poohbear 1,360 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 If someone is excellent at what they do, and gets paid the same rate as someone who is useless, is that a good thing? Is that going to promote excellence, I don't think so! No....Just not a lottery win every year...3 grand a week should be enough for any Civil Servant no matter what the job. After all it's millions of us on a pittance in comparison who are keeping them. Damn it all...3 grand a week is what Neil Kinnock and his missus struggle to live on...and that's just their pension. TOO MUCH...Who exactly judges that these people are worth a vast amount more than say a steeplejack or North Sea trawlerman.They've never risked their lives in their contribution to society. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
DJBrenton 738 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 So you think the civil service shouldn't be able to compete with the private sector for the best people? The civil service should just muddle along with second raters in key positions because anyone who's any good is getting paid too much by the private sector to drop to £150k a year? That might seem an unimaginable amount of money to you but trust me it's not. My daughter-in-law earns nearly that as a tax accountant. i used to earn £100k djing in clubs. How do you recruit someone to manage a team who get paid £150k if that's all you can offer their manager? There really are people who can contribute 20, 30 or 50 times as much value to a business as you can. That's why they are worth whatever it takes to get them. Neil Gorman oversaw a compete change in organisation that has seen a £5million a year surplus as a result and massively increased the reputation of the Uni. Good value I'd say comapared to penny-pinching and not getting those results. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
barclaycon 569 Posted March 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 Re #16 What's your problem? Are you referring to me ? I don't have a problem per se. I just reported the fact that this man trousered £624,000 last year for being head of a University. Now some people - like you, seem happy that the Department of Eduction has given this man a huge payment from our taxes whilst ordinary students are struggling to live and are left with £27,000 of debt. You are clearly a huge fan. I'm not. Unfortunately DJ you are determined to try and convert everyone to your way of thinking and have no capacity to 'agree to disagree'. Ranting and raving will just get the thread locked - as usually happens when you chime in. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
siddha 826 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 Fellow Nottstalgians this is a pointless discussion as there is nowt we can do in the current political climate. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
DJBrenton 738 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 Re #16 Are you referring to me ? I don't have a problem per se. I just reported the fact that this man trousered £624,000 last year for being head of a University. Now some people - like you, seem happy that the Department of Eduction has given this man a huge payment from our taxes whilst ordinary students are struggling to live and are left with £27,000 of debt. You are clearly a huge fan. I'm not. Unfortunately DJ you are determined to try and convert everyone to your way of thinking and have no capacity to 'agree to disagree'. Ranting and raving will just get the thread locked - as usually happens when you chime in. So disagreeing is 'ranting and raving'? Is yours the only view allowed? You made a statement that he should not have been paid what he was and I have dared to point out that there are good reasons why people can be paid what to you seem high amounts. Are you determined to convert those of us who disagreed with you to your point of view? Why else have you posted again? Are you trying to get the thread locked or could you perhaps engage with the points I've made rather than apparently trying to suggest I have no right to my opinions. I'm happy to 'agree to disagree' but I'm also happy to back my opinons up. Are you, or do you just not want other views aired? I don't expect my views to be unchallenged, why do you think yours should be? Oh, and actually he 'trousered' the money out of the surplus his management helped create, not out of our taxes. Link to post Share on other sites
barclaycon 569 Posted March 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 What was I thinking ! Of course. You're right about everything. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
DJBrenton 738 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 I didn't say I was right about everything. I said I had a right to challenge your views and you have a right to challenge mine. You apparently think challenging your views shouldn't be allowed. That's why threads get locked. because people stop trying to debate the issue and get childish or personal. If you disagree with what I'm saying, try arguing your case instead of merely trying to stifle my (and other people's) views. Start with #27. Explain what's wrong with my opinion then I'll propose a counter. That's how debate works. Link to post Share on other sites
benjamin1945 16,278 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 I AINT READ IT ALL 'BARCLAYCON, cos i got well bored, But i take my hat off to you for #31, takes a MAN to say that, you serious or what? Link to post Share on other sites
DJBrenton 738 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 Anyway, this will have to wait till later. I'm off to Wetherspoon's for some chicken shortly. Link to post Share on other sites
benjamin1945 16,278 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 Never had 'chicken shortly'................bet its nice, 6 Link to post Share on other sites
DJBrenton 738 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 Well that was a valuable contribution to the debate. Link to post Share on other sites
Bubblewrap 3,815 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 Anyway, this will have to wait till later. I'm off to Wetherspoon's for some chicken shortly. Is that the same as chicken quickly ? Link to post Share on other sites
DJBrenton 738 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 I'm now eating chicken quickly yes. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
don walker 122 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 barclaycon regards thread no. 28 here, here,, totally agree,but don,t rise to his baiting Link to post Share on other sites
DJBrenton 738 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 barclaycon regards thread no. 28 here, here,, totally agree,Care to add anything of your own to the debate? I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts rather than just applause for someone else's. Link to post Share on other sites
Cliff Ton 10,525 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 I think the thread has come to the end of its natural life. 3 Link to post Share on other sites
mick2me 3,033 Posted March 4, 2015 Report Share Posted March 4, 2015 Am I wasting my breath and time. Do any of the contributors to this thread read what I have written? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts