Dee Forbes banging the RTE TV licence drum again 60m uncollected fee *poll not working - pl ignore*

Brendan Bendar

Stovepipe wrote: »

It isn't all about management failures; the RTE unions have a role in this too. No shortage of jobsworths there. Why do you think so many RTE programmes are made by third-party companies? Cheaper, non-union soeasier to work with and, cynically, easier to blame if something goes wrong. In my very, very limited association with film and TV work, the independent companies hate working with RTE permanent staff because of the unions, especially some of the technical staff. Getting a contract to make a show for RTE is regarded as good money but, as one friend in the business said to me, do as much of it as you can yourself without involving RTE staff, as the union rules will kill you. Look what's happened now; the journalists and broadcasters are at each others throats, despite being all in the same NUJ chapter, working in the same offices, eating in the same canteen,etc, all because of the huge payscales given to the top twelve. Dee Forbes has been given a poisoned chalice and she knows it and the politicals are trying to get the boot in, given half the chance.

Good summation there, very similar to other semi-State companies which were Union dominated and hamstrung until the ‘penny finally dropped ‘ and it became compete or go out of business.

Outsourcing became more or less normal and jobs which took several months now took a few weeks.

I would disagree to an extent that MsForbes has been given a ‘poison chalice’ she applied for the job and should have known the issues or certainly learned about them in her tenure there.

Those well known canines ‘ the dogs in the street’ could tell that the ‘stars’ were way overpaid plus the general costs were not sustainable.

Her first action should have been to tackle this, but little appears to have been done.

This would at least dampen down public opinion and give her a fighting chance of getting public support.

She is being well paid, she now needs to earn it.

elperello

marvin80 wrote: »

A spokesman for RTÉ confirmed the vehicles referenced in the tenders are for 2rn staff, a subsidiary company of RTÉ which maintains, manages, and develops all of Ireland's broadcast transmission network.

The spokesman said: "The vehicles referred to allow 2rn's staff to gain rigging and engineering access to the main sites which are distributed throughout the countryside.

"Many of the sites are very remote and require a 4x4 vehicle to access them.

"RTÉ and other broadcasters broadcast from these sites 24 hours a day, seven days a week in all weather conditions.

"Rigging and engineering staff often need to access these sites in the most extreme weather conditions, and for this reason, the appropriate vehicles are required," he added.

Thanks for that.

So it seems that good reliable vehicles are needed.
Imagine the complaints if the service went down and they couldn't get up the hill to fix it.

elperello

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

The debate can move on when RTE want to stop portraying themselves as a public service broadcaster in desperate need of more money while simultaneously paying outrageous salaries to the above people.

They want the best of both worlds - being a public service broadcaster (which I actually think they're good at and should be supported) and being a commerical one (which they are not in any way good at and should not be supported by public money).

OK, it's just that you seemed to want to get rid of the four named presenters overnight.
I think better to go a bit slower rather than fire people without an idea where we are going.

I agree the PSB vs. commercial should definitely be a part of any review.

Nijmegen

Stovepipe wrote: »

It isn't all about management failures; the RTE unions have a role in this too. No shortage of jobsworths there.

Yeah the union thing is a problem, I guess the general culture of slowing things down and resisting reform.

As I say, can you get the outcome you want without having RTE? The amount of work they outsource tends to point towards an affirmative. You could literally outsource everything, including the management function, to companies that are on 5 or 10 year performance based contracts.

Stovepipe

The top earners are essentially contractors and could be dropped at a moment's notice. They've done it before. Of all the earners, in the publicly well known faces, people like Mary Wilson earn well below that paid to the senior management and even well below that of the rest of the high earners. I'd justify keeping her any day. Another thing cropped up with the retirement of Mary Kennedy; it turns out she was a contractor and the station basically forced her to become staff 15 years ago, along with a few other well-known TV and radio names. She didnt want to, as being a freelancer suited her, but some accountant won the battle and she became staff. The option given, allegedly, was "become staff or be cast aside". No choice there then, but a widely disliked move because it left them with a very small RTE pension and no choice but to pay into it. Bit of a thoughtless move by some grey suit.

end of the road

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

If RTE is as much value for money as Dee claims, why the need to try new ways to force people to pay? Surely people would have no issue paying for this fantastic value service?

whether they would or wouldn't doesn't matter to be fair as it's not voluntary but mandatory to pay it if you own a tv.
the reason they want more ways included for a requirement to pay is so that people who have the ability to use their services via other means pay the same as anyone else receiving it via terrestrial means.
i don't like paying a tv license myself but they do have a fair point on this one.

X111111111111 wrote: »

They are completely out of touch with reality tbh. You could go out and buy 5 second hand SUV's in really good nick for 50k if you did your homework. How can they get away with this kind of stuff it's complete insanity they are still funded by the hard pressed tax payers of this country.

you could, but how many years would they get out of them compared to buying brand new?

tayto lover

Dee Forbes intimating that RTE’s top broadcasters are being sought elsewhere.
I’d love to put that to the test. Hopefully they are and some other station takes them, but I doubt they are.
She’s bluffing imo.

end of the road

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

The debate can move on when RTE want to stop portraying themselves as a public service broadcaster in desperate need of more money while simultaneously paying outrageous salaries to the above people.

They want the best of both worlds - being a public service broadcaster (which I actually think they're good at and should be supported) and being a commerical one (which they are not in any way good at and should not be supported by public money).

it's more that government expect them to be that rather then rte choosing it.
it's the same with many other state organisations.
much of the public also expect and want this to be so, or at least they did.

bigroad

You would think some sort of lease deal would be better than paying out 200k .

Elmo

tayto lover wrote: »

Dee Forbes intimating that RTE’s top broadcasters are being sought elsewhere.
I’d love to put that to the test. Hopefully they are and some other station takes them, but I doubt they are.
She’s bluffing imo.

The only really point that was properly convayed was the fact that they are public figures and alot of pressure comes from that. However it's not to the amount that they are getting paid.

The committee for the most part were good on their points particularly in relation to the lack of detail in their strategy and how RTÉ have already made a number of U turns, RTÉ often hid behind commercial interests not to answer those questions.

M McD was good on the pay issue, he point out the fact that if you drop 2 of the top earners the savings made were large due to them leaving RTÉ (he didn't mention either Pat Kenny or Jerry Ryan but those are the two) and only a small amount was taken from the rest.

James Brown

Stovepipe wrote: »

It isn't all about management failures; the RTE unions have a role in this too. No shortage of jobsworths there. Why do you think so many RTE programmes are made by third-party companies? Cheaper, non-union soeasier to work with and, cynically, easier to blame if something goes wrong. In my very, very limited association with film and TV work, the independent companies hate working with RTE permanent staff because of the unions, especially some of the technical staff. Getting a contract to make a show for RTE is regarded as good money but, as one friend in the business said to me, do as much of it as you can yourself without involving RTE staff, as the union rules will kill you. Look what's happened now; the journalists and broadcasters are at each others throats, despite being all in the same NUJ chapter, working in the same offices, eating in the same canteen,etc, all because of the huge payscales given to the top twelve. Dee Forbes has been given a poisoned chalice and she knows it and the politicals are trying to get the boot in, given half the chance.

Because the Arts Minister at the time, Michael D. Higgins, ensured RTE start putting contracts for new or renewed programming out to public tender.
That's when all the RTE heads went out and formed their own independent production companies.
Bill O'Herlihy owned the company produced his shows. Same with Pat Kenny and many many others.
Unions play a role in ensuring their members are looked after. The unions don't work for us and have no remit to consider us. You may as well be giving out that the Catholic Girl guides only look after the affairs of the Catholic Girl guides.

Forbes ain't going to do **** for the tax payer. She's not there to look after us either.

*EDIT*
Forgot to add, these 'private' companies use the same unionised production staff such as cameramen, sound, lighting.

Brendan Bendar

Stovepipe wrote: »

The top earners are essentially contractors and could be dropped at a moment's notice. They've done it before. Of all the earners, in the publicly well known faces, people like Mary Wilson earn well below that paid to the senior management and even well below that of the rest of the high earners. I'd justify keeping her any day. Another thing cropped up with the retirement of Mary Kennedy; it turns out she was a contractor and the station basically forced her to become staff 15 years ago, along with a few other well-known TV and radio names. She didnt want to, as being a freelancer suited her, but some accountant won the battle and she became staff. The option given, allegedly, was "become staff or be cast aside". No choice there then, but a widely disliked move because it left them with a very small RTE pension and no choice but to pay into it. Bit of a thoughtless move by some grey suit.

Happens to people in jobs every week, only in the pvt. sector it’s out the door and on your own.

The ordinary person hasn’t the luxury of being a contractor or staff.

There are plenty of people on small pensions so forgive me if I haven’t total sympathy with the issues in RTE.

If the company feels its more advantageous to have folk on staff, then that’s how it goes.

A company isn’t set up to aggrandize the staff, there are obligations to the shareholder, in this case JQ Taxpayer.


Regarding Ms Wilson and her pay, is it linked to senior management?

If she is not happy, then go into senior management.

This rubbish is annoying and while the top presenters should be paid well, no problem with that, the levels of pay are way above what would seem fair and commensurate with output and responsibility.

mgn

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/1211/1098534-rte-lyric/

Just goes to show RTE is only a Government mouthpiece, you scratch my back and we will scratch yours.

I suppose Richard Bruton will be on the news now 5 times a week instead of 4.

elperello

mgn wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/1211/1098534-rte-lyric/

Just goes to show RTE is only a Government mouthpiece, you scratch my back and we will scratch yours.

I suppose Richard Bruton will be on the news now 5 times a week instead of 4.

It only makes sense to delay the final decision pending the Commission. Not often I find myself in agreement with LV but he is right.

I thought it was a bad move in the first place considering that there was very little real saving. Also there are plans to revitalise the centre of Limerick which will involve considerable investment. Bad timing for a public service to be pulling in the opposite direction.

Expunge

But how are RTE executives supposed to do their jobs, whether it be good or bad, if government figures keep 'suggesting' changes to their plans? We had this a few years ago with that LW transmitter and now this with Lyric?

Lyric is essentially a collection of sound files on a computer with the odd, mostly substandard live presenter. It doesn't matter a crap where it is broadcast from. The 20 or so staff mobilised fellow luvvies into making it some life or death issue, which it is not.
The two local FG senators vying for Noonan's seat got to work and once again the RTE executives must back down. It's a great message sent out to all the self-entitled staff in RTE (which includes the Lyric staff). Get yer TDs and Senators onto and Dee will have to roll over.

NIMAN

elperello wrote: »

OK, it's just that you seemed to want to get rid of the four named presenters overnight.
I think better to go a bit slower rather than fire people without an idea where we are going.

I am no great fan of RTe's so-called stars, but would agree with you that they shouldn't all be fired.

They are like music and film, its very subjective. Some people like them, others don't.

But what you could do is to pay them a sensible salary. Next time contract negotiations are up, offer them a max 150k per year, take it or leave it deal.

I know we are continually told that the top 10 talent wages aren't a big contributor to the overall debt, but it would help RTe in their image with the public or man in the street, which is at rock bottom. And it of course save a hefty pile of cash every year.

end of the road

Expunge wrote: »

But how are RTE executives supposed to do their jobs, whether it be good or bad, if government figures keep 'suggesting' changes to their plans? We had this a few years ago with that LW transmitter and now this with Lyric?

Lyric is essentially a collection of sound files on a computer with the odd, mostly substandard live presenter. It doesn't matter a crap where it is broadcast from. The 20 or so staff mobilised fellow luvvies into making it some life or death issue, which it is not.
The two local FG senators vying for Noonan's seat got to work and once again the RTE executives must back down. It's a great message sent out to all the self-entitled staff in RTE (which includes the Lyric staff). Get yer TDs and Senators onto and Dee will have to roll over.

lyric is exactly what the license fee should be going on, all be it probably in it's original form, so quite rightly people spoke up and in turn got rte to make the correct decision to back down on any threat to close lyric.
nobody was mobilised to make it a life or death issue, rather they were mobilised to inform the station's listeners that there was a serious threat of the station potentially being lost or severely cut back.
if this is successful then brilliant for the listeners of the station, rte's radio services mostly do serve a ps remit even if the audiences may be tiny in some cases.
every station these days is a collection of sound files with some live presenters which go from anything from good to scraping the barrel. that's just life so i'm not sure why lyric should be singled out, at least it provides a service.

