries', but still completely relevant imo)
It’s pretty obvious.
You’re suspended and whilst being investigated you get paid (in case it turns out you didn’t do it). Then the pay rise was clearly contractual.
Then when the filth came out they rightfully got rid, end of story. Surely no one hates the BBC that much they’re pretending they’re somehow “pro nonce” and actually rewarded such disgusting crimes.
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
It's a stretch to see a story about children being abused and decide that the big issue with the story is how much the perpetrator was paid before pleasing guilty.
The story is not about a man and how much he was paid. It's about child victims.
The thread us about BBC salaries, so would've thought this is the perfect place to raise the point, and maybe a new thread would be needed if you want to discuss the charges he's facing
The amount of money he was paid for a few weeks is utterly trivial - to the extent that it should be considered pretty much irrelevant - in the context of the crime he's guilty of.
There are plenty of topics on the subject of BBC salaries that could be discussed. (One of which could well be why the top salaries appear to be reducing over time).
It's quite simple - why was a BBC top earner suspended on full pay while under investigation, then at the same time given a pay rise.
The fact he was being investigated for the accusations as they were, brings a whole different nuance to it, like it or not, imo. On top of that, it ain't the first time something like this has happened is it. (Which is now stepping away from 'BBC salaries', but still completely relevant imo)
It’s pretty obvious.
You’re suspended and whilst being investigated you get paid (in case it turns out you didn’t do it). Then the pay rise was clearly contractual.
Then when the filth came out they rightfully got rid, end of story. Surely no one hates the BBC that much they’re pretending they’re somehow “pro nonce” and actually rewarded such disgusting crimes.
I don't think they're pro-nonce, that would be stupid to even
suggest it, but they don't have a very good history in dealing with the issue,
even after they're made aware that someone on their books is an active sex
offender.
Regarding salaries: This is public money they're being paid,
so would it be beyond reason to write it into contracts of highly paid, high
profile employees that if they bring the Corporation into disrepute, their
hefty salary, bonus, or pay rise will be frozen until any internal or criminal
investigation is over and they are found innocent? If they are found guilty,
they can swing for it. I’m quite sure any well-meaning person could cope with
that being in a contract, and at least you won’t have MP’s having to make statements,
asking the person in question to think about giving some of it back.
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
It's a stretch to see a story about children being abused and decide that the big issue with the story is how much the perpetrator was paid before pleasing guilty.
The story is not about a man and how much he was paid. It's about child victims.
The thread us about BBC salaries, so would've thought this is the perfect place to raise the point, and maybe a new thread would be needed if you want to discuss the charges he's facing
The amount of money he was paid for a few weeks is utterly trivial - to the extent that it should be considered pretty much irrelevant - in the context of the crime he's guilty of.
There are plenty of topics on the subject of BBC salaries that could be discussed. (One of which could well be why the top salaries appear to be reducing over time).
It's quite simple - why was a BBC top earner suspended on full pay while under investigation, then at the same time given a pay rise.
The fact he was being investigated for the accusations as they were, brings a whole different nuance to it, like it or not, imo. On top of that, it ain't the first time something like this has happened is it. (Which is now stepping away from 'BBC salaries', but still completely relevant imo)
It’s pretty obvious.
You’re suspended and whilst being investigated you get paid (in case it turns out you didn’t do it). Then the pay rise was clearly contractual.
Then when the filth came out they rightfully got rid, end of story. Surely no one hates the BBC that much they’re pretending they’re somehow “pro nonce” and actually rewarded such disgusting crimes.
I don't think they're pro-nonce, that would be stupid to even
suggest it, but they don't have a very good history in dealing with the issue,
even after they're made aware that someone on their books is an active sex
offender.
Regarding salaries: This is public money they're being paid,
so would it be beyond reason to write it into contracts of highly paid, high
profile employees that if they bring the Corporation into disrepute, their
hefty salary, bonus, or pay rise will be frozen until any internal or criminal
investigation is over and they are found innocent? If they are found guilty,
they can swing for it. I’m quite sure any well-meaning person could cope with
that being in a contract, and at least you won’t have MP’s having to make statements,
asking the person in question to think about giving some of it back.
I don’t disagree with anything you said there, in spirit.
But I don’t think anything like so is written into contracts anywhere. The fact it’s public money makes it more emotional for us all but in practical terms they’d have the same rights as the rest of us.
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
I get keeping him on the payroll whilst an investigation is taking place (legally they have to do that), but getting a pay rise whilst suspended is absolutely incredible.
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
I get keeping him on the payroll whilst an investigation is taking place (legally they have to do that), but getting a pay rise whilst suspended is absolutely incredible.
He should be made to pay it back.
Totally agree. Whatever your job is, surely logic dictates you don’t get a pay rise if you’re suspended. I am unaware of pay rises being contractual too, certainly in my sector. They’re discretionary and normally called pay reviews.
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
I get keeping him on the payroll whilst an investigation is taking place (legally they have to do that), but getting a pay rise whilst suspended is absolutely incredible.
He should be made to pay it back.
Totally agree. Whatever your job is, surely logic dictates you don’t get a pay rise if you’re suspended. I am unaware of pay rises being contractual too, certainly in my sector. They’re discretionary and normally called pay reviews.
How many times does it need to be explained that he wasn't suspended when he got the bonus?
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
I get keeping him on the payroll whilst an investigation is taking place (legally they have to do that), but getting a pay rise whilst suspended is absolutely incredible.
He should be made to pay it back.
