I just cant understand how no one is sacked... only one guy went out the door and he resigned on full perks. Other people were simply given new jobs in the BBC where I presume they can continue not doing their job right.

Because they have everyone by the short & curlys and they know it. They don't have anyone to answer to (that can really exert any power over them anyway).

Its not like everyone can vote with their feet is it ? Ok we could all get rid of our TVs but realistically its not going to happen and they know it, so the game goes on.

There should be an opt out on the TV licence I think, if you don't want to pay you don't get access to their output.

Nope, I would say that the contract he had, was fairly bombproof, and the cheapest way to get rid, was seen to be (in the Public eye) as offensive.

If you want top exec's they come with fairly full on contracts, terms, PILON clauses and such.
Patton said tonight, to get rid of him without just stuffiong money in his pocket would have been more costly

"Lord Patten, the BBC Trust chairman, testified to a parliamentary committee in the United Kingdom that he had no legal grounds to dismiss former BBC director general George Entwistle following the 'Newsnight' accusations against a former top British politician. Entwistle departed the BBC on November 11 and received a $720,000 payoff for his less than three months of service.

Patten explained to Parliament that he sought advice from legal experts before giving the green light to Entwistle's severance package. According to Patten, Entwistle demanded a full 12 months' salary, private medical coverage and legal representation in his departure. He added that lawyers suggested that if Entwistle went before a industrial tribunal, he could win an additional $128,000 on top of the $720,00, so he was attempting to save the BBC money.

"We did not have grounds for dismissal," Patton said. "We could either accept a consensual deal for 12 months, or the situation would drift on and we would find ourselves with a constructive dismissal [claim] and also an unfair dismissal."

They clearly aren't top execs though as they prove their incompetance time and again. You may as well pay a tenth of the salary/contract, you'd have no shortage of applicants and they couldn't make a worse job of it. Just because you pay a fat contract it doesn't guarantee any level of ability. Who are these people who are offering such enormous contracts that award failure? Once again there are unaccoutable people wasting public money hand over fist.

TEKNOPUG

Original Poster

18,988 posts

206 months

[report]

[news]

Thursday 20th December 2012

Paddy_N_Murphy said:

TEKNOPUG said:

True to an extent for sure.
It is am employment marketplace however. You pay for what you get.....

Every permanent job I've ever had has come with at least a 3 month probation period. He's only been in the job 54 days. 1 week's salary, now p