TV licence fee cash guarantees house prices of BBC staff!

#1
Anyone else very angry at this news?Not only do they constantly show repeats & dross,now this!

The prices of hundreds of homes owned by BBC employees in London will be guaranteed by licence-fee payers under a relocation package aimed at enticing staff to Salford.

Employees will also receive £5,000 in relocation expenses, up to £3,000 to pay for new carpets and curtains and will keep thousands of pounds in London weighting allowances, it emerged yesterday. The decision to use the licence fee to underwrite property values in a falling housing market has been condemned as unacceptable.

The BBC said last night that it was reviewing the planned relocation terms for 1,630 staff because of the economic downturn. Details of the packages will increase anger at the corporation's decision to move more than 2,500 jobs from London to increase the percentage of programmes made in the “regions and nations”.

The BBC is moving five departments, including sport, children's programmes and Radio 5 Live, to Salford Quays, Greater Manchester. The BBC plans to move half of its production outside London by 2016, with Question Time, The Weakest Link and Newsnight moving to the Pacific Quay complex in Glasgow.

Under the “guaranteed house purchase scheme”, employees on permanent contracts will receive up to 95 per cent of the market price for a property. The BBC will incur any loss on the price when the property is sold and will pay for solicitors' fees, surveys and stamp duty, home information packs and building society charges.

The move to Salford, which will cost an estimated £200 million, is believed to have been opposed by a number of star presenters at the corporation. Simon Mayo, the Radio 5 Live afternoon presenter, is reported to have said that he will not move, and has been offered an alternative job on Radio 2. Peter Allen, the presenter of the Drive show, is also said to be unhappy. David Dimbleby, the veteran Question Time presenter, is reported to have expressed concerns about the transfer.

Details of the relocation payments were released after an application under the Freedom of Information Act. Details of the contract between the BBC and Cartus, a specialist relocation contractor, have been withheld by the broadcaster, citing commercial reasons. All staff must decide whether to move by September 30, with most relocating between April and December 2011.

Removal costs will be paid and the BBC is also offering a packing and unpacking service; storage costs will be paid for up to three months.

The BBC says that it expects the guaranteed house purchase scheme to apply only to a minority of staff moving north, but the exact numbers are not yet known. Staff on short-term contracts or who do not own a house will not be eligible. They will be paid a maximum of £8,000 for the move.

Matthew Sinclair, the research director of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: “Guaranteeing staff against falls in the value of London homes [is] a slap in the face to the ordinary taxpayer. Providing this kind of expensive subsidy to staff at the taxpayers' expense isn't acceptable.”

The BBC has told the Government that it is committed to the move north because it “addresses concerns that the organisation is not fully representative of the peoples of the UK”.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk

A corporation spokesman said: “We are fully aware of the harsh economic situation but we do need to move significant numbers of staff to a new operational centre in Salford. We seek to offer relocation assistance which is comparable to that offered across the private and public sectors.”
 
#2
“We are fully aware of the harsh economic situation but we do need to move significant numbers of staff to a new operational centre in Salford. We seek to offer relocation assistance which is comparable to that offered across the private and public sectors.”

They provide the service at the end of the day. how about "Outrage as taxpayers pay for Squaddies to go Skiing"?

Its all part of the service.
 
#5
This is similar to the Armypaying more the removals etc.

However, 8k in relocation expenses?

Paying for the fall in house prices?

If anyone doesn´t want to moev and follow their job, fcuk ém off.
 
#6
To be fair, if I had a civi employer who wanted me to move to Salford, it would take a lot more than the BBC are offering
 
#7
ubuntu said:
“We are fully aware of the harsh economic situation but we do need to move significant numbers of staff to a new operational centre in Salford. We seek to offer relocation assistance which is comparable to that offered across the private and public sectors.”

They provide the service at the end of the day. how about "Outrage as taxpayers pay for Squaddies to go Skiing"?

Its all part of the service.
What? You mean the piss poor excuse for television these days bar the odd worthwhile documentary?

If I were told that part of the tax I pay was to send Private Bloggs to Switzerland for adventure training then all I would have to say about it would be that I hope he has a good time. The service provided by the military to this country though not necessarily beamed into our homes 24/7 is much, much more worth taxpayers money.

Just because you provide the service doesn't mean you should use the license payers money to unnecessarily pamper your staff. The £5,000 for relocation seems fair. I don't know what you would then need further allowances on top of that.

Though, I believe the 'media village' this is all related to is to be built not too far away from Salford university...which in itself has a park within its grounds that must be infested by feral pikeys considering the amount of people that get stabbed in there.

Might be worth keeping an eye on this one to see which BBC bod is the first to find (in the words of Lance Corporal Jones) they don't like it up 'em. :twisted:
 
#8
Crying shame I don't have a tv license.
 
#9
Big fuss - remember MOD Manual 12? Nothing in here that wasn't in that and no doubt subsequent JSPs and single service docs...nor indeed that commercial companies offer, BAE SYSTEMS for example when they shifted me from Lancashire to Hampshire.
 
#10
Cuddles said:
Big fuss - remember MOD Manual 12? Nothing in here that wasn't in that and no doubt subsequent JSPs and single service docs...nor indeed that commercial companies offer, BAE SYSTEMS for example when they shifted me from Lancashire to Hampshire.
BAE can hire a truck to move each individual item of your house, cuddles. It is their money.

The licence fee is a TV Tax, ie OUR MONEY.

Maybe shenanigans like this is why they hound people for TV licences.... for SIX YEARS!

The television licence enforcers were nothing if not persistent. For five years they pursued 69-year-old Hannah Patricia Humphris with a succession of intimidating missives demanding she buy a licence.

