# RTE presenters salaries



## geegee (23 Dec 2004)

Where does RTE get the salary packages for their presenters from - thin air? On RTE Radio 2, E650K for the most obnoxious uninformed bozo is flagrant abuse of tax payers money. They may argue that is the going rate for a high-profile presenter. Says who? Are they judging it on similar UK presenters? OK, throw down the gauntlet and tell these overpaid second-raters to go and get a job in the UK - they wouldn't stand a chance as no-one has ever heard of them outside of Ireland. Therefore, because their salaries are largely paid for out of the public purse, they should be on Civil Service rates. 

I am sick to death of the RTE 1 daytime hosts crying crocodile tears when talking to homeless people of social welfare dependant people. How can someone on between E7 - E10k per week have any empathy for someone struggling for survival? 

Elocution and diction is also sadly lacking 
- they all should have lessons in plain English.


----------



## Leatherarse (23 Dec 2004)

Geegee , I think that you are barking up a wrong tree, and are a begrudger. If it was you that was getting the big bobs you would not complain. There were and will be many Irish broadcasters who have and will make it big in the UK. Why oh why should we always use the UK as a yardstick. Let us stand on our own two feet for once. Also if you are so brave to make such assertions then be brave enough to tell us who you are talking about or are you afraid of the legal consequences. I would suggest you think hard before you answer this.... if you do answer it . :mad


----------



## ClubMan (23 Dec 2004)

*How can someone on between E7 - E10k per week have any empathy for someone struggling for survival?

Elocution and diction is also sadly lacking
- they all should have lessons in plain English.*

This is a bizarre juxtaposition of concerns in my personal opinion! If you feel so strongly about this issue why not ditch your TV receiving gear and legitimately stop paying your TV licence.


----------



## podgeandrodge (23 Dec 2004)

*rte*

I have some sympathy for Geegee - in a time where we hear that RTE has stopped giving out free RTE Guides to staff in an effort to save money, it seems over the top top be paying salaries of such proportion - and while they may or may not make it over in the UK I'd bet a couple of them would take a pay reduction rather than run off to the UK at this stage of their lives together with their families.  We are paying a high license fee.


----------



## rainyday (23 Dec 2004)

*Re: rte*



> it seems over the top top be paying salaries of such proportion - and while they may or may not make it over in the UK I'd bet a couple of them would take a pay reduction rather than run off to the UK at this stage of their lives together with their families.


Why attack the high-earners? Why not impose a % wage cut on all salaries at RTE - say 15%? Hell, why not try it with the entire public service - then we'll be really on a winner - right?


----------



## geegee (23 Dec 2004)

Leatherarse,



> Geegee , I think that you are barking up a wrong tree, and are a begrudger. If it was you that was getting the big bobs you would not complain.



If the fact that I do not appreciate my licence fee paying grossly over inflated salaries to second rate presenters makes me a begrudger then so be it. Obviously I would not complain if I was getting the big bucks but other people would have the right to and anyway, that is a hypothetical situation - let's stick with actuality. 



> There were and will be many Irish broadcasters who have and will make it big in the UK. Why oh why should we always use the UK as a yardstick. Let us stand on our own two feet for once.



Irish people may well make it big in the UK but they usually are virtual unknowns over here beforehand. We should use the UK as a yard stick because it happens to be our (helllllooo!) nearest long-established industrialised neighbour and the fifth largest economy in the World. If Japan happened to be our nearest neighbour than perhaps we would look to them but they are not; the UK is, funnily enough. 



> Also if you are so brave to make such assertions then be brave enough to tell us who you are talking about or are you afraid of the legal consequences.



Absolutely, only a fool would not be when living in one of the most litigious societies in the world.




> I would suggest you think hard before you answer this.... if you do answer it .



What are you on about? Why would I not answer it? What do you want me to think hard about?


Clubman,



> This is a bizarre juxtaposition of concerns in my personal opinion! If you feel so strongly about this issue why not ditch your TV receiving gear and legitimately stop paying your TV lice



I made a couple of what could have been a multitude of concerns. In case you are not aware, you have to have a TV licence whether you watch RTE or not.


----------



## Leatherarse (23 Dec 2004)

Geegee you have proved my point you are a begrudger!!!!
  1. You have still not named names so  you are a cowardly begrudger.

