Our thanks to Mike P for this piece in the Telegraph. Firing men from their shows is an inevitable element in achieving the absurd objective of ending the non-existent problem of the gender pay gap at the BBC by 2020. We can but hope some of the men bring sex discrimination cases. If they’re successful, we can expect our spineless government to change the law.
Leaving the issue of pay to one side, it seems to me that women already dominate ‘on screen’ at the BBC, with predictable consequences. Although we should see a lot more of Fiona Bruce, obviously.
If everyone who read this gave us just £1 – or even better, £1 monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.
Justice for Men & Boys 
So the public are forced to watch talentless women because of political correctness.
And they wonder why the level of TV licence/BBC refusal grows.
LikeLike
‘So the public are forced to watch talentless women> … ‘
Not at all: the public are forced to pay for them not watch them. That really is invidious.
LikeLike
The choice an employer makes on what to pay his staff should be a matter for him alone. The Government muddied the waters by introducing a ‘minimum wage’. it is intuitively obvious that some people have been priced out of a job by this, Unemployment is still at a level that would have caused howls of rage in the 1970s.
On a wider point, if society wants to continue to decline into insanity I increasingly do not see why I should join it. It is now no longer a question of if there will be economic and social collapse, but when. The ability of groups of people to secede from a state should become a right (states in the USA had the right to secede until 1861). Secession, anyone?
LikeLike
Personally I can’t stand Chris Evans so the fact he is paid so much is annoying but the list of highly paid BBC employees is a ist of unique individual employed in a competitive market. It is completely ridiculous to expect that salries will conform to any neat scale and there will be winners and ‘losers’ (if being paid a lot can but less than someone who is paid even more can be considered losing). It was a massive mistake to publish this and it will be a millstone around the organisations neck.
Publication is a nightmare as it will make negotiating on the BBC side doubly dififcult, every negotiation by the employee will involve seeking to equalise up to anyone who can plausibly be considered to be a peer and every increase will be made in the knowledge that once this is published it will cause a further round of attempts to equalise up by everyone paid less.
The net result will be a very strong motive for the BBC to underpay anyone who would earn substantially more than the average so very successful employees will either leave or never join and a tendancy to overpay the less successful. This is before the ridiculous gender pay gap propoganda comes up which will cause a further motive to overpay and over recruit women ignoring differences in role, qualifications, experience and hours worked/anti-social hours etc.
As a big organisation I am sure recuritment is already a bureaucratic nightmare but this will make it almost impossible ignoring the necessity of individual negotiation for ‘stars’.
LikeLike
‘ … the list of highly paid BBC employees is a ist of unique individual employed in a competitive market … ‘
Really? You don’t consider a compulsory levy on television viewing, extracted under duress, to be the antithesis of competition in the market? Whether or not, many people, myself amongst them, consider most of those appearing regularly on the BBC to be unique only in the sense that they are more or less talentless mediocrities who are unemployable by any commercial broadcaster. Those are what make their salaries unacceptable.
The BBC is not in any sense competitive and so cannot reasonably claim any need to pay top salaries to top talent, which it can be argued are thereby priced out of the reach of commercial channels. I’m not against any organisation paying huge sums of money it has competed for to those it feels add value to its brand, however, I am opposed to anyone being paid sums they could not earn elsewhere from money extracted by force, which would be called extortion were you or I to try it.
LikeLike
The feminists have now outclassed even Engels, Marx, Lenin, Castro and Che Guevara in their utopian, unrealistic ‘equality doctrine’. Western men, however well brought up, polite and non confrontational towards women, need to wake up from their own unrealistic dream of expecting the feminists and their supporters to lead the society in the right direction. It’s never going to happen and the sooner men put a stop to this, the better.
LikeLike
‘Western men, however well brought up, polite and non confrontational towards women, need to wake up from their own unrealistic dream of expecting the feminists and their supporters to lead the society in the right direction.‘
That isn’t going to happen without some very hard lessons. Those who think they know have calculated that 80% of all the men who have ever lived died without issue, which is four times as many as childless women. Most men live in hope and undying optimism is written into the core of our DNA, which can only be rewritten by some sort of harsh evolutionary stimulus. We need feminism to set us free, although not in the way feminists are wont to pretend.
LikeLike
So those white knights at the BBC who have been defending the toxin that is Feminism may now find themselves on the receiving end of ‘Positive’ discrimination and removed from their lucrative positions.
For them I have no sympathy, they built their own crosses over a long period of time.
The BBC, already facing heavy criticism regarding the license fee, will continue to produce sub-par programs, but this time without half their main draws. This should hopefully be a fatal decision for the BBC.
