RTE Salaries

EchoO

Kinski wrote: »

Bear in mind that these salary levels are related to ad revenues. Gerry Ryan took a massive amount of stick when he initially refused to take a paycut along with RTE's other stars, claiming that he was worth what he was being paid. He gave in eventually, but after his death his original point was proved - listenership is way down for his slot, meaning much less coming in from selling advertising in that slot.

The collapse of Gerry Ryan's old audience was down to how truly awful Tubridy was as a replacement. RTE picked the wrong person.

if RTE slashed Pat Kenny's or Joe Duffy's pay packets, the O'Brien-controlled media outlets would be more than happy to offer well in excess of 150k euro a year for their services.

Newstalk paid Eamon Dunphy 100k to present a Sunday morning show. On year later he had the grand total of 50,000 listeners. His Saturday Show on RTE Radio 1 had an audience of 260,000. The station tries to cut his wages in half and he flounces off.

I don't think O'Brien-controlled media outlets will be overly eager to try this again with another RTE star. Having a show on the national institution that is RTE Radio 1, is much more important than who the presenter is. The brand loyalty to that station is so strong that vast majority of listeners would just continue to listen to Kenny's or Duffy's replacement. They just don't don't turn the dial away from Radio 1.

FreudianSlippers

Kinski wrote: »

It's not the BBC or Channel 4 poaching their stars that concerns RTE, it's Newstalk and TV3 doing it.

Bear in mind that these salary levels are related to ad revenues. Gerry Ryan took a massive amount of stick when he initially refused to take a paycut along with RTE's other stars, claiming that he was worth what he was being paid. He gave in eventually, but after his death his original point was proved - listenership is way down for his slot, meaning much less coming in from selling advertising in that slot.

Now, just to be clear, I think these people are all mediocre talents, and I can't account for their popularity (just like I can't account for the popularity of Davina McCall or Graham Norton in the UK,) but if RTE slashed Pat Kenny's or Joe Duffy's pay packets, the O'Brien-controlled media outlets would be more than happy to offer well in excess of 150k euro a year for their services.

That's exactly the point - the breakdown of RTÉ income is roughly 50% public and 50% private (mainly from advertising revenue).
It may be an exercise in semantics (as it all goes in the same 'pot' initially), but my understanding is that 'talent' salaries are earmarked mainly out of the private income, that way they are linked to ad revenue... you sell more ad space you get more money.

In reality if you want to complain about TV licence money, you'd see TG4 and a bunch of Radio gone before RTÉ1&2 TV or radio lowered the salaries of their 'stars'.

EchoO

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

That's exactly the point - the breakdown of RTÉ income is roughly 50% public and 50% private (mainly from advertising revenue).
It may be an exercise in semantics (as it all goes in the same 'pot' initially), but my understanding is that 'talent' salaries are earmarked mainly out of the private income, that way they are linked to ad revenue... you sell more ad space you get more money.

In reality if you want to complain about TV licence money, you'd see TG4 and a bunch of Radio gone before RTÉ1&2 TV or radio lowered the salaries of their 'stars'.

RTE's commercial revenues have fallen by 32 per cent since 2007. Yet nearly all these 'stars' were locked into to boom time contracts throughout the recessions. Many of those contracts are only up for renewal this year. RTE's net deficit is 16.8 million.

I don't think you can say their salaries comes out of ad revenue but not the licence fee. If that licence fee element was removed, even allowing for the radical changes that would have to be made to the organisation, would they still be able to pay the 'stars' the same amount? I doubt it.

And it's not just a case of how much their respective shows generate. More relevent is how much more does that timeslot generate than if someone else was presenting at that time. It most cases I would say - not very much.

There's also the question of why would any company pay vastly greater amounts to their employees than their competitors would, or could?

M three

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

That's exactly the point - the breakdown of RTÉ income is roughly 50% public and 50% private (mainly from advertising revenue).
It may be an exercise in semantics (as it all goes in the same 'pot' initially), but my understanding is that 'talent' salaries are earmarked mainly out of the private income, that way they are linked to ad revenue... you sell more ad space you get more money.

In reality if you want to complain about TV licence money, you'd see TG4 and a bunch of Radio gone before RTÉ1&2 TV or radio lowered the salaries of their 'stars'.

Taking about Rte income misses the point, they are spending way more than they take in. Pay is too high.
It should be made stand on its own two feet and only pay out what it can afford.
Of course that wouldnt suit whatever government is in power as they wouldnt have a compliant little propaganda tool for their own use.

Anyone that doesnt realise this would want to pay attention to the amount of crap rte news puts out and the amount of non stories they report on

goose2005

EchoO wrote: »

RTE's commercial revenues have fallen by 32 per cent since 2007. Yet nearly all these 'stars' were locked into to boom time contracts throughout the recessions. Many of those contracts are only up for renewal this year. RTE's net deficit is 16.8 million.

I don't think you can say their salaries comes out of ad revenue but not the licence fee. If that licence fee element was removed, even allowing for the radical changes that would have to be made to the organisation, would they still be able to pay the 'stars' the same amount? I doubt it.

And it's not just a case of how much their respective shows generate. More relevent is how much more does that timeslot generate than if someone else was presenting at that time. It most cases I would say - not very much.

There's also the question of why would any company pay vastly greater amounts to their employees than their competitors would, or could?

And all of this makes the assumption that RTE's purpose is to generate money: it's not. It's supposed to be a public service broadcaster, supplying work of value to society that the commercial sector can't afford to do, or won't risk doing.

M three

goose2005 wrote: »

And all of this makes the assumption that RTE's purpose is to generate money: it's not. It's supposed to be a public service broadcaster, supplying work of value to society that the commercial sector can't afford to do, or won't risk doing.

No one is asking rte to make money that I know of.
They should be covering their costs. Saying they are a public service broadcaster doesnt mean they should be shelling out millions to mediocre presenters.
The excuse that the public need them is a bit much, with cable, satellite, downloads etc they are not needed as much as they try to let on.
They're needed more by the government of the day to put their own spin on things.
Anyway hasn't sky news lost money every year its existed? Proof that news is more about propaganda than money

Cerco

Miriam O'Callaghan was chairing the Pat Kenny show yesterday. I expect she will soon be doing the Weather, the Lotto and Spin the wheel. Is there any limit to her talents?

M three

Cerco wrote: »

Miriam O'Callaghan was chairing the Pat Kenny show yesterday. I expect she will soon be doing the Weather, the Lotto and Spin the wheel. Is there any limit to her talents?

Yes, there definitely is.
She is unable to put a half decent question to any politician from a government party and prefers to kiss ass on air instead.

mike65

goose2005 wrote: »

And all of this makes the assumption that RTE's purpose is to generate money: it's not. It's supposed to be a public service broadcaster, supplying work of value to society that the commercial sector can't afford to do, or won't risk doing.

Its not their job to lose millions year after year while costs are not tackled with a proper enthusiasm. RTE are in a hole for the medium term they have to cut their cloth.

thebman

goose2005 wrote: »

And all of this makes the assumption that RTE's purpose is to generate money: it's not. It's supposed to be a public service broadcaster, supplying work of value to society that the commercial sector can't afford to do, or won't risk doing.

To a limit past which the tax payer isn't willing to make up the difference.

Well past that point at the moment.

Their deficit is after all the money they have been given from license fees etc... so they are taking that money and still crying out, please sir can I have some more to the tune of millions to pay for staff costs not quality programming.

Not sustainable or acceptable to any sane person who doesn't work there IMO.

Benedict

No tourist would visit Ireland if no police force existed. Therefore, a garda should get thousands of Euro a week because without him/her, there would be no tourists.
This is the sort of farcical reasoning used to justify the fact that we are still paying obscene salaries to RTE presenters. Advertising is worth millions to RTE, Joe Duffy makes people listen to RTE therefore he is responsible for making millions therefore he is actually cheap at nearly 6k a week for less than 8 hours work per week.
Here's another one folks - without ink manufacturers, there'd be no money, so ink manufacturers should get paid huge sums every week. Without teachers, nobody would be able to read, the economy would fail, so teachers should get what? Even more per week than Joe Duffy?
How in God's name is it right that Joe Duffy gets more per week (whether he's on - or someone else is standing in) than Barak Obama.
And we're paying it!

