| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Senior LBH officers pay - good HR policy, or nest-lining? | |
| Posted by: | Chris Calvi-Freeman | |
| Date/Time: | 31/03/15 03:18:00 |
| A few comments from one who spent 11 years at Head of Service level, one tier below AD: When I started at LBH there were ( I think) nine Directors. Now there are three. I can't remember the number of ADs but I think it was far more than now. So, the D and AD roles are much bigger than before. The spread of responsibilities and other metrics tend to suggest that salaries should have gone up. However, inevitably, more responsibility day to day and tactically now rests on the HoSs, many of whom struggle/d to balance the necessary time to provide strategic or tactical guidance to their teams, oversee performance and team finances, attend senior level meetings, deal with member and elevated public complaints, compile FOI responses, devise and monitor annual plans, negotiate funding, draft or quality-control Committee reports, and provide expert advice as expected in their professional field. There was always a significant salary gap between HoSs and ADs - in my opinion a larger than reasonable gap given the pressure on some of the HoSs. Their numbers have also been reduced but I'd be surprised if their salaries have increased - in fact probably the opposite. I have no truck whatsoever for the sweeping and ignorant statements of the likes of Fiona Campbell. There were and are many fine senior officers and managers at LBH - this from someone who has worked in several senior roles in three different countries and has seen his fair share of duds. CCF |