LikeLike
I hope both the stars and those a bit lower down the “food chain” do both reflect on their white knightery, but perhaps one can only realistically expect them to think of themselves. In which case I hope they fight using the Equality Act. too few men know or can afford to invoke this act. This group have the money to mount cases. Some high profile cases would inform men they too can use legislation. Its one of those “secrets” the feminists rely on as they advise women to threaten cases.
LikeLike
‘ … but this time without half their main draws.’
You old white knight you; you’re far too generous to the ‘fairer’ sex. The reason the men are paid more than the women is because they draw more viewers. Their main drawers are men, almost exclusively, which is why some are to be sacked.
LikeLike
AH, gotcha.
Amendment:
The BBC, already facing heavy criticism regarding the licence fee, will continue to produce sub-par programs, but this time without their main draws.
I hope that’s better, William.
😉
LikeLike
If the BBC want to pay women more than men, maybe they should become a porn channel.
LikeLike
Or simply a Fashion Channel, or pop music channel,
LikeLike
Absolutely ! hire younger, beautiful women, with mini skirts and low cut tight shirts, show a lot of revealing camera angles and then they have a chance to go back up the ratings. But it is not going to be due to wit or talent. Unfortunately for feminists, the economic reality has eventually sunk every communist and socialist minded regime. So sorry it takes the feminists so very long to sink in. But the society’s patience is running out.
LikeLike
‘ … hire younger, beautiful women, with mini skirts and low cut tight shirts … ‘
That’s a puzzle: are they ‘expressing themselves’ and ‘achieving their full potential’ or are they just ‘objectifying’ themselves in fearful obedience to an exploitative ‘patriarchy’, whether wittingly or unwittingly. What does the Great Gob of Yardley say on the subject?
LikeLike
No problem: the commercial channels will just hoover up the marketable talent, as it did with Jeremy Clarkson, and ignore the dross. The BBC will sink even lower in the public’s esteem, as it did with Top Gear, and calls for the abolition of the licence fee are bound to grow louder and more insistent.
LikeLike
Here is a clear path to destruction – which is, of course, the intention.
We know this because there are important principles involved.
Is the right of any entity or body to hire who it wants and needs to, without interference from the State, the law, or anybody else.
Quotas, targets and other manipulations, and are all clumsy abrogations of of self governing freedom.
Having groups or sub-groups of persons who are identified as permissible, offically-sanctioned personae non grata, (in this case men, particularly white men) is always the first step to atrocity.
Employing the simple but effective technique of turning everything upside down, and the reversing of meaning is the second step.
Witness Orwell’s Ministry of peace, or Ministry of Love, which were nothing of the sort.
Two thousand years ago Confucius held that “Things should be called by their proper names, otherwise all manner of confusion will arise.”
Again, this is the purpose and aim.
Conveniently, there is one single word, a name if you like, that encapsulates all these infamous, pernicious evils.
That name is Communism. Although there are other, unsavory names for it also.
P.S. Might this be our most responded to item yet?
LikeLike
‘ … there are important principles involved. [One is] the right of any entity or body to hire who it wants and needs to, without interference from the State, the law, or anybody else.‘
Does the BBC have that right? It’s income is principally from a levy imposed by parliament and ultimately protected by the judiciary, ‘The Police’ and the penal system, which are arms of the state. If any and all television viewers are to be coerced by the state into funding the BBC, regardless of whether or not they watch or listen to the BBC, they have the right to decide through government and interfere in how that money is spent and to object when they feel it has been misspent, haven’t they? Government cannot reasonably interfere in the business of one body of people, in this instance the television viewing public, and not in the business of another, in this instance the BBC, can it?
LikeLike
Does anyone else feel the headline ‘men targeted in suspected acid attack’ on the BBC today sounds a bit strange (as in there is too much emphasis on the word ‘men’). For other crimes it would be like ‘men targeted in armed robbery’. But I’m also not sure if I’m going insane ha. Perhaps the BBC are trying to imply it is unusual for men to be victims? Here’s the story anyway:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-40720437
LikeLike
Well a superb example of automatic “outrage” mode. The Fawcettes and othe feminist organisations and academics have for years been going on that women in senior positions lack confidence to push themselves, demanding “mentors” ,female only assertiveness courses, “fast track” promotion pathways to boost or compensate for this lack of push. Sir Philip Hampton a White Knight, says exactly this in the context of the BBC “stars” using his own experience. Yet he’s pilloried!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40744426
When will the White Knights learn!
LikeLike