Tim Robbins

srsly78 wrote: »

Well in theory if they do a good job there will be lots of viewers. Lots of viewers = lots of ad revenue. Therefore they should be worth it.

However in reality noone watches RTE so I have no idea.

That's a bogus comparison. They get subsidised so they have to show less ads and make better quality programs so they should be getting good figures.

If mars bars got subsidised by the tax payer you'd expect them to out sell snicker bars?

Farmer Pudsey

RTE is just the tip of an iceberg that is Semi-State pay. This often means that we are paying a higher price for services provided by semi-state bodies than we should. At present Electricity prices in Ireland are 40% higher than the EU average. I know that wages are only a small part of this however it seem to be an atitude accross semi-state bodies that workers come first and consumers stump up.

RTE pay wages way out of sync with its size. The reality is that if Pat Kenny, Joe Duffy and Ryan Turbidy went to the open market it is unliky that they would recieve 60% of these wages. However the real issue is that there is a second tier of presenters such as Marian Finnucane and Derek Davis that are semi retired and either do radion program over the weekend or are wheeled out for the summer when the big name presenters dissappear for 6-8 weeks.

I do not see comparable close downs in the BBC or other TV stations where there main presenters get holidays at Christmass, Easter Summer and even at mid-term.

The wages in the ESB, Board Gais, Bord na Mona et al are similar are push up part of the price of there products

Tim Robbins

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

RTE is just the tip of an iceberg that is Semi-State pay. This often means that we are paying a higher price for services provided by semi-state bodies than we should. At present Electricity prices in Ireland are 40% higher than the EU average. I know that wages are only a small part of this however it seem to be an atitude accross semi-state bodies that workers come first and consumers stump up.

It is a power nexus. Bryan Dobson was on 300K a year and running private media coaching courses teaching politicians how to answer questions at the same time a few years ago.

Miriam O'Callaghan know very little about anything but yet commands a leading position in current affairs! She has FF relations as does Tubs - not saying that got her to where she is but she is pretty useless at what she does considering the tricks the politicians are up to in this state it should be easy to pressurise them.

Chucky the tree

Benedict wrote: »

No tourist would visit Ireland if no police force existed. Therefore, a garda should get thousands of Euro a week because without him/her, there would be no tourists.
This is the sort of farcical reasoning used to justify the fact that we are still paying obscene salaries to RTE presenters. Advertising is worth millions to RTE, Joe Duffy makes people listen to RTE therefore he is responsible for making millions therefore he is actually cheap at nearly 6k a week for less than 8 hours work per week.
Here's another one folks - without ink manufacturers, there'd be no money, so ink manufacturers should get paid huge sums every week. Without teachers, nobody would be able to read, the economy would fail, so teachers should get what? Even more per week than Joe Duffy?
How in God's name is it right that Joe Duffy gets more per week (whether he's on - or someone else is standing in) than Barak Obama.
And we're paying it!

Supply and demand. If there is a large demand for something but a limited supply then that will effect the price/cost. We can easily supply lots of guards for much less then €1k per week so there is no need paying them that. The question is can a radio show host bring in as many listeners as Joe Duffy et. all? Most couldn't, that's the problem. Problem then is to work out how many listeners can be lost for saving €100k on his wage.

Farmer Pudsey

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Supply and demand. If there is a large demand for something but a limited supply then that will effect the price/cost. We can easily supply lots of guards for much less then €1k per week so there is no need paying them that. The question is can a radio show host bring in as many listeners as Joe Duffy et. all? Most couldn't, that's the problem. Problem then is to work out how many listeners can be lost for saving €100k on his wage.

