< link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://sirhumphreys.com" > Sir Humphrey's: Oh Really?


SITE MOVED:Sir Humphrey's has moved

Please join us at our new site: www.sirhumphreys.com.

The RSS feed for sirhumphreys.com is now here.

Tuesday, November 08, 2005

Oh Really?

Since when has some jerk of a public official who happens to sit on an employment tribunal had the right to pontificate about the appropriateness of someone's salary? I hope he will give us his views on the Prime Minister's salary. Let's hear what he has to say about Theresa Gattung's salary. What about the Chief Justice's salary. I'm sure he'll have an opinion on that. So $450k is obscene? How much is he paid for dispensing his 'wisdom'?
The ERA said TVNZ was not permitted to impose a new salary next year without the presenter's consent. However, it noted that her $450,000 salary will expire at the end of the year.

The ruling also said ordinary New Zealanders find it difficult to comprehend how such extreme, extravagant and even obscene salaries can be legitimately commanded.
I'm no lawyer but I can't help think this extraordinary outburst would just about render his so called 'judgement' valueless and subject to appeal.
ยท Linked Article

Posted by Adolf Fiinkensein | 11/08/2005 01:57:00 PM


Blogger Gooner said...

Actually what the adjudicator said was this:

"I venture to suggest, that ordinary New Zealanders find it very difficult indeed to comprehend how salaries of the present magnitude and several times the average wage, can legitimately be commanded for the work that is performed. There is a view that such salaries are extreme, extravagant and even obscene. Economists diagnose the controversial component of such salaries as economic rent. However contentious, they are nonetheless negotiated terms of legitimate employment relationships governed by the same employment law principles and legislation as all other employments."

So, the ruling did say that but then went on to state the correct position that they are 'nonetheless negotiated terms of legitimate employment relationships governed by the same employment law principles and legislation as all other employments.'

In other words it's all a matter of contract as it should be.

That wasn't printed though was it.

11/08/2005 02:24:00 PM  
Blogger Antarctic Lemur said...

Is it possible for us to post the source documents in cases like these? Who owns the copyright?

11/08/2005 02:31:00 PM  
Blogger gd said...

Gooners right The adjudicator was refering to the good old tall poppy syndrome although he did portray his Socialist leanings.If you earn more than me then your a rich bastard who deserves to get kicked.Its pathetic and yet another sign of our immaturity as a society.Some day we might grow up (sigh) but not with current bastards in government

11/08/2005 03:43:00 PM  
Blogger Craig Ranapia said...


Perhaps, but I'd rather the members of the ERA stick to their mandated task and avoid the intemperately expressed cod sociology.

11/08/2005 04:17:00 PM  
Blogger JamesP said...

I don't really see the problem here especially as the comments were made with respect to TVNZ. A lot of NZers *do* feel that way about the salaries of presenters like Wood and Bailey. I have often heard those exact sentiments expressed.

So long as TVNZ remains an SOE it is the taxpayers business how they spend our money. And frankly given the number of journos at TVNZ / TV3 who would do just as good a job but get paid substantially less it does seem wasteful to pay a few "stars" the big bucks.

Obviously though, contracts must be honoured and private companies are a whole other story.

11/08/2005 04:53:00 PM  
Blogger Adolf Fiinkensein said...

James P. Do you know how much people at TV3 are paid? I hope you don't. It's their business and their employer's. If they are producing ratings that generate $5.m worth of advertising with a before tax margin of $2.0m and they want 500k then pay the $500k but for God's sake shut up about it.

11/08/2005 05:16:00 PM  
Blogger Antarctic Lemur said...

Sounds like good money... how to get the Lemur on TV?

11/08/2005 05:27:00 PM  
Blogger JamesP said...

I've read and had confirmed on good authority that John Campbell is the highest paid presenter at TV3 and is paid less than Susan Wood. Also the (much lower) salaries of other TVNZ presenters who are IMHO just as able as Wood are public knowledge.

TVNZ should be sold. The political angle gives what would otherwise be a fairly routine contract dispute unnecessary import. There are, of course, several other good reasons...

11/08/2005 05:40:00 PM  
Blogger Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Of course it should be sold. Can you imagine Kerry packer paying a million dollars a year to a newsreader in a provincial Australian TV channell? TVNZ serves a bout half the population of Sydney. I's so easy to run a business when there is an unlimited supply of other people's money which can kinda disappear in unaccounted for charter spending. What was it last year? $17m?

11/08/2005 05:47:00 PM  
Blogger Antarctic Lemur said...

Questions of income aside, Wood is one of the most irritating TV people around. Her presence fronting Closeup is why I'll never watch it (apart from the episode on the sinking boat/111 fiasco, which she screwed up anyway). I can't believe they ditched the Raging Leftist Terrier (Kim Hill), but were actually negotiating to keep the bland Wood in a primetime slot. I dislike the arrogant Hill, but at least she has some energy and can actually ask half-decent questions. Sometimes.

11/08/2005 05:52:00 PM  
Blogger Berend de Boer said...

Did anyone hear Wussel Brown on National Radio around 16:18 or so? He said something like: "many of us would be ashamed to be earning $350,000". Yeah right.

Man, he sounded soooo incredibly jealous.

11/08/2005 06:00:00 PM  
Blogger Gooner said...

Berend, I'd be ashamed if I'm NOT earning that in 10 years given my ambitions to be rich enough to not give a hoot about what the government of the day told me to do.

11/08/2005 06:09:00 PM  
Blogger Adolf Fiinkensein said...

He'll never have to worry about the shame of it all. These lefties are such dick heads!! None of them are worth much more than the dole anyway. That's all they aspire to, it's called egalitarianism.

11/08/2005 06:47:00 PM  
Blogger reid said...

The benefit of this saga is that no-one now believes in the fallacy of inviting the presenter into the nation's living room, which started this whole thing off several decades ago. While most of us always knew this was a fallacy, apparantly the people involved in TV are a bit thicker than most and it took several debacles to drum it in. D'oh.

Let's hope the TV people in general start paying the news presenters at about teacher's rates, which is about what they're worth. In case the TV still don't understand, it's the content, not the face.

11/08/2005 10:03:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home