The pursuit culminated with a letter this month threatening her with prosecution and a possible £1,000 fine.

But the TV licensing police had overlooked one crucial fact: Miss Humphris hasn't owned a television since 1978.

She got rid of her set that year because it wasn't working properly and, she said, there were no interesting programmes.


More here
 
#11
The BBC is institutionally spendthrift so there will be no savings in this exercise.

Salaries will not be reduced to reflect the fact that they are generally less in the North than in the South, and “London weighting” will be replaced pound for pound with travel, overnight accommodation and subsistance allowances across the board to enable all employees to attend frequent meetings in London regardless of whether or not they need to be there in the first place.
 
#12
Andy71 said:
and how does that compare to the allowances in JSP 752?
Believe me it does not But these are the packages people in these sort of Jobs get .Its called their contract of employment and if you could get on this gravy train you are made.
As I left the military I fought for 18 months for £350 removal expenses due to a error in my last posting.Arrived on a new development in the west country to see all my middle class neighbours moving from their previous locations. I iooked at these people how could they afford this or that,as you became more chaty over the garden fence you get to know X paid for Y paid for that .It was incrediable what their companies paid for. But as they said their company wanted them to move there and therefore they should not be out of pocket .
Contrast that with the mil system,but who is to blame the Government ,the Mod and our senior officers who never stand up and fight our corner.
 
#13
Am I the only one who is p1ssed off with this governments penchant for moving organisations out of London? Like it or not it is the Capitol City and pandering to minorities and vested interests is in MHO, stupid.
 
#14
exile1 said:
Am I the only one who is p1ssed off with this governments penchant for moving organisations out of London? Like it or not it is the Capitol City and pandering to minorities and vested interests is in MHO, stupid.
Sorry i do not agree.Look at the success of moving the Met office from Bracknell to Exeter.1500 staff and families moved from the rat race South east to West country .Better value housing ,quality of life for all family ,cheaper cost of living. Lower operating costs.
The South east and particulary London and outskirts cannot go on taking this continual building.In this world of technology most jobs of this type can be done anywhere and they should not be crammed into the south east with the government keep telling us they have to build x houses ,x roads , x airports to accomodate this self perpetuating part of the country .The south east is ( was )only booming because this government canot see a disaster until it stares them in the face.Every government department which does not realy on face to face contact and location should be moved to where there in unemployment ,space , staff, more affordable housing. Private companies should be given free business rates , money paid to local councils by central gov in return for not having to come up with the funds to cram more people in this corner of Uk ..There would be no need for a conjestion charge if there was no conjestion. There would be no need to upgrade trains to central london if there was less people travelling on them .It needs the will and a bold plan not the likes of Prezzer tampering at the edges.I lived in London for 3 years i would never want to repeat the experiance.
 
#16
tooled-up said:
wet_blobby said:
Poor loves, Salford is a shitehole.[/quot

London is the shithole....some of the commutable surrounding areas ie rural Cheshire are idyllic.
They can keep their city slicker towny arrse out of rural Cheshire.

It´s cnuts like these who ponce in to the countryside, who drive house prices up meaning local kids can´t buy houses.

Which in turn drives them away from the farms they grew up on, or working with.

Because the hands then have to drive in from a distance, early, the farmer then has to pay them more. Driving his own costs up, and killing off the British Farms.

This makes us dependent on imports, handy when the fcuking bankers that live in the country side then so fcuk up the ecomomy that we have to morgage the house to buy an apple.

So if they don´t mind they can all fcuk off back in to whatever urban conglomeration they hail from and make a stand to change that in to a nicer place, instead of ruining the countrysie with chelsea tractors and obscene housing.

And they can take those football players with them too.

Or if they must live with us, they could support the local small businesses and maybe pop in to the local for a pint. Support the local activities such as Rose Queen, instead of walking round with the whole clan like some ghastly inbreeding of tourist and laird.

The moment these type land in the village, the village wilts.
 
#17
DH24 said:
Though, I believe the 'media village' this is all related to is to be built not too far away from Salford university...which in itself has a park within its grounds that must be infested by feral pikeys considering the amount of people that get stabbed in there.

Might be worth keeping an eye on this one to see which BBC bod is the first to find (in the words of Lance Corporal Jones) they don't like it up 'em. :twisted:
Much the same as White City then; they should feel right at home :D

Not that having BBC Sports and CBBC in Salford is going to alter public perceptions of the Beeb's London-centricity.

A corporation spokesman said: “We are fully aware of the harsh economic situation but we do need to move significant numbers of staff to a new operational centre in Salford. We seek to offer relocation assistance which is comparable to that offered across the private and public sectors.”
In other words, it's going to cost them a lot more in redundancy payouts if they can't persuade the staff to relocate.
 
#18
exile1 said:
Am I the only one who is p1ssed off with this governments penchant for moving organisations out of London? Like it or not it is the Capitol City and pandering to minorities and vested interests is in MHO, stupid.
Actually it is a capital city...a very cluttered one where costs are very high for property. Before the clutch on the outrage bus wears out, relocation will reduce recurring costs over time but by paying these non-recurring relocation "benefits", they will improve retention and therefore reduce cost in recruitment, training and efficiency in operation.

As for the "ooh look what they are doing with OUR money" vigilantes, I have two things to say to you...a)governance and b)NAO. If you feel this is a breach of a) then why not give b) a tug and see what they think?
 
#19
Not sure what the fuss is, I was given 6k to relocate when I left the Army by the company I went to work for. I never spent it all but it was there if I needed it.
 
#20
wet_blobby said:
Poor loves, Salford is a shitehole.
They are going to work there, not live there. There are lots of very, very nice places nearby, and apparently the house prices there are not suffering in the least!
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top