Stovepipe

Regarding the vehicles, 200k for five is probably a good deal, given that the vehicles will be fitted out like ESB off road vehicles, as mobile toolboxes for getting to difficult locations. All State and semi-State agencies are required to justify their vehicle fleet and RTE is no different. originally, the pay of the RTE staff, from top to bottom, was linked to the Civil Service, until people began to see what UK TV stars got and began to agitate for similar treatment.

SEPT 23 1989

Simple solution

Contract up station in near insolvency so we are cutting your wages in half

But I have been offered more by some other stations on another small island off the west coast of Europe

That’s fine

Show us all the offers made to you and we will match them

Won’t do that

Out the door

Expunge

end of the road wrote: »

lyric is exactly what the license fee should be going on, all be it probably in it's original form, so quite rightly people spoke up and in turn got rte to make the correct decision to back down on any threat to close lyric.
nobody was mobilised to make it a life or death issue, rather they were mobilised to inform the station's listeners that there was a serious threat of the station potentially being lost or severely cut back.
if this is successful then brilliant for the listeners of the station, rte's radio services mostly do serve a ps remit even if the audiences may be tiny in some cases.
every station these days is a collection of sound files with some live presenters which go from anything from good to scraping the barrel. that's just life so i'm not sure why lyric should be singled out, at least it provides a service.

Yes, of course a lot (sadly not all) of Lyric's output is pure public service and merits support. Once a commitment was made to keep lyric on air, really there was little more to be said. Then the staff based locally made it about keeping lyric in Limerick City. This seems to have been a purely selfish campaign about preserving their terms and conditions and lifestyles with some guff about being embedded in that city.
It's nonsense. They should have been supported for the move or helped out the door.
That's what has happened recently in An Post, Bord na Mona and ESB. These RTE staffers see themselves as exceptional when the vast majority of them are anything but.

Brendan Bendar

Expunge wrote: »

Yes, of course a lot (sadly not all) of Lyric's output is pure public service and merits support. Once a commitment was made to keep lyric on air, really there was little more to be said. Then the staff based locally made it about keeping lyric in Limerick City. This seems to have been a purely selfish campaign about preserving their terms and conditions and lifestyles with some guff about being embedded in that city.
It's nonsense. They should have been supported for the move or helped out the door.
That's what has happened recently in An Post, Bord na Mona and ESB. These RTE staffers see themselves as exceptional when the vast majority of them are anything but.

Exactly the same tactic deployed when the old Health Boards were in action.

Huge deficit... what will we do?

There’s a small hospital there in Anytown, doesn’t do much but has doctors, nurses, security ,porters, upkeep, lighting heating,admin, clerical, maintenance etc..... we’ll close it down and move the workload to the district hospital 15 miles away.

Local TDs hear this........ you will in your b****x... this will cause us to lose our seats, Mary the nurse married to John the Guard will lose their nice little cushy number and we are out the door.

Leave these lads and lassies alone and sure it’s only taxpayers money anyway, clear off outa that and try somewhere else.

Cut children’s allowances or something.

kenmc

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Simple solution

Contract up station in near insolvency so we are cutting your wages in half

But I have been offered more by some other stations on another small island off the west coast of Europe

That’s fine

Show us all the offers made to you and we will match them

Won’t do that

Out the door

Unfortunately, we all know there's not a hope that any station in the world would even consider taking on tubridy, Darcy, Joe etc. We're bloody stuck with them. And yet they are paid rediculous amounts of our money in case they're poached.

