The BBC's top presenters, such as Jonathan Ross and Jeremy Clarkson, are to escape a 10 per cent pay cut which is to be enforced on lesser known names because of a £4 billion funding deficit.

 

When existing contracts come up for renewal all presenters in national and regional television and radio will be faced with a minimum 10 per cent reduction. If they refuse to accept, their contracts will not be renewed.

 

There are around 40 television and radio stars who are being paid more than £1 million a year by the corporation.

 

In 2006-07 the BBC spent £242 million on screen and radio talent, up six per cent on the previous year, but the increase for the 50 highest was in double figures.

Newly employed staff are now working alongside people who are being paid far more for doing the same work irrespective of their experience.

 

The two-tier salary system has prompted unease with the trade unions who have already threatened strike action over the axeing of 2,500 jobs this year. The jobs were went because of the funding deficit caused by a less than generous settlement from the government in the licence fee negotiations.

 

But the cost-cutting is facing a growing revolt as household name stars have been shielded from the economy drive. They include Jonathan Ross, who is on a three year £18 million deal, Jeremy Clarkson, who fronts Top Gear, Terry Wogan whose listening figures for his Radio 2 show are the biggest in the country, Anne Robinson who presents The Weakest Link, and Graham Norton who is on a £2,5 million annual contract.

 

The BBC refused to discuss who was facing pay cuts but presenters of the Today programme such as John Humphrys and Jim Naughtie may be targeted and news readers such as Fiona Bruce.

 

The edict to cut the BBC salaries bill comes in the week that Carol Vorderman quit Channel 4's Countdown after being told she faced a 90 per cent cut to her reputed £1 million-a-year salary.

 

Programme-makers delivered the ultimatum to Miss Vorderman, who co-presented the show for 26 years, as part of measures to cut the show's budget by 33 per cent. A slump in advertising revenues on commercial channels is likely to lead to more big name broadcasters facing battles to maintain their six figure pay deals.

 

BBC presenters assumed that they were not as vulnerable as others because the corporation's £3 billion income comes from the licence fee. However, Sir Michael Lyons, the head of the BBC Trust, has made clear that the BBC will no longer submit to presenters' inflated salary demands.

 

The wage bill for the corporation's 10 executive directors rose by 17 per cent to almost £5 million last year. Mark Thompson, the director-general, who waived his bonus for the fourth year in a row, defended the rises, saying they were in response to increased responsibilities..

 

Some of the executives imposing the salary squeeze were awarded six figure pay rises this year despite the fakery and phone-in scandals which this week saw the BBC fined a record £400,000 by Ofcom.

 

Jana Bennett, the director of vision, who was criticised for her role in the "Crowngate affair'' - where a trailer for a documentary about the Queen was wrongly edited - saw her salary rise from £433,000 to £536,000 last year, a 24 per cent.

 

One BBC presenter, who is a household name but fears he will be penalised by the accountants, was adamant he would not accept such a large cut. The presenter, who declined to be named, said: "This is being imposed by directors who have to take ultimate responsibility for the Ofcom fine. The cheating and fakery happened because there was a reckless disregard for the BBC's ethics. When those directors take a 10 per cent pay cut then may be some of us will be more willing to agree to belt-tightening."

A BBC source said: "There will be very tough contract negotiations. We have not got enough money, and we are facing a huge rises in our fuel bills like everyone else. When contracts come up for renewal they will have to agree to 10 per cent cuts. At least 10 per cent."

 

Source: Sunday Telegraph

 

Should the big stars be immune from pay cuts like the other employees?

Should the big stars be immune from pay cuts like the other employees?

 

 

Well..NO.

Ignoring the fact that a 10% pay cut would hardly harm the likes of Johnathan Ross, it's pretty outrageous that the BBC is helping to INCREASE inequalities in pay by protecting the already rich.

Where would they go? ITV is so poor now that surely the likes of Ross, Clarkson, Wogan, Robinson etc. would rather take the cut than have to present on the other side?

Actually, I can see why they're angry in some ways... The Directors dont seem to be taking any 10% pay cuts and they were the ones responsible for the funding deficit and the Ofcom fines , so why should the presenters take the fall alone....? It may be the case that 10% aint exactly gonna hurt them, but it wouldn't exactly hurt the execs and the bosses either to show a bit of solidarity, and it wasn't exactly the fault of the likes of Johnathan Ross or Graham Norton that the fukk-ups occurred was it.....?

 

 

Actually, I can see why they're angry in some ways... The Directors dont seem to be taking any 10% pay cuts and they were the ones responsible for the funding deficit and the Ofcom fines , so why should the presenters take the fall alone....? It may be the case that 10% aint exactly gonna hurt them, but it wouldn't exactly hurt the execs and the bosses either to show a bit of solidarity, and it wasn't exactly the fault of the likes of Johnathan Ross or Graham Norton that the fukk-ups occurred was it.....?

Not to mention the example shown by politicians!

Not to mention the example shown by politicians!

 

Mate, don't even get me started on that shower of b/astards..... :lol: :lol: