Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Salaries paid to the 'top ten' employees of Haringey Council
MY attention has been drawn to the answer to a resident's Freedom of Information question, about the salaries paid to Haringey's senior staff.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Please supply a list of the job title and the salary for each of the
highest ten salaries paid to your employees, as from 18th April, 2016.
Please also supply the number of people employed in the "Senior Management Team," and the sum total of their salaries, also as from 18th April 2016
My response is as follows:
The top 10 positions are as follows:
Chief Executive £191,318.00
Deputy Chief Executive £153,472.00
Chief Operating Officer £153,472.00
Director of Regeneration, Planning & Dev £148,672.00
Director of Childrens Services £126,200.00
Assistant Director for Human Resources £126,200.00
Director of Adult Social Services £126,200.00
Tottenham Programme Director £120,000.00
Director of Public Health £112,269.00
AD for Commercial & Operations £112,200.00
The Council has an Executive Management team made up of the Chief
Executive, Deputy Chief Executive, Chief Operating Officer and the
Director of Regeneration, Planning & Development. The total annual salary
for these posts is £646,934.00.
__________________________________________________________________________________
CDC
Haringey Councillor
Liberal Democrat Party
Tags for Forum Posts: Council, Haringey, Salaries, adult social care, top 10, top ten
Replies are closed for this discussion.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Some people are just obsessed with other's earned income. Try looking into unearned income.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
Clive what's your view of these salaries? I'm assuming from your posting them that you think they're too high. If I'm wrong, please correct me. If I'm right it would be helpful if you could say what level you think each salary should be at and briefly how the thinking that led to your conclusions.
-
-
Permalink Reply by StephenBln on
-
Nothing like a bit of envy or jealousy to get the ball rolling. The age old trick and btw, exactly how the n+zis operated against the jews in the beginning.
But what usually happens is, is that those who agitate tend to go on to award themselves exactly the same benefits, if not more, when in a position to do so.
Perhaps Clive could categorically state, that he would never accept such a salary, if he ever were in a position to receive one. A new group perhaps? - Friends of Haringey, doing it all on the cheap.
Clive is actually sawing away at the tree, on which he aspires to position himself.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Stephen, Can suggest it might be fairer and more accurate if you criticised (or even occasionally praised) Clive Carter for what he says, does or doesn't do. Rather than for what you attribute to him as his feelings and motivations.
Of course none of us really knows what makes another person tick. Or how they would behave if given opportunities to behave in a different way - possibly irresponsibly or badly.
But had you met and talked to Clive I think you might reverse your view that he would simply turn into the people he now criticises. -
-
-
Alan, I notice you are currently back in a 'Clive' period.. For a long time, it was 'Mr Carter' .. just like 'Mr Hole' was once 'Billy'.
I guess that's because he's criticising those with whom you still have an account open. It was, of course, a different story when he was pushing untruths about Ally Pally, in order to get the crowds in.
Perhaps you could both sieze the moment and form an alliance - may I suggest it be called 'The Self-Righteous Club'?
German & French have much easier ways of keeping distance from correspondants. Sie können Sie zu mir sagen. 'You' can say 'you' to me. Mr Bln sounds weird, but is quite an acheivement.
-
-
-
I've met and talked to Clive Carter face to face. And also observed him change - I think - after he was elected as a councillor - as he learns and carries out the job with seriousness, independent thought and hard work. We can still strongly disagree about lots of things. But he has earned respect from me and I hope from others.
Over several years I've read your contributions on this site because what you have to say is usually interesting, challenging and often new to me. But if you dislike what I write, why bother reading it? -
-
-
Experience tells me that when people react with the 'why bother reading it' line, that the comment had maybe been close to the line.
So why this sudden huffiness? I find your contributions 'interesting' too, but that doesn't mean that I agree with them all. They certainly have given an insight into council 'teamwork' and how the business is conducted. They are also coloured by your experience in advocating a mostly apolitical community. Which does sometimes feel a little like being spoken down to.
I assume you have given Clive some wise tips in your meet ups. Perhaps like the one about making a name for himself. Of course, it's the only way to the top for a local politician. Which brings me back to Clive's contributions here. He's discarded his saviour of Ally Pally stance (which you continually fought), for a name and shame, no bars held, drip, drip, approach. I don't like it and I think I'm not the only one.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Judith Box on
-
And your point is?
(1) You don't need a freedom of information request to find that information - it's published as a matter of course. (see the document pay policy statement 2015/2016) By sticking freedom of information in there you 'spin' the message, making it seem like it's something thats been hidden.
(2) Haringey Council is a huge business responsible for a £281 million expenditure. So yes - their CEO and directors are going to have relatively high salaries.
Now whether you think they are 'worth' that salary or not is another matter, as is accountability. But I'm a little perplexed as to the overall point you are trying to make.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
Judith, if you include all expenditure it's well over £500m.
Does seem rather silly, and a waste of money, to FoI this information which is available on every local authority website as a legal obligation.
It would be good to see the same level of openness for senior salaries in the private sector who of course pay salaries from the money you and I spend on their goods and services -
-
-
Judith, I know nothing about Meg Bott the person who asked the Freedom of Information question. I've had very little time recently to follow Freedom of Information Act questions and answers. So I was interested that Clive Carter had pointed this out.
As you say, this information is available in the document you mention on the Council's website. The reply to Meg Bott said this.
Due to lack of time more than for any other reason I tend not to read and rarely reply to posts on HoL if at first glance they don't seem to have anything worth saying. (Plainly this is sometimes wrong and I skip over a post which needed more time to consider properly.) It seems that you and other people may have felt that Clive's posting of Ms Bott's F.o.I. question was not worth reading. (Which by the way, he presented neutrally. No spin about this information being "hidden" that I can detect.)
But yes, I am interested in the general topic of the gap between top and bottom salaries. If other people are not, then why read Clive's post? -
-
Permalink Reply by Protheroe O'Shea on
-
There's nothing wrong with paying good staff well. Although the director of children's services needs to be the highest paid.
-
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
