How many candidates for a council ceo job?
Discussion
How many candidates do you think would be in the running for the £145k top job at York City council?
The actual answer is 1
https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/18823708.new-145k...
The actual answer is 1
https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/18823708.new-145k...
Typical politicians. "I don't agree with this so I will abstain". Surely they would've had more impact on the recruitment process if the labour cllr had taken part in the assessment? Abstaining just makes a point, it doesn't influence any decision.
Anyway, the internal guy would probably have got the job anyway (due to bias) so they saved themselves some time by not dragging external candidates in. They should've done it properly though and at least gone through the motions to entertain some other candidates to give the impression of a competitive process.
However, budgets are tight at the moment so keeping headcount down is a priority.
Anyway, the internal guy would probably have got the job anyway (due to bias) so they saved themselves some time by not dragging external candidates in. They should've done it properly though and at least gone through the motions to entertain some other candidates to give the impression of a competitive process.
However, budgets are tight at the moment so keeping headcount down is a priority.
There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with the in-house person getting the job. They have an inbuilt advantage in that they know what the Organisation’s strengths/weaknesses are and what the Council is looking for in a CEO.
However, given that both unions were in favour, and apparently not appointing him would have resulted in legal action, this stinks a bit.
It sounds like the good old days of Unions insisting that all promotion slots were first offered to Existing employees and that the Interview Panel had to demonstrate nobody internally could do the job before going external. It meant that mediocrity ensured promotion.
However, given that both unions were in favour, and apparently not appointing him would have resulted in legal action, this stinks a bit.
It sounds like the good old days of Unions insisting that all promotion slots were first offered to Existing employees and that the Interview Panel had to demonstrate nobody internally could do the job before going external. It meant that mediocrity ensured promotion.
devnull said:
A CEO would probably expect to be on high six figures, not £145k. I work with people in my industry who earn that on a bad year.
Pay in Public Sector (at the top end) isn't great in my opinion and the roles/responsibilities are quite stressful. There are easier ways of similar money in the private sector.CaptainSlow said:
Pensions are good though...not unknown to be pensioned off on full pension in your mid 50s.
I'm not sure if that's still true. i remember some changes going through back in 2006-ish about the Rule of 85.To cut a long story short - it used to be the case that if you were 55 or over (and your age + membership of the scheme >= 85) then you could retire and get the pension you had accrued. It wouldn't be a FULL pension unless you had at least 40 years of service. i.e. somebody with 20 years' service would get 20/80ths of their final salary and so on. The big benefit was that it wouldn't be actuarially reduced because you were taking it before the NRA.
After 2006 (IIRC) the rules changed. Not all schemes and not all scheme employers allowed it. Some would only allow it for people retiring on grounds of ill-health. Some people would get it if they were being made redundant and so on..
Having said that - Pensions (when they were still Final Salary) were amazing, especially for those people who got promoted regularly. Your CETV would jump significantly every time you got a promotion. Under the CARE schemes that aspect is nowhere near as good.
CaptainSlow said:
These are people being managed out and getting the equivalent of a full pension.
Nobody in their mid-50's is going to get managed out/pensioned off on a full pension (Unless it's the CEO and they have incriminating pictures of the Board Chair and Flossie the Sheep). They might get it as part of a VER package but even then there would need to be a business case showing VFM.The additional lumpsum payment into the Fund would be minimum 6 if not 7 figures and (assuming Public sector) would probably need Central Govt approval under the "Novel and Contentious Payments" rules. I'm not saying it doesn't happen but the hoops that have to be jumped through make it very hard.
The previous York ceo left with early retirement and £400k in her bin
https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/18252584.400k-pay...
Anyway, the job to which I referrred in OP has been voted on by the council tonight: he’s in. 22 votes for, 20 against, 3 abstentions
https://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/18252584.400k-pay...
Anyway, the job to which I referrred in OP has been voted on by the council tonight: he’s in. 22 votes for, 20 against, 3 abstentions
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff