To think it's odd to be paid more than your manager?

[KenAdams]

Who happens to be the PM?

The BBC are reporting today that Sue Gray is paid more than Keir Starmer.

She's not even at the top of her band.

Surely the top of the band for civil servants should sit below the salary of the PM?

I wonder why she said no when she was told to reduce it by a few thousand because of the optics?

BBC News - Keir Starmer's top aide Sue Gray paid more than the PM
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx247wkq137o

I'm sure the pM is getting plenty more when you take into account housing, food, cars etc.

PM an elected position.

Civil servants are employees.

How do you get the best people in the civil service without paying them market rate salaries? Any number of jobs people with those abilities could go into elsewhere and be paid a lot more.

I’d also say - in roles where total compensation is performance based it’s not unusual for more junior employees to have higher salaries eg sales people.

Technical specialists (rare skills/knowledge) often make more than generalist managers (more common skillset). It’s supply and demand.

Does the same not apply to elected officials though?

The PMs salary is artificially depressed because well politics.

As a consequence you get unfortunate situations like this.

She's Chief of Staff isn't she, so not on commission?

As per my comment above, I'd think we want to attract the top talent to be PM, so why does that rule only apply to advisors?

I'm was hoping for a change in attitude and accountability at the top but no such luck so far. I'm public sector and have to be whiter than white, I can't even accept a Christmas gift from anyone with an interest in my organisation, so it doesn't look good so far.

Yep this is true where I work. Lots of highly trained specialists are paid more than managers- and quite rightly too.

I agree. I'm new to the arm of the public sector I work in and it's a prime example of how nothing seems to work well together. Departments by and large work in silos so you end up with things at odds with one another.

British Prime Ministers have always had a weirdly low salary for the level of responsibility and compared to CEO’s of large companies. SG is probably being paid the going rate for the job nationally.

This is such a non story. Everyone knows the PM’s salary is completely unconnected to the level of responsibility

We desperately need good civil servants. At present they are hugely underpaid compared to equivalent private sector roles. So they either go to the private sector or else work as consultants (meaning salaries not disclosed) which costs more than if they were employees on a market rate. Awful race to the bottom stuff.

The point about her being an employee was a separate one to that about commission, I believe.

High salaries aren’t required to attract people to be PM (or MPs, or any elected office). It’s about power, kudos and the potential for subsequent earnings (which can be astronomical).

The situation is not unusual in politics. Police and Crime Commissioners (elected) all earn less than their own Chief Execs/Chiefs of Staff (employees). They also earn less than the Chief Constables they hold to account.

I don’t think I’d want to live in a country with extremely highly paid politicians, if I’m honest.

I know this isn't the point of your thread but I once didn't go for a senior role because it would mean a pay cut.

It was when working with disabled children.

YABU, naive view.

You already know the answer, so I’m not sure of the point of the post.

As others have said, PM position is about power, future and side earnings. It’s a “nominal” salary.

Personally I think senior civil servants are under paid. Not a stealth boast by any means, but she earns considerably less than I do and that surprises me. So I am more interested in why HER salary is surpressed compared to the market.

Would we blink if men were paid more than their female managers?! (That has sadly happened to me before).

Yep 100k in freebies. Last year alone. I seem to remember he created hell because Boris got free wallpaper for number 10. Hypocrite.

Surely the top of the band for civil servants should sit below the salary of the PM? Sue Gray isn’t a civil servant.

I support MPs etc being paid significantly more. At least triple the current pay.

With that the full removal of subsidised anything in parliament. Minimum expense claims similar to what you can claim for jury duty. Centralised staffing so they can't hire who they chose and they can't claim their office/staffing costs as expenses. Zero acceptance of personal donations/gifts above £10k per annum. Hospitality only through official office. No second home subsidising either. They can live in Buckingham Palace while they are in Parliament. The rest of the time they should be at home in their constituency.

Never going to happen because they only become MPs etc because they can already afford multiple homes and are significantly wealthy. Their expense claims and donations mean they don't actually spend their salary at all.

She's not the first though. It's almost always the case. The right wing MSM are having a field day with Labour currently, so they've decided to make an issue of it.

@caringcarer - not defending Starmer but none of it is taxpayer's money (like Johnson's was or Sunak's furlough money to his wife's companies and the private helicopter). It's also not a 600k dodgy loan. Lord Ali is a very long standing Labour ally & this has never been a problem before. And I wouldn't mind betting that there are many many things that MPs don't disclose. But the right wing MSM media has a grudge.

It is not a new thing by any stretch of the imagination. The most senior civil servants will earn more than the PM in salary terms. They don't get to live in Downing St or use Chequers etc but they often get paid more. It's a total non-story.

"I wonder why she said no when she was told to reduce it by a few thousand because of the optics?"
Um the same reason as pretty much everyone would, if offered a higher salary say yes please? I can't think of many people who would say "no thanks that's too much give me a few grand less". I certainly wouldn't.

You're really saying that a woman should have not even agreed but OFFERED to be paid less so it doesn't make a man look bad?

Civil service and elected mps regardless of what position of seniority they hold are completely different jobs. I'm sure there are chief execs of health boards/NHS trusts and even some specialist doctors that get paid more than the minister of health. There are definitely CEOs who get paid millions more than the chancellor of the exchequer etc.

Sue Gray isn't getting free transport to work, police escort and protection, free housing in the centre of London and a free country house so the PMs overall benefit package is still far more than hers.

Plus everyone knows the real money from being PM is what you get after you've done the job - fees for books, speaking arrangement etc. Plus all the lifetime benefits like security protection.

Sorry you're quite right that she's no longer a civil servant. But it's still true that it's a non-story.

To be honest given the amount of them we've had in the last few years, prime ministers seem