Totally agree. Whatever your job is, surely logic dictates you don’t get a pay rise if you’re suspended. I am unaware of pay rises being contractual too, certainly in my sector. They’re discretionary and normally called pay reviews.
How many times does it need to be explained that he wasn't suspended when he got the bonus?
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
I get keeping him on the payroll whilst an investigation is taking place (legally they have to do that), but getting a pay rise whilst suspended is absolutely incredible.
He should be made to pay it back.
Totally agree. Whatever your job is, surely logic dictates you don’t get a pay rise if you’re suspended. I am unaware of pay rises being contractual too, certainly in my sector. They’re discretionary and normally called pay reviews.
How many times does it need to be explained that he wasn't suspended when he got the bonus?
Oh, I thought you weren't......
Looks like he'll be coming out of the nick to his full pension though.
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
I get keeping him on the payroll whilst an investigation is taking place (legally they have to do that), but getting a pay rise whilst suspended is absolutely incredible.
He should be made to pay it back.
Totally agree. Whatever your job is, surely logic dictates you don’t get a pay rise if you’re suspended. I am unaware of pay rises being contractual too, certainly in my sector. They’re discretionary and normally called pay reviews.
How many times does it need to be explained that he wasn't suspended when he got the bonus?
Oh, I thought you weren't......
Looks like he'll be coming out of the nick to his full pension though.
Is that unique to the BBC, or is it the norm to take away the pension of anyone convicted of a criminal offence? .
Nice to see that Hue got a £40k salary increase whilst suspended. Good old BBC supporting a fellow nonce. How many more have they got hidden. Images of sex with 7 year olds. Fucking sickening I know this will get closed/removed, but cannot ignore this. You lot keep paying your TV licences though.
I get keeping him on the payroll whilst an investigation is taking place (legally they have to do that), but getting a pay rise whilst suspended is absolutely incredible.
He should be made to pay it back.
Totally agree. Whatever your job is, surely logic dictates you don’t get a pay rise if you’re suspended. I am unaware of pay rises being contractual too, certainly in my sector. They’re discretionary and normally called pay reviews.
How many times does it need to be explained that he wasn't suspended when he got the bonus?
Oh, I thought you weren't......
Looks like he'll be coming out of the nick to his full pension though.
Is that unique to the BBC, or is it the norm to take away the pension of anyone convicted of a criminal offence? .
You can’t lose your pension if you are sacked for gross misconduct or in fact being sent to prison. A pension is a financial arrangement into which you have paid part of your salary. It cannot be withdrawn. It’s your money. A police officer convicted of a crime can have the employers contribution removed but that’s not always done. It would depend on whether the crime was associated with their duties as a police officer.
Huw Edwards has been asked by the BBC to hand back the salary he earned from the corporation after being arrested on child abuse image charges.
In a letter to staff the BBC Chair Samir Shah said that Edwards had "behaved in bad faith", saying that the corporation believed he had taken his salary despite knowing he was to plead guilty to the offences.
Huw Edwards has been asked by the BBC to hand back the salary he earned from the corporation after being arrested on child abuse image charges.
In a letter to staff the BBC Chair Samir Shah said that Edwards had "behaved in bad faith", saying that the corporation believed he had taken his salary despite knowing he was to plead guilty to the offences.
Be interesting to see how this plays out. Initial thought is that seems like a PR statement to try and restore some reputation. The BBC would need to prove that handle the situation correctly.
The fact it is now in the public, you would imagine the general public would expect them to proceed legal proceeding if he does not return the wages.
Handing it back isn’t going to make him look any better to the public so I doubt he will. Unless it would affect his sentencing. I also imagine it will be a suspended one.
Comments
The story is not about a man and how much he was paid. It's about child victims.
There are plenty of topics on the subject of BBC salaries that could be discussed. (One of which could well be why the top salaries appear to be reducing over time).
The fact he was being investigated for the accusations as they were, brings a whole different nuance to it, like it or not, imo. On top of that, it ain't the first time something like this has happened is it. (Which is now stepping away from 'BBC salaries', but still completely relevant imo)
I won't add more, though. Because I think it's deeply unpleasant to discuss a criminal's pay - and score points over the BBC - over and above giving consideration to his child victims.
What I would say is that when benchmarking equivalent jobs across the business sector, without fail the BBC paid top upper quartile salaries. As a job evaluator and remuneration expert, it just appeared to be wrong and unnecessary.
Little wonder they have been required to defend multiple equal pay claims from women employees.
Regarding salaries: This is public money they're being paid, so would it be beyond reason to write it into contracts of highly paid, high profile employees that if they bring the Corporation into disrepute, their hefty salary, bonus, or pay rise will be frozen until any internal or criminal investigation is over and they are found innocent? If they are found guilty, they can swing for it. I’m quite sure any well-meaning person could cope with that being in a contract, and at least you won’t have MP’s having to make statements, asking the person in question to think about giving some of it back.
But I don’t think anything like so is written into contracts anywhere. The fact it’s public money makes it more emotional for us all but in practical terms they’d have the same rights as the rest of us.
He should be made to pay it back.
Looks like he'll be coming out of the nick to his full pension though.
Is that unique to the BBC, or is it the norm to take away the pension of anyone convicted of a criminal offence?
.
Huw Edwards has been asked by the BBC to hand back the salary he earned from the corporation after being arrested on child abuse image charges.
In a letter to staff the BBC Chair Samir Shah said that Edwards had "behaved in bad faith", saying that the corporation believed he had taken his salary despite knowing he was to plead guilty to the offences.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clynjvve0gvo
I guess no one has a leg to stand on, have they?