  2. Cop on, anyone who make it big are always unknown before they make it big.

  3. I am not as thick as you think (hellllloooo) Russia is only two miles from Canada and either are not led by each other

  4. You complain about paying your over inflated TV licence and getting scant reward, yet you are paying over inflated tax to inept politicians yet you do not complain. What is your gripe with RTE were you sacked by them... I think so.

  5. Why make accusations when you cannot back these up with facts.


----------



## ClubMan (23 Dec 2004)

*In case you are not aware, you have to have a TV licence whether you watch RTE or not.*

I realise that - that's why I said that you could always get rid of all of your TV receiving equipment and avoid the need for a licence if you so choose.


----------



## Rabbit (23 Dec 2004)

The TV license is way too much .   RTE salaries are way too much.    Everyone I know watches UTV and BBC and C4 and Sky much more than RTE, yet we have to pay a licence to 1950's style RTE.


----------



## podgeandrodge (23 Dec 2004)

*salaries*

Why cut everyone's salary by 15%? Most people earn a wage that is in some proportion to their output.  It is the grossly inflated salaries of some that impact on the TV license that we pay.  Word is that RTE are now interested in taking a former TV3 , now SKY News presenter due to the lack of interest in SKY News Ireland.  What's the betting that they will probably offer a wage increase to that person in the process?  While I'm at it, why does RTE need 2 newsreaders at 6pm to take turns reading the news?  Back in the days of Don Cockburn etc it seemed that we were happy with one face on the tele.  And why do they send their newsreaders up the north when something "big" is going down - just to interview their correspondent that is already up there?

And before I get berated like Geegee, why all the attitude with regard to individual opinions?  This area of AAM is known as "Letting of Steam" - can that not include begrudgery


----------



## ClubMan (23 Dec 2004)

*Everyone I know watches UTV and BBC and C4 and Sky much more than RTE, yet we have to pay a licence to 1950's style RTE.*

So do you think that we should be able to watch the _BBC_ for free at the expense of the _UK_ license payers or something?If somebody objects strongly to the TV license then there is always a legitimate way out of paying it. I think that _XXXAnother PersonXXX_ has done this if I recall correctly.


----------



## daltonr (24 Dec 2004)

*Nonsense*



> I realise that - that's why I said that you could always get rid of all of your TV receiving equipment and avoid the need for a licence if you so choose.



Surely the fact that he has a TV License buys him the right to comment on how it's spent.   It's a nonsence to say that he should pay up and shut up or else get rid of his TV altogether.

When you pay bank charges do you agree to never criticise the bank?   When you pay tax do you agree to never criticise the government?   How about Mobile phone and telephone bills.  You get my point.

Don't say TV is a luxury.  Lots of people survive without bank accounts, and a telephone is no more essential than a television.

He has a perfectly valid point.  You might not agree with it, but the fact is the cost of the TV licence is constantly rising.  If that rise is to pay these salaries then it's perfectly acceptable to ask why we can't have a cheaper licence and a different type of service.

The guy has paid his licence and has a right to complain.  Telling him to stop complaining or else get rid of his TV is just plain nonsence and to use my favourite McDowell quote of 2004 - "Not replete with intellectual integrity".

BTW, I have BBC Freeview and would gladly pay the UK TV Licence instead of the Irish one for the service provided.

Happy Christmas.

-Rd


----------



## ClubMan (24 Dec 2004)

*Re: Nonsense*

*It's a nonsence to say that he should pay up and shut up or else get rid of his TV altogether.*

Whether it is or it isn't I never said that or any of the rest of the stuff you seem to attribute to me. I merely pointed out that somebody who doesn't agree with the license fee is under no obligation to pay it and can avoid the need for paying it by getting rid of their TV receiving equipment if they so choose. I never told anybody what to do, whether it be to stop complaining or to ditch their TV reception equipment. It might make for a more constructive discussion if you actually read what people post and desist from engaging in knee-jerk rants against what you thought that they posted. :rolleyes


----------



## Rabbit (24 Dec 2004)

*Re: Nonsense*

*So do you think that we should be able to watch the BBC for free at the expense of the UK license payers or something*?

No, but we have to pay the ever increasing RTE licence fee as it is, even though we hardly watch any of it.   Like another poster, I would not mind paying the BBC fee, as we watch more BBC, UTV, Channel 4 etc than RTE.