The other question is could Duffy command the same salary from a private radio station. Yes he could command more from a UK station but is his type of program transferable accross the water. Also remember he has sailed close to the water with libel cases this is a cost as well. I would like to see wage scales of presenters on private stations.

Is Vincent Brown on more than RTE current affairs presenters. Most RTE current affaris presenters on TV are only on 3 days a week and then only for part of the program. Vincent is tied to the chair four nights a week ans is the sole presenter.

Matt Cooper presents the last word for 2.5 hours 5 days a week again he is the sole presenter. I believe that RTE takes the easy option on wages. Ryan Turbidy's radio show is not exactly show stopping his wages are. Another issue is the way RTE allows them to sub contract these presenters the revenue comissioners are clamping down on it in Privtae industry but I do not see them sending a team into RTE.

Chemical Burn

padraig102 wrote: »

Marian Finucane, whose fee of €570,000

4 hours per week at 52 weeks per year, 208 hours.
€570,000/208hours
€2,740/hour

mikom

Chemical Burn wrote: »

4 hours per week at 52 weeks per year, 208 hours.
€570,000/208hours
€2,740/hour

Try 30 weeks per year.
She is missing every third or forth week.

Rape of the licence payer is what it is.

Fr Tod Umptious

Chemical Burn wrote: »

4 hours per week at 52 weeks per year, 208 hours.
€570,000/208hours
€2,740/hour

If you really think that TV or radio presenters only work the hours that they are on air then there is no use having a debate with you here.

kippy

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

If you really think that TV or radio presenters only work the hours that they are on air then there is no use having a debate with you here.

Obviously she "works" more than the hours she is on the air - but no where near enough to justify the salary she is getting paid.
There is absolutely no reason any public service paid presenter of anything in this country should be getting paid over and above 150K per year and that in itself is generous.
If they were "THAT" good at attracting "revenue" for advertising I wouldn't have had to stump up 160 quid for the past few years on a license fee.

If they "threaten" to go else where, let them off. Hire in someone else, there are plenty young media graduates out there with the drive to do a lot more than the current guys in there.

creedp

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

If you really think that TV or radio presenters only work the hours that they are on air then there is no use having a debate with you here.

Surely though the hours off air are proportional to those on-air and in that case Ms Finucane works less that any other top presenter. In that regard it was seriously disingenious of her to chastise other public servants on her one show for not realising how hard the private sector work.

I think she should seriously look into her own work schedule and €500k+ salary before chastising others!

Readyhed

Max Powers wrote: »

RTE is like most other state bodies; undereffective, a lot of overpaid/over holidayed staff especially at upper levels, oversized in general has an uncanny ability to make embarrassing half-a$$ed copies of succesful things from the abroad.

The TV tax should be scrapped,
RTE will then be forced to cut number of channels/staff and stand on its own 2 feet with its significant ad money

Absolutely correct.

Any business/organisation that can depend on a huge income regardless of how efficient it is will sink into an abyss of waste, coruption and poor performance.

CelticRambler

creedp wrote: »

Surely though the hours off air are proportional to those on-air ...

Proportional, yes, but do you have any idea what the proportion is? I have a cyber-acquaintance on another forum who's recently spent five days working for a broadcast on the "private sector" - an ad, as it happens - preparing a few Shetland ponies for a shot. How long are they on screen for? 2 seconds.

That might be the extreme end of things, but there is a huge amount of work that goes on behind the scenes, and the better presenters will never really switch off. I agree that no-one is worth three quarters (or even half) a million euro per year, but basing any calculation on their on-air time shows a no understanding of the business at all.

Max Powers

got my TV tax bill today, i resent paying this the most out of all the taxes inc water/property tax. RTE should be made stand on its own feet. They have the greatest ability on earth to try copy a show format from BBC and make their yellow-pack crap excuse of a version of it. Add in the mix of overpaid 'stars' such as tubs and Pat Kenny who had the cheek to say that no one gives out about John O Shea getting 70000 a week from Utd, so why do people give out about his paltry 1m approx as it was a few years ago.

Readyhed

Max Powers wrote: »

got my TV tax bill today, i resent paying this the most out of all the taxes inc water/property tax. RTE should be made stand on its own feet. They have the greatest ability on earth to try copy a show format from BBC and make their yellow-pack crap excuse of a version of it. Add in the mix of overpaid 'stars' such as tubs and Pat Kenny who had the cheek to say that no one gives out about John O Shea getting 70000 a week from Utd, so why do people give out about his paltry 1m approx as it was a few years ago.

The citizens of Ireland are not forced by law to pay John O'Shea's salary!!

Compu Global Hyper Meganet

Companies don't give worthy employees pay rises just because they deserve it. They do it so that their most valuable workers won't move on to their competitors. With this in mind, why do RTE give such enormous salaries to their on air talent? If they slashed Joe Duffy's or Marion Finucane's salary, what are they going to do about it? Other Irish stations would still be unable to match the RTE offer, and radio/TV stations abroad are hardly going to be interested. (I can hardly imagine the BBC approaching Marion for instance). Just can't understand it.

creedp

CelticRambler wrote: »

Proportional, yes, but do you have any idea what the proportion is? I have a cyber-acquaintance on another forum who's recently spent five days working for a broadcast on the "private sector" - an ad, as it happens - preparing a few Shetland ponies for a shot. How long are they on screen for? 2 seconds.

That might be the extreme end of things, but there is a huge amount of work that goes on behind the scenes, and the better presenters will never really switch off. I agree that no-one is worth three quarters (or even half) a million euro per year, but basing any calculation on their on-air time shows a no understanding of the business at all.

We are talking about a radio show here and in the case of Ms Finucane she does one show a week. I'll bow to your expertise but I don't think I need to be an expert on media production to understand that she is grossly overpaid and more than slightly out of touch with reality.

mistermouse

RTE not only are poor value for money but the licence fee is nothing more than a tax. The stations in general offer very poor value for money to the state

The paying of huge wages to presenters who use companies to work the taxation system is a further waste to the state

Now that so many viewers have access to multiple channels, the license tax is propping up wastage.

Many advertisers have moved with the times and you can be assured that the Govt move to place a fee on media ie covering online etc is showing that they know RTE is a failed entity but this new charge will still be used to prop up RTE rather than independent broadcasters/online media etc which are quickly becoming the choice of viewers

At the very least the fee should be distibruted and RTE privatised and let stand on its own to see if it can. RTE do not do that much homegrown worthwhile product and cannot really be seen as a PBS in any sense of the word.

Furthermore I would really question how good many of their 'Stars' are. Many of Ireland's Best broadcasters are not on Irish TV Channels and those who would go to the UK in a cull, might not last as long as we are led to believe.

RTE is a protected entity, one that politicians of all sides like to keep in with. Therefore its easier to foist an unfair tax on the taxpayers.

Benedict

People talk about "supply and demand". The sort of daft pay that the likes of Joe Duffy picks up each week is a national disgrace. Supply and demand my foot. We don't get a choice in deciding what these people get. We are just informed that they are getting X amount and that's it.
It's a complete rep-off. Joe Duffy gets more in a year than the President and Vice President of the USA? Are we out of our minds or what?

Benedict

Chemical Burn mentions a figure of around 2.7K per hour for Marian Finucane. That's assuming a 52 hour week - but there are many weeks in the year in which there is a "stand in" - so it's probably nearer to 3k per hour. I think that she is brilliant at her job - but hey! It's a recession and hospital wards are being closed!

While the government is slashing pay all around them, this elite group appears to be safe. Is it because politicians are terrified that if they upset the presenters, the presenters will say nasty things about them on air?

These presenters whine that they have "no pensions". After all, wouldn't everyone prefer to be a nurse on 25k a year and have a modest pension to look forward to than receiving 40 or 50k a month for decades and having "no pension".

Hey Joe, Marian and the rest? Why not stick a couple of hundred grand a year into a pension fund? That way, you'd have a two million Euro pension fund accumulated every ten years?