Pay them 40k a year each. It's not like they've got many other options of employment, can't see any of them being able to do anything else.

fritzelly

I'm totally bemused by the claim that the likes of Joe Duffy bring in more money than they are paid - listened to LL today, there was hardly any ads by private companies
Then when you do get a private ad you get JD spitting his utter contempt at the ad
https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/radio/can-it-be-removed-from-liveline-joe-duffy-hits-out-at-atrocious-ad-but-rt-wont-say-if-it-will-be-pulled-38088773.html

Any wonder why no one wants to pay for the ad slots.

elperello

fritzelly wrote: »

I'm totally bemused by the claim that the likes of Joe Duffy bring in more money than they are paid - listened to LL today, there was hardly any ads by private companies
Then when you do get a private ad you get JD spitting his utter contempt at the ad
https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/radio/can-it-be-removed-from-liveline-joe-duffy-hits-out-at-atrocious-ad-but-rt-wont-say-if-it-will-be-pulled-38088773.html

Any wonder why no one wants to pay for the ad slots.

But that ad was terrible especially during the daytime.

381,000 listeners can't all be wrong.

Nevin Parsnipp

NIMAN wrote: »

I am no great fan of RTe's so-called stars, but would agree with you that they shouldn't all be fired.

They are like music and film, its very subjective. Some people like them, others don't.

But what you could do is to pay them a sensible salary. Next time contract negotiations are up, offer them a max 150k per year, take it or leave it deal.

I know we are continually told that the top 10 talent wages aren't a big contributor to the overall debt, but it would help RTe in their image with the public or man in the street, which is at rock bottom. And it of course save a hefty pile of cash every year.

Lookit ! What get's peoples goat is that some Dude or Dudes has AGREED these payment levels to the so called stars...and has being paying them very substantial wedges over the past number of years.

While at the same time crying to the Govt. via the taxpayer for more money.

Everybody gets that the "Stars" salaries are only a small percentage of the overall wage bill .

But paying dudes just south of half a million euirons for at best competent performance is just not on.

The focus may be on the "Stars" but the entire RTE wage bill and expenditure needs to be looked at before spending any more taxpayers money.

fritzelly

elperello wrote: »

But that ad was terrible especially during the daytime.

381,000 listeners can't all be wrong.

Eight (8) complaints, one of which was probably JD - I heard the show and he riled up the listeners to agree with him

Doesn't send a good message when the host spends the whole show complaining about the ad that is trying to promote radio advertising.
Calling for it to be removed from his show - who does he think he his? Shows the attitude these presenters have - believe they are beyond reproach

elperello

fritzelly wrote: »

Eight (8) complaints, one of which was probably JD - I heard the show and he riled up the listeners to agree with him

Doesn't send a good message when the host spends the whole show complaining about the ad that is trying to promote radio advertising.
Calling for it to be removed from his show - who does he think he his? Shows the attitude these presenters have - believe they are beyond reproach

Sorry I phrased that post badly.

They were meant to be two separate points.

1- the ad in question was terrible especially during the day.

2- the show must be doing something right with 381,000 listeners.

NIMAN

Nevin Parsnipp wrote: »

Lookit ! What get's peoples goat is that some Dude or Dudes has AGREED these payment levels to the so called stars...and has being paying them very substantial wedges over the past number of years.
.

Totally with you on this.

Thing is, some of the big earners aren't actually RTe employees, but contractors.

So the next time it comes to negotiate 'the contract' that their company provides to RTe, tell them "look we were able to pay 495k last year but we're broke, and can only offer 150k this year".

Let them decide then if they want to take that deal or go to Newstalk, TV3 or wherever and get more.

With RTe employees it might be harder to make them take such a massive cut, as they probably have union rights and would only have to take whatever percentage cut the rest of RTE staff are taking.

fritzelly

elperello wrote: »

2- the show must be doing something right with 381,000 listeners.

363,000 at last count a month or so ago and still declining - and even at that it's just statistical figures based on a small sampling that doesn't take in to account if someone actually listened to the whole show or 5 minutes.

Atlantic Dawn

fritzelly wrote: »

I'm totally bemused by the claim that the likes of Joe Duffy bring in more money than they are paid - listened to LL today, there was hardly any ads by private companies
Then when you do get a private ad you get JD spitting his utter contempt at the ad
https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/radio/can-it-be-removed-from-liveline-joe-duffy-hits-out-at-atrocious-ad-but-rt-wont-say-if-it-will-be-pulled-38088773.html

Any wonder why no one wants to pay for the ad slots.

And when he basically uses his show to freely advertise his bukes without a single cent needing to be spent by the publisher on RTE you really do wonder how the money struggling organisation is run.