----------



## daltonr (24 Dec 2004)

*Whatever.*



> Whether it is or it isn't I never said that or any of the rest of the stuff you seem to attribute to me.



Actually you did.  In response to his complaints about RTE not about the license itself, you responded...



> This is a bizarre juxtaposition of concerns in my personal opinion! If you feel so strongly about this issue why not ditch your TV receiving gear and legitimately stop paying your TV licence.



He never said he didn't want to pay the licence.  He said it was being wasted.  A valid point of view even if you disagree with it.   And having paid it he's entitled to say what he likes about how it's spent.



> It might make for a more constructive discussion if you actually read what people post and desist from engaging in knee-jerk rants against what you thought that they posted.



There's no need to get stroppy.  It's christmas.  Go back and read what HE actually said before you made a knee-jerk comment about what you thought he said. 

-Rd


----------



## rainyday (24 Dec 2004)

*Re: Whatever.*

I sometimes wonder why the armchair experts are so absolutely convinced that they know more about running a TV station than those who have built their careers around running TV stations?


----------



## daltonr (24 Dec 2004)

*Re: Whatever.*

Same reason the armchair experts think they know more than the people who run Banks, Hospitals, Countries, or even Building Societies.

-Rd


----------



## Leatherarse (24 Dec 2004)

*Re: Whatever.*

Just noticed that Geegee has gone qt, is it a fact that he copped on or is he one of the thieves of his bosses time.


----------



## Silvera (24 Dec 2004)

*tv presenters*

Guys Guys Guys.........

Geegee is more than entitled to voice his concerns about how Irish tv licence payers/taxpayers money is spent........as are all the rest of us !

I agree with him !!!


Most Irish tv presenters are -

_'Over-rated, Overpaid and Over here !!!'_

The radio presenter he alludes to is not worth the money he is paid, for the job he does - as is the case with most RTE radio/tv presenters !

I bet there are many _more competent_ people out there  who - given half the chance - would do a better job for* a quarter of the cost *!


Happy christmas to all !

Silvera.


----------



## EAMONN66 (24 Dec 2004)

*Re: tv presenters*

i think geegee has a very valid point. pk gr etc would do the same jobs for a fifth of what they currently get . they would not have a choice but to accept it as they would not be able to get jobs elsewhere. even at a fifth , they would still be very well paid. their current salary levels  which are multiples of what bertie gets are not justified.


----------



## geegee (24 Dec 2004)

Good Morning Leatherarse,



> Just noticed that Geegee has gone qt, is it a fact that he copped on or is he one of the thieves of his bosses time.



I fail to see what hope to achieve by goading. You appear to have a serious problem with my point - could it be that you yourself are one of the second rate presenters?? Either that or, no offence, you have a serious computation problem. I will now addressyour points:



> 1. You have still not named names so you are a cowardly begrudger.



If you check back I addressed this - see "litigious society"



> 2. Cop on, anyone who make it big are always unknown before they make it big.



Exactly my point - the overpaid presenters here are already "big" so it would be highly unlikely that they would go elsewhere and start from scratch on a paltry salary.



> 3. I am not as thick as you think (hellllloooo) Russia is only two miles from Canada and either are not led by each other



This really takes the biscuit. In case you hadn't noticed the _de facto_ situation is that Ireland is part of the British Isles with a similar culture. All of the institutions are based upon the English system - the Gardai and the  legal system toi name but two.

It is nothing short of incredible to analogize Russia and Canada; again, in case you hadn't noticed, Canada is part of the West and Russia part of the East. Canada is Democratic and, up until relatively recently, Russia was Communist. In post WW II history, they have had no shared culture, ideology or political system. 

For further information, try an internet search under "Cold War" , "Communism" or "Socialism".





> 4. You complain about paying your over inflated TV licence and getting scant reward, yet you are paying over inflated tax to inept politicians yet you do not complain. What is your gripe with RTE were you sacked by them... I think so.



Can I not complain about one thing without mentioning absolutely every conceivable gripe I have? I really do think your last line was either in jest or simply a silly attempt at goading again.




> 5. Why make accusations when you cannot back these up with facts.



What facts do you want? If you contact RTE they will provide you with salary figures. Again, if you do some research, you will not find many alternative job opportunities at the same salary level in Ireland. EAMONN66 has put it in a nutshell.


Merry Christmas to you and your family,

gg


----------



## ClubMan (24 Dec 2004)

*Re: Whatever.*

*Actually you did. In response to his complaints about RTE not about the license itself, you responded...*

Actually I didn't. I said that he (and others) could do this whereas you claimed that I said that they should. No doubt I'll be accused of engaging in semantics here but anybody who can't see a qualitative difference in these two statements could benefit from remedial _English_ classes in my opinion.

*He never said he didn't want to pay the licence. *

Again I never claimed this. I just suggested a course of action that could be taken by people who felt so strongly about the license that they might decide to avoid paying it altogether.

*There's no need to get stroppy. It's christmas. Go back and read what HE actually said before you made a knee-jerk comment about what you thought he said.*

I must admit that I can get stroppy when people persist in ignoring the precise details of contributions to a discussion and attempt to veer off into inaccurate interpretations of what was stated. I fully understood what he originally said and have tried to explain to you above how my responses fit in with this. It would help if you read carefully what I said and not jump to erroneous conclusions. _Christmas_ is no excuse for dispensing with adherence to the facts of the discussion...


----------



## daltonr (24 Dec 2004)

*Whatever*



> Actually I didn't. I said that he (and others) could do this whereas you claimed that I said that they should.



Actually you said.



> why not ditch your TV receiving gear and legitimately stop paying your TV licence.



I know it's a few years since my remedial English classes but that sounds like a suggestion to me.   
My apologies if in my stupidity I misinterpreted.



> I just suggested a course of action that could be taken by people who felt so strongly about the license



This thread wasn't about the license.  In fact you were the first person to mention the license.



> I fully understood what he originally said and have tried to explain to you above how my responses fit in with this.



If you say so.  I really don't care anymore.

-Rd


----------



## Gordanus (25 Dec 2004)

*How much is anyone's work worth?*

What is the value to society of that person's work?  It's obviously worth as much as (approximately) 6 hospital consulltants; or 11 of me; or (god knows) 65 junior chefs/road sweepers/whatever.  All these inflated top-end salaries do is widen the gap between rich and poor.
Personally I can't stand the man and turn the radio off when he comes on, so my estimation of his social value is very little.   How popular is he in listenership?


----------



## ClubMan (25 Dec 2004)

*Re: Whatever*

*I know it's a few years since my remedial English classes but that sounds like a suggestion to me. *

Ah - the penny drops. It is indeed a suggestion, something that leaves the ultimate decision up to the recipient of the advice, and not the same as telling somebody to do something  done.

*My apologies if in my stupidity I misinterpreted.*

Fair enough.

*This thread wasn't about the license. In fact you were the first person to mention the license.*

_geegee_ mentioned "tax payers' money" and "the public purse" so it seemed logical to me to include the license fee under those headings.

*If you say so. I really don't care anymore.*

Don't get stroppy. It's Christmas!


----------



## Leatherarse (25 Dec 2004)

Geegee, far from being second rate I would be regarded as first rate, as the ratings  prove. 
Not all presenters are highly paid. There are many who are around for a long time and are quite happy to work for the salary they recieve. They dont begrudge their higher paid colleagues one cent. The majorityof the higher paid worked their way up the ladder and were once part of the lower paid presenters.
Ireland is not part of the British Isles, part of it does remain in British hands and we all know why, and granted a lot of our laws and ways are British influenced , but in our constitution we are a 32 county republic.
I dont need a lesson in history , as I spent enough time studying it in Uni studying it and teaching it afterwards.
Geegee methinks you would have made a good presenter and perhaps you could have been on quite a good salary now, perhaps some day you will, anyway Nollaig Shona dhuit agus ath bhlíain faoi mhaise dhuit


----------



## geegee (26 Dec 2004)

Leatherarse,



> Geegee, far from being second rate I would be regarded as first rate, as the ratings prove.



Ahaa! Which one would you be then? Not GR by any chance? That would explain why you were so vehement in your defence of your/their position.



> Not all presenters are highly paid.



Are any on less than a six figure salary or at least the high fives? If not, they are grossly overpaid in a marketplace where they have virtually no alternative opportunities. This is inverted market forces - high salaries are only paid where it is necesary for staff retention.



> Ireland is not part of the British Isles,



Ireland _is_ part of the British Isles, not politically of course, but geographically, yes. It is therefore quite right to refer to it as part of the British Isles.



> part of it does remain in British hands and we all know why



This sounds ominous! As far as I know, as a layman, it is because the democratic majority says it should - but do you know otherwise?


Regards,

gg


----------



## Rabbit (26 Dec 2004)

I have to agree with GeeGee there.  What he / she says is true.    I think RTE presenters are very overpaid in a distorted marketplace.    RTE has very little of quality now, it has gone down a lot over the years.


----------



## ClubMan (26 Dec 2004)

* think RTE presenters are very overpaid *

In comparison to what? Do other TV and radio broadcasters etc. divulge indiviual presenters' salaries so that comparisons can be made?


----------



## Rabbit (27 Dec 2004)

*"In comparison to what? Do other TV and radio broadcasters etc. divulge individual presenters' salaries so that comparisons can be made?" 
* 

In comparison to what they are worth.    In a free marketplace, RTE would not pay its presenters as much as they could not afford to, as they would not have such a big subsidy from the license payer.    Also, some presenters salaries in the US and UK may be more, but these countries have much, much, much bigger populations.

While Gerry Ryan for example is a good broadcaster and presenter, and good luck to him, he does not have a very difficult job compared to some people who are paid a fraction of what he is.   We have to listen to him going on about his holidays / breaks to New York / South Africa / Paris / Orlando / Dromoland Castle the whole time , plus his freebie concert excursions with his buddies in the business etc.  He presumably has a sickness plan and a pension from RTE.  Yet he complains about his "work".    If only some others I know were that lucky in life.   I know others in RTE who are overpaid also.


----------



## ClubMan (27 Dec 2004)

*In comparison to what they are worth.*

How do you assess this? Perhaps _RTÉ_ do it in relation to the advertising revenue attributable to individual presenter's programme slots among other things?


----------



## Rabbit (27 Dec 2004)

Yes, but RTE is massively subsidized by our high TV license fees, which we have to pay, even though many of us watch ITV, BBC, C4, SKY etc instead most of the time.
Ah well, it could be worse.  Happy Xmas.


----------



## ClubMan (27 Dec 2004)

Is our license fee really that high by international standards? I see that the [broken link removed] is GBP£121 which is about €172 in comparison to . (Curiously enough the _UK_ still also offer black & white licenses for GBP£40.50). I'm not sure what the norm (if any) is across the rest of _Europe_ although, having seen public broadcasting TV in several _European_ countries, I certainly appreciate the quality of _RTÉ's_ output a bit more even if there may be room for improvement. 

By the way, anybody who is dissatisfied with RTÉ's output or other aspects of its operation can presumably do something constructive about it by providing feedback and comments via the Audience Council.


----------



## ajapale (27 Dec 2004)

This site is an excellent exposition on why the TV tax should be abolished. It was posted by fangs on the PreBudget forum.

[broken link removed]



> Looked at objectively then, the current TV licence system is a terrible waste of time, money and personnel. Since it applies to almost everyone in the country, it would be just as fair to make a single, simple appropriation from the Exchequer at budget time, paid directly into RTE's coffers.



Clubman,
Peoples attitude to RTÉ goes back a long way. I find the most virulently anti-RTÉ people are those who had to endure *one channel land* in the sixities and seventies. Those of us who had to endure *one channel land* still had to pay the full tv tax. Over in multichannel land people were able to enjoy the uk channels with no ads in the case of BBC. 

With respect to  *RTE presenters salaries*, my view is that its a free market and that presenters contracts will reflect the commercial climate prevailing at the time of renewal. In the same way I have no problem with the Roy Keans earnings, I have no problem with Pat Kennys earnings. When the day comes that either of them fail to perform then their contract comes to an end and they are no longer paid.

ajapale


----------



## rainyday (27 Dec 2004)

Many posters seem to be forgetting the fact that a free market does exist in this business today. Look at Dempsey & Darcy who jumped ship to Today FM. Look at all those Irish presenters who have ended up in the UK or further afield (Amanda Byram, Liz Bonnin, Emma whatshername from MTV a few years back). The free market exists.

