| |
Give them a watch
• LAST week’s Tribune reported that Islington Council’s chief executive will be quitting her post in the summer (Town Hall chief is quitting hot-seat job, January 11). She will be following other senior council officers, among them the deputy chief executive and the director of housing and adult social services.
The chief executive earns £130,000 a year, and no doubt the others earn proportionately high salaries. Should these high-ranking officers be rewarded on their departure by having their salaries supplemented by bonus “golden handshakes”?
A recent Financial Times article remarked critically on the growing disparity in the UK between richest and poorest wage earners. Whereas 30 or more years ago the not-inconsiderable difference between them was nine to one, today it is nearly 100 to one! Published details of bonuses awarded to high earners leaving their employment in the City of London show that many hugely surpass already high salary levels and are in five figures. Several are worth more than £1 million.
May we trust that senior council officers in this borough do not draw on our neighbouring council’s example. Comparatively affluent themselves, they should preferentially consider the needs of the many severely deprived families dependent on council services.
So they should not expect the council’s proposed budget (being finalised next month) to be stretched to provide them with leaving bonuses or other trendy forms of “golden handshakes” outstripping their already handsome salaries, at the cost of any diminishment of council services.
Well within living memory, grateful employers used to reward faithful employees completing decades of work with a handsome gold watch or silver salver. While these objects were often treasured as marks of appreciation for a lifetime of loyal service, the scale of their financial value made no impact on their owner’s lifestyle, as the present trendy scale of today’s bonuses seems designed to do.
Council tax-payers are unlikely to approve financial deductions from council services budgets to provide more than symbolic gestures of appreciation for already well-paid council employees, now living comfortably and secure in the expectation of very adequate pensions.
Surely such bonuses do not fulfil the often-vaunted “value for money” criterion, especially while economic conditions are growing tougher and the need for costly council services such as housing and care of the elderly and disabled are greater than ever.
ANGELA SINCLAIR
Secretary, Islington Pensioners’ Forum
|
 |
|
| |
| Your Comments : |
| |
| |
| |
