Wed Jan 31, 2018 4:49 pm
#1587763
I just don't think you can look at 'personality-based' employment in such a simplistic manner.
It isn't the same as a postman or a coal miner where you do the job and who you are is essentially irrelevant - the work is done and your own personality/opinions/appearance /judgement have no little or no bearing on the work outcomes.
Television presenters/personalities are essentially paid to be who they are. Their value is determined by things like their perceived gravitas, popularity with viewers, etc.
I don't believe you can directly compare any two of the sort of BBC employees that are being discussed in this context. Jon Sopel is paid according to Jon Sopel's perceived market worth and Carrie Gracie according to Carrie Gracie's. I don't believe there's anything wrong with this. Would anyone argue for a rule requiring that all footballers in a professional team be paid the same?
I'm not a journalist, I just work in a business environment. But the same is the case in my team - my peers will not be paid exactly the same as me. Some may be paid more, some may be paid less. It'll be a factor of our perceived value to the company (which is not necessarily the same just because we have the same job description) and also of our own ability to negotiate a favourable package.
I believe most of these people at the BBC are overpaid and that their skills are not particularly rare or unique, but that's a different point.
Schrödinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.