Martina FitzGerald quitting RTE; Receiving substantial payout in exchange for silence

hatrickpatrick

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/martina-fitzgerald-will-leave-rt-after-being-given-substantial-payout-37650792.html

Surprised not to see a thread on this here already.

Just what the hell went on here? There's obviously a fair amount of behind the scenes stuff we don't know about. The whole incident has been very odd - RTE not mentioning FitzGerald in their statement announcing Cunningham replacing her, politicians scolding the public broadcaster over its choice of political correspondent (not a good look IMO regardless of how one feels about this), FitzGerald apparently looking into possible legal action she might have taken, and now this "hush hush" payout as she decides to quit the broadcaster altogether.

Obviously with RTE's requirement to re-advertise these positions every few years to keep the unions happy, nobody can assume they're going to be rubber stamped back into the job. Her demotion alone wouldn't have seemed that peculiar if RTE hadn't burned her in their announcement of her replacement - very unusual and some would say bad form, not to name her or thank her for her service in announcing the next person to take the role. This would imply some bad blood behind the scenes. Many have speculated that it's linked to her comments on gender pay equality in RTE, but to my mind it would be both incredibly petty and incredibly foolish for RTE to so blatantly "retaliate" for that - if that's what they're doing, they're being very obvious about it. So that to me suggests that this isn't the real reason.

Has anyone been following this more closely? Are there other goings-on here which have passed me by, or does the whole incident just seem somehow.... Strange?

suicide_circus

the cash was clearly more important to her than spilling the beans so we can only assume she's happy with the settlement.

kneemos

What was the settlement for?

fergiesfolly

Publicly funded organisations shouldn't get to give undisclosed payments to anyone without an explanation.
I'm seriously sick of RTE and wish the government would appoint a minister who has the balls to clean it up and have a major clear out.

VonZan

You have to laugh at the Montrose elite. The entitlement culture in there is sickening. Ray D'Arcy et al are stealing a living.

Kivaro

It's RTE.
They don't give a crap about the money we are forced to pay them.

Even though Martina has signed a confidentiality agreement with RTE, she still has a "friend" who was able to make comments yesterday to a national newspaper about the deal e.g.

Last night, a friend of Ms Fitzgerald said she was "thrilled" with the deal struck with the broadcaster.

"RTÉ offered her a settlement and she is delighted with the outcome," the source added.

The source added: "She won't be in any rush to make a decision on her next career move due to the settlement."

So her "friend" went to great pains in order to proclaim to the world that her settlement was substantial.
Wonder how many television licenses did it take to pay her off?

And you think that was bad?
What was more galling is the fact that "several senior politicians, including Cabinet minister Mary Mitchell O'Connor spoke out publicly against RTÉ's decision not to renew Ms Fitzgerald's contract as a political correspondent."
So if there was ever a sign of back-scratching collusion between RTE and the government, you have it right here.

RTE should be disbanded and re-built from the ground up (not top down) on a subscription and advertisement basis.
They are not fit for purpose.

McMurphy

fergiesfolly wrote: »

Publicly funded organisations shouldn't get to give undisclosed payments to anyone without an explanation.
I'm seriously sick of RTE and wish the government would appoint a minister who has the balls to clean it up and have a major clear out.

This.

You can't have Forbes etc whispering in ministers ears for a raise of the fee for a license to own television.

And in the next breath throw this money around to silence people at their discretion.

Someone needs to drain the swamp in Montrose. Law unto themselves.

Mebuntu

Ludicrous. Someone works in a job with a 5 year contract. The contract expires and someone else gets the job for the next 5 years. The person who was replaced then gets a "substantial" payoff for not having been offered a renewal of the contract. That's some precedent to set in any organisation let alone a publically funded one!

Ardent

No doubt the gender card was played here, judging by past form and recent comments by her ally Mary Jobs-for-the-girls-only Mitchell O'Connor.

Between this payoff and letting Beverly Flynn off the hook for millions in legal costs a few years ago, RTE can go f**k themselves looking for TV license money off me.

kneemos

Ardent wrote: »

No doubt the gender card was played here, judging by past form and recent comments by her ally Mary Jobs-for-the-girls-only Mitchell O'Connor.

Between this payoff and letting Beverly Flynn off the hook for millions in legal costs a few years ago, RTE can go f**k themselves looking for TV license money off me.

Paid her off because she threatened legal action on gender equality. That's crazy.

As she says herself she can take her time looking for another job thanks to the settlement. Who's going to hire her I wonder?

Franz Von Peppercorn

I too question an NDA in a publically funded organisation. Maybe she can’t disclose but possibly a FOI could.

TCM

Whatever about the pay out, I'm happy that I don't have listen to her amateurish reporting. Every second sentence was interrupted by a swallowing catching breath type motion. Good riddince I say.

hatrickpatrick

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/martina-fitzgerald-will-leave-rt-after-being-given-substantial-payout-37650792.html
.... Obviously with RTE's requirement to re-advertise these positions every few years to keep the unions happy, nobody can assume they're going to be rubber stamped back into the job.

So, jobs have to be advertised every few years "to keep the unions happy" that union members will only have contracts for a few years rather than permanent contracts?

suicide_circus

a dirty dirty organisation

seamusk84

Seriously p****d off that I paid my license fee this year now.

SEPT 23 1989

Point one

She must know where the serious dead bodies are buried over there

Point Two

Can Ingrid union sources miley be paid off to fcuk off as well?

Harry Palmr

All looks very murky. Fitzgerald's contract was for 5 years, she reapplied but didn't get the job again. On what basis did she sue and on what basis did RTE cave in?

kneemos

Harry Palmr wrote: »

All looks very murky. Fitzgerald's contract was for 5 years, she reapplied but didn't get the job again. On what basis did she sue and on what basis did RTE cave in?

Looks like she threatened them with something or other and RTE responded by "here have a bin bag full of money".

Cockford Ollie

Woman replaces man in a job. Good thing.

Man replaces women in a job. Sexist, patriarchal misogynist society which warrants condemnation from elected officials.

Gender equality is great.

Idbatterim

Laughable many of you complaining here and at the same time paying the license fee. If people stop paying in large numbers , they won’t be able to do sfa about it. This outrageous waste goes on and there was war about the water charges ? Lol!

hatrickpatrick

Deleted User wrote: »

So, jobs have to be advertised every few years "to keep the unions happy" that union members will only have contracts for a few years rather than permanent contracts?

I don't have the details on this agreement, but I do have it from people who have worked in RTE That the five year review thing is indeed a union-driven arrangement, and has not always been in place at RTE.

EDIT: Just for the record, I'm not really on any particular "side" in this, I just find the story very odd and intriguing, and would bet a fair amount on there being some interesting hidden element here we're not being told about.

padd b1975

kneemos wrote: »

What was the settlement for?

Having her feelings hurt because her contract wasn't renewed.

Carlingford Locked

Idbatterim wrote: »

Laughable many of you complaining here and at the same time paying the license fee. If people stop paying in large numbers , they won’t be able to do sfa about it. This outrageous waste goes on and there was war about the water charges ? Lol!

I know, it's like 15e a month or something. Imagine trying to introduce a new tax for 15e a month, for water or whatever. There'd be Gilet Jaunes all over the place.
Meanwhile they don't have a problem paying 600k for Ryan f**king Tubridy who got his job through nepotism. At least recruitment in other public services are as transparent as they can be for the most part. It beggar's belief.

gandalf

TBH RTE is an incredibly political organisation I can only assume that Fitzgerald pissed someone off. I don't understand why she got a payoff if she was a contract worker. I can only speculate that something else has gone on in the background. It does annoy me that RTE seem to be willing to throw our money at their problems like they did when they "offended" the Iona Institute a few years ago.

RTE at this stage is a waste of taxpayers money. In recent years I can think of only a handful of programmes that have been any good at all. The output certainly doens't justify their cost to us as taxpayers. My personal believe is they should be shut down.

gandalf

gandalf wrote: »

TBH RTE is an incredibly political organisation I can only assume that Fitzgerald pissed someone off. I don't understand why she got a payoff if she was a contract worker. I can only speculate that something else has gone on in the background. It does annoy me that RTE seem to be willing to throw our money at their problems like they did when they "offended" the Iona Institute a few years ago.

RTE at this stage is a waste of taxpayers money. In recent years I can think of only a handful of programmes that have been any good at all. The output certainly doens't justify their cost to us as taxpayers. My personal believe is they should be shut down.

Go the Netflix route, you want it, you pay a tenner/fifteen a month....cant think of anything id watch on it, American shows which are months behind other stations, Crap shows with D'arcy/Tubbs/talentless relatives et al

Venom

Zaiden Prickly Schoolmarm wrote: »

Go the Netflix route, you want it, you pay a tenner/fifteen a month....cant think of anything id watch on it, American shows which are months behind other stations, Crap shows with D'arcy/Tubbs/talentless relatives et al

RTE willingly going the Netflix route will never happen as even they aren't deluded enough to think the majority of viewers won't opt out the second they can. What I can see happening over the next decade, is more and more people moving to non-receiver capable TV's so as to legally avoid having to paying the licence fee.

TheRiverman

I always thought her presentation was very poor in front of the camera,constantly pausing to catch her breath and swallow,even when she was in the studio with the newsreader,she was still doing it.

dxhound2005

Carlingford Locked wrote: »

I know, it's like 15e a month or something. Imagine trying to introduce a new tax for 15e a month, for water or whatever. There'd be Gilet Jaunes all over the place.
Meanwhile they don't have a problem paying 600k for Ryan f**king Tubridy who got his job through nepotism. At least recruitment in other public services are as transparent as they can be for the most part. It beggar's belief.

If you think that beggars belief you would be amazed at the stupidity of those who pay the likes of Sky. They fork out vast sums every month, and then mostly watch BBC and ITV programmes which are Free to Air.

mikeym

Good old Rte they never fail to disappoint.

seamusk84

TheRiverman wrote: »

I always thought her presentation was very poor in front of the camera,constantly pausing to catch her breath and swallow,even when she was in the studio with the newsreader,she was still doing it.

She was never their most articulate corespondent. Very noticeable when they spoke to her live on the 6’1 when she was standing outside the Dail.
I assume this is the reason they didn’t want to renew her contract, she genuinely wasn’t up to standard.

gandalf

seamusk84 wrote: »

She was never their most articulate corespondent. Very noticeable when they spoke to her live on the 6’1 when she was standing outside the Dail.
I assume this is the reason they didn’t want to renew her contract, she genuinely wasn’t up to standard.

Then why the payoff?

Venom

dxhound2005 wrote: »

If you think that beggars belief you would be amazed at the stupidity of those who pay the likes of Sky. They fork out vast sums every month, and then mostly watch BBC and ITV programmes which are Free to Air.

People have the choice to pay for the likes of Sky or Virgin Media, unlike RTE where there is no choice. There is also the fact that both Sky and Virgin Media offer phone, internet services, radio and a 100+ TV channels.

chicorytip

TheRiverman wrote:

I always thought her presentation was very poor in front of the camera,constantly pausing to catch her breath and swallow,even when she was in the studio with the newsreader,she was still doing it.

That aside, her general level of knowledge and reportage of the political scene was not impressive. She seems to have a sense of entitlement and clearly regarded her reappointment as a mere formality.

dxhound2005

Venom wrote: »

People have the choice to pay for the likes of Sky or Virgin Media, unlike RTE where there is no choice. There is also the fact that both Sky and Virgin Media offer phone, internet services, radio and a 100+ TV channels.

If they have Sky or Virgin in this country they are also liable for the TV licence fee. Some people here don't pay it, so they think there is a choice. Sky offer 100+ channels, but the people who throw money at them mostly watch BBC and ITV. Really odd behaviour.

I would not choose to get broadband from anyone who also makes me buy a TV service.

Gimme A Pound

Cockford Ollie wrote: »

Woman replaces man in a job. Good thing.

Man replaces women in a job. Sexist, patriarchal misogynist society which warrants condemnation from elected officials.

Has that happened?

Gimme A Pound

Idbatterim wrote: »

Laughable many of you complaining here and at the same time paying the license fee.

How do you know?

touts

gandalf wrote: »

Then why the payoff?

Because they made a complete pig's ear of her removal and replacement and my bet is they were staring down the barrel of a very nasty and well publicised constructive dismissal case so paid her off as the faster and cheaper option.

freshpopcorn

Maybe Prime Time will investigate the large payouts in exchange for silence within RTE!

OldMrBrennan83

Zaiden Prickly Schoolmarm wrote: »

Go the Netflix route, you want it, you pay a tenner/fifteen a month....cant think of anything id watch on it, American shows which are months behind other stations, Crap shows with D'arcy/Tubbs/talentless relatives et al

Netflix isn't much of an alternative in this country, it's rubbish.

AndyBoBandy

kneemos wrote: »

As she says herself she can take her time looking for another job thanks to the settlement. Who's going to hire her I wonder?

She’s apparently spent the last few weeks promoting her ‘best selling’ book!! So I can’t imagine she’ll be signing on for her €200 a week anytime soon! I believe the book is about females being elected to political roles/positions.
I wonder has that anything to do with the contract not being renewed? Was she seen to be profiting from her privileged position as a journalist with access to the political classes?

c.p.w.g.w

Idbatterim wrote: »

Laughable many of you complaining here and at the same time paying the license fee. If people stop paying in large numbers , they won’t be able to do sfa about it. This outrageous waste goes on and there was war about the water charges ? Lol!

Some people can't risk getting caught, as it could affect their job. Especially within the financial services industry

seamusk84

touts wrote: »

Because they made a complete pig's ear of her removal and replacement and my bet is they were staring down the barrel of a very nasty and well publicised constructive dismissal case so paid her off as the faster and cheaper option.

No, her contract naturally ended after 5 years. Therefore no case to be had in terms of dismissal. She just didn’t get the job when she reapplied.

So the question remains - Why the payoff?

kneemos

kneemos wrote: »

Looks like she threatened them with something or other and RTE responded by "here have a bin bag full of money".

"Take one of the bags in the room to your right on the way out"

Kivaro

So, in essence (going by the Martina Fitzgerald debacle) if you work at RTE there is no way that you can be fired, and if you are let go, then you can expect a substantial tax-funded payoff.

God, I want to work at RTE.
The only problem is that I have no relatives at RTE, so there isn't a chance in hell that I would get a job there; irrespective of my qualifications.

And, continuing on with the petulant, self-righteous, entitled behaviour of RTE staff, Sharon Ní Bheoláin has filed an official complaint after a "bust up" in the newsroom during the week. She is refusing to do any further broadcasts.

Jesus, what a cesspit of an organisation. It must be a nightmare if you are just an "ordinary" RTE worker (i.e. not a "star" on massive wages) trying to do your job. I wonder if they are allowed to actually look at or talk to the likes of Sharon, Tubriby, or the other six-figure elites?

Gimme A Pound

seamusk84 wrote: »

No, her contract naturally ended after 5 years. Therefore no case to be had in terms of dismissal. She just didn’t get the job when she reapplied.

So the question remains - Why the payoff?

People don't know, but by god they'll say what happened anyway.

Not that I'm a fan of RTE.

paw patrol

touts wrote: »

Because they made a complete pig's ear of her removal and replacement and my bet is they were staring down the barrel of a very nasty and well publicised constructive dismissal case so paid her off as the faster and cheaper option.

but that is just not true,
She signed a contract and that contract was fulfilled for the full term.

it was done and dusted. They then had a new contract for that role and a new term. Somebody else got it.
There was nothing of what you suggested.

I suggest people write to their TDs on this, hopefully the public account committee can hammer RTE on this.

Cockford Ollie

Kivaro wrote: »

And, continuing on with the petulant, self-righteous, entitled behaviour of RTE staff, Sharon Ní Bheoláin has filed an official complaint after a "bust up" in the newsroom during the week. She is refusing to do any further broadcasts.

Complaint is against head of news and current affairs Jon Williams.

Sounds like a man's name, she's won that already.

Mad_maxx

I'm a fairly prolific conosuer of news media yet I can honestly say I barely noticed her down the years, was amazed to read she is eighteen years at rte.

Franz Von Peppercorn

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

She’s apparently spent the last few weeks promoting her ‘best selling’ book!! So I can’t imagine she’ll be signing on for her €200 a week anytime soon! I believe the book is about females being elected to political roles/positions.
I wonder has that anything to do with the contract not being renewed? Was she seen to be profiting from her privileged position as a journalist with access to the political classes?

Oh I don’t doubt she will be signing up if she has paid stamps.

RTE, like a lot of the civil service and universities, is basically a mechanism to transfer money to people who were already born privileged in the leafy suburbs of the south city. They see milking the taxpayer as their right.

paw patrol

paw patrol wrote: »

but that is just not true,
She signed a contract and that contract was fulfilled for the full term.

The fact is once you go over 4 years in a public job you are entitled to be made permenant. I’m not sure if RTE falls under this rule but it possibly does.

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

RTE, like a lot of the civil service and universities, is basically a mechanism to transfer money to people who were already born privileged in the leafy suburbs of the south city. They see milking the taxpayer as their right.

That is absolute nonsense.

The J Stands for Jay

TCM wrote: »

Whatever about the pay out, I'm happy that I don't have listen to her amateurish reporting. Every second sentence was interrupted by a swallowing catching breath type motion. Good riddince I say.

I've been hearing all these stories about her, but had no idea who she was, no recollection of ever seeing her. But now you mention the swallowing, I know exactly who she is.