Most of the RTE presenters do a decent job most of the time. Gerry Ryan & Pat Kenny are great radio presenters, though I'd avoid any TV appearance of either like the plague.


----------



## Rabbit (28 Dec 2004)

You mention Today FM - is it subsidized by the license payer, like RTE is ?  No, it is not a free market , while RTE enjoys these govt. type subsidies.


----------



## rainyday (28 Dec 2004)

I'm not sure I get your point Rabbit. Care to expand?

I contradicted myself by watching the RTE Top Hits of the 80's fronted by the great Gerry Ryan. Fascinating show - at times, I felt that some of the clips of real RTE TV from the 80's were like the more surreal moments of Fr Ted, e.g. the Castlebar International Song Content ('live from the Travellers Friend'), the Garda recruits in uniform playing 'Whiskey in the Jar' from Bibi's show live from Templemore, the 'Housewife of the Year' competition etc etc. Only Nighthawks came off with any credit.


----------



## Leatherarse (29 Dec 2004)

Geegee, sorry, I was away for a short break, thanks to a generous sponsor (one of my perks) we all get little perks in our jobs. There are a quite a few with mid to high five figured sums in their salaries, especially with the rural stations. I didn't put a gun to my employers head to get the figure I am on,...it was offered and I accepted, I guess they thought I was worth it. I would like to take this opportunity to publicily thank all the Irish people for the part they play in supporting our National media as would some of my journalistic colleagues in the print media.
Thanks Geegee.


----------



## podgeandrodge (29 Dec 2004)

*rte*

RTE Top Hits of the 80's would have been just as entertaining (or not) without Gerry at the helm, what made the program interesting or not was the clips.  Gerry's twopence worth was irrelevant and, in my opinion, annoying.  Still, at least I've said he was worth twopence.


----------



## jasconius101 (29 Dec 2004)

*GR*

I calculate that at 650k p.a., what with monstrous summer breaks, it comes out at 2k per hour - not even Monica could earn that much. 
  His so called breakfast show is positively lewd when it comes to reviewing the daily rags - he doesn't seem to progress beyond page three - notice how his breathing  gets a bit heavier.


----------



## Ceann Comhairle (29 Dec 2004)

I don't understand something here - dos that person Leatherarse mean that they are working in RTE as a highly paid prsenter and stil there details state that thy are a leisure director  Have they 2 jobs?


----------



## Leatherarse (29 Dec 2004)

Why should I give my full job title? ....just like you did CC ?Actually as well as produce I also direct which you are right in one way in saying, that is two jobs. I would regard it as one. I actually like to direct what I present also I do some research .......oh! that is three jobs.


----------



## ajapale (29 Dec 2004)

May I draw your attention to the posting guidelines?



> 16) *Please respect the privacy of others:*
> 
> Some contributors post anonymously/pseudonymously because they do not want to divulge their real identity for a variety of reasons. Please respect their right to privacy and desist from speculating on Askaboutmoney about their real identities. *Posts which speculate about the identity of bona-fide contributors* (as opposed to suspected spammers or other nuisance posters) *who choose to post anonymously/pseudonymously will be removed.*
> 
> ...



This thread appears to be reaching the end of its life. Would contributers like to make any final statements before it is closed?

ajapale


----------



## Leatherarse (30 Dec 2004)

No Ajapale, I have had my say and appreciate all the good natured criticism. It is heartening to see the level of debate and the varied trains of thought. It's up to Geegee now the initiator of this thread to have a final say if he wants to, if not Aja....turn the key:|


----------



## Dr Moriarty (30 Dec 2004)

I'd just like to add that personally I really enjoy a good old "bitchin'" squabble like this, amid the season of goodwill, peace on earth an' all that... 

I'm simply sick of people being nice to people at this stage. Family, friends, complete strangers...!

Can't we have a bit more? :rollin 

_[Or just a poll on who thinks The Plank, The Hook, etc. are worth every penny of €650K p.a. of the taxpayer's hard-earned...  ]_


----------



## geegee (30 Dec 2004)

Thank you for your graciousness, leatherarse (albeit late and in sharp contrast to your earlier comments)  - I will now take a bow.

good idea, Dr. Moriarty - let's have that poll and then then get RTE to act upon the result and put an end to over-inflated egos _Forever!!!!_.


----------

