Public Sector Rich List 2007

In November 2006 the TaxPayers' Alliance produced the first ever list of the richest people in the public sector.  The second edition of the annual Public Sector Rich List presents a list of the 300 most highly paid people in the public sector – people receiving remuneration packages of at least £150,000 a year in 126 government departments, quangos, other public bodies and public corporations.

Key findings

• There is 1 person in the public sector – Adam Crozier, Royal Mail Chief Executive – who earns more than £1 million a year.
• There are 17 people in the public sector earning above £500,000 a year.
• There are at least 66 people earning above £250,000 a year (recent media reports suggest that some GPs are in this category).
• The 300 people had an average pay rise of 12.8 per cent between 2005-06 and 2006-07.  This is three times average earnings growth (including bonuses) across the country, which fluctuates around 4 per cent and over six times the current 2 per cent government target for growth in pay for ordinary public sector workers.
• The average total remuneration of the 300 people on the list is £237,564 per annum.  This works out at over £4,500 a week.  Although many people on the list are likely to work longer, based on a 35-hour week, this is equal to almost £130 an hour, or around £2.15 a minute.
• The 10 most highly paid people in the public sector earn on average around 40 times the amount earned by someone starting out as a police officer, nurse or soldier.
• There are 10 people involved in delivering the London 2012 Olympics on the list, including two in the top 10 highest remuneration packages overall.  Their packages average £325,000 per annum.
• The 82 most highly paid people in the NHS earn an average of £181,956 each.  By comparison, the starting salary for a nurse is around £22,000.
• Gordon Brown is only the 143rd highest paid person in the public sector.

Purpose of compiling the Public Sector Rich List 2007

• Transparency.  People and organisations that receive large amounts of taxpayers’ money should be accountable to the public they serve.  Taxpayers should be able to judge for themselves whether the remuneration of senior officials represents good value for money.
• Rewards for failure.  People in the public sector should be paid well for good performance.  But in far too many cases senior public sector officials are being paid over the odds for dreadfully poor performance, which in some cases would warrant a sacking in the private sector (see Table A1.2 for 10 examples).

Matthew Elliott, Chief Executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said:

“Taxpayers have a right to know how much senior public sector officials are being paid because only then can we judge whether they deserve their remuneration.  Too often, public sector executives are rewarded handsomely even when they fail.  At a time when the Government is rightly aiming to restrain public sector pay increases to 2 per cent, these top officials shouldn’t be hiking their pay by six times as much.”

Download the Public Sector Rich List 2007 (PDF)

The top 10 public sector remuneration packages are shown below:

Comments

[John Lindley]

Do the Rich List salaries include an allowance for the pension rights? Are the pensions non-contributory? Have I been in the wrong job all these years?

[Tony Callaghan [retired headteacher]]

I am a retired headteacher and i believe that the salaries of Adam Crozier, Ian Griffiths et al, are grossly obscene.The fat rats in the Royal Mail for example, have the brass neck to speak to the media about the productivity of the workforce and how R.M. cannot afford an above inflation pay award? They should be publicly flogged for taking home such obscene sums of money, whilst their workers save madly for a decent xmas for their families. The leaders of the teacher unions are no better,they take home fat rat salaries whilst their gullible members, who pay their salaries, struggle with below inflation pay settlements. When are the people going to take to the streets and protest against the rank exploitation of the workforce in the UK.If this situation had been revealed in Europe then the people would have taken to the streets in protest. What do the british do..... roll over and allow the fat rats to feed on their entrails..

[Tony Callaghan [retired headteacher]]

Why do we call them ''fat cats'' Cats are furry and cuddly according to my mother in law! Fat Rats is a far more accurate descripton.... don't you think fellow artisans?

[jk]

Why should NHS chief executives, responsible for running large and hugely complex organisations with turnovers running into hundreds of millions of pounds, be singled out for attack in this way for earning £150,000 a year? We don't think twice about people of similar skill and with comparable responsibilty earning far more than that in the private sector. While large payouts to the heads of failing trusts are harder to defend, almost without exception these individuals could be earning more if they chose to move to the private sector. How can we hope to have a well-run NHS if there is this kind of stigma attached to the [relatively] high-earning and highly skilled individuals who chose to do demanding jobs in the public sector?

[cs]

What is the problem ? You get what you pay for in life. The reason public services are for the most part poorly run , is because they cannot or will not pay for the calibre of staff needed. A position which is true from top to bottom.The debate should not be about fat cats (what ever they are),but why the public sector feels it should not pay the going rate for job ie what it takes to get the calibre of individual needed to do the job effectively.
Until the debate focuses on performance delivery and then the approporiate pay we will continue to get soundbites instead of clear thought. I speak as one who has worked in the NHS,Central governement and the private sector.

[Acorn]

"We don't think twice about people of similar skill and with comparable responsibility earning far more than that in the private sector." The way you prove this statement false, is to look at what actually happens in the public sector.

The vast majority of promotions occur within the public sector. Very rarely do you find a senior staff member moving out of the public sector system. The ones that make it are the ones that Councillors will tell you were the obvious shinning examples of talent. The rest, believe me, could not hack it as movers or shakers in the private sector because they never even accidentally show any talent to move or shake anything. They are died in the wool aparatchics and the public sector is their natural home.

The talented ones in the public sector are the ones with their own agenda for the business they are in. They are the ones who will quietly drop hints to Councillors on better ways of doing things for less cost (and tell them that it fits in with their political objectives).

The few examples of imported talent are the ones who were struggling to climb the pole in the private sector. When they arrive they will have plans to move and shake the public sector business they have joined.

They very quickly realise that they have two options. To move or shake anything, they have to outsmart a highly unionised workforce that has no fear of the management; or, slip into a cosy relationship with the unions and sit back and collect the pay packets. They invariably do the latter, which confirms why they left the private sector in the first place.

The chances of a senior public sector aparatchic getting the sack on capability grounds are very small. The system has been designed to make sure that blame is easily spread around the system to the point that it becomes invisible to scrutiny. A re-organisation of management procedures(this is when you will hear the phrase "lessons will be learnt") will make sure the problem is buried for the foreseeable future.

The private sector has developed systems for handling all the above and there is always a price for everything including getting the best people for a job of work. No such system operates in the public sector, which is why they had to invent things like pay review bodies that contrive a sort of market connection.

[john tait]

it is immoral and undemocratic to tell the public one thing and yet to do just as they wish with cash that is not theirs in the first place its obscene in the way that the
government expects everyone else to work within cash rise boundaries and then to rub it in our faces by giving hard earned cash away to people who are adequately waged in the first place and yet almost every area that requires funding from the public purse
ie! government, on our behalf is struggling
in some shortfall way. this abuse of public
finance should be openly revealed to the media in all areas these people have to be accountable for their actions we are still a democracy they cannot be above the laws of this land.they are financialy insulating themselves against the massive tax/vat that
will arrive at our doors once we are forced to accept the dreaded EU CONSTITUTION AGAINST OUR DEMOCRATIC WISHES FOR A REFERENDUM. to much money is being diverted
TO the wrong places to the wrong people.
who, in most cases have done nothing to justify receiving it.an adequate wage is one thing, but then to include bonus-perks is
salt in the wound. the public has to be told and made aware, NOW.

[Observer]

They are not all high performers. There is one civil servant in the list who, to my knowledge, has destroyed morale in the organisation that he leads within a year of his appointment to head it. Yet the very top management does nothing: he is not held accountable by them and he will continue to see his remuneration rise while the performance of his organisation slides.

[ATFlynn]

There is the system for avoiding Direct Taxation that is used by a great many people in this Country. And it is Legal.

It is perfectly possible and perfectly Legal
to arrange to use an Off-Shore Agent. And for every Employer and every Employee to ignore any demands for payment of Taxation by Central Government.

In this fashion, the only Taxation that is Legally enforceable, would be Local Council Tax.

I see no fault in the Working TaxPayer abandoning the Westminster System of Taxation, as long as an alternative system was agreed to replace it. A system where the TaxPayers had some control. A Flat Tax that when I started this, was only £250 to Threshold. But that has now ballooned and a
Threshold of £500 would now be a more realistic point to begin with.
No my friends, until you remove those Wonkers of Westminster, from your pocket and your Bank Account, they will continue to impose outrageous demands for you Money. Don't let them, move your money out of their reach.
Regards, ATFlynn.

[James Chan]

Here is a response from Royal Mail regarding a complaint over Adam Crozier's pay:

----------------
Dear Mr Chan

Thank you for your email regarding the financial remuneration of directors of this company.

The government is the sole shareholder in Royal Mail however we operate as a commercial company and as we have made a profit in recent years then there is no question of taxpayers money being used to finance wage or bonus
increases for any staff.

I trust I have managed to deal with the point raised to your satisfaction but please feel free to contact us again if you have any further questions.

Regards

John Nairn
Customer Service Advisor

Enquity Reference number: RM0297-0273

Over 65's whose earnings are above the national average, should be given vouchers with which to improve the energy efficiency of their home NOT a winter heating allowance. Giving someone who heats their home with "two bar" electric fires and leaves the windows open all winter is about as stupid as it gets.

[Marina]

Having read John Nairn's reply from Royal Mail, I wonder how many people were made unemployed?, who paid the unemployment compensations?, how many of these claim benefits?, how many of the existing employees claim some benefit or another (i.e working tax benefit)?
When these questions and similar ones have been answered, I would like to see if the benefits they reward themselves with are truly based on profits made.
Also, when they made losses, who supported them and were they ever paid back??

[Graham Roxburgh]

Please answer John Lindleys query by stating the current value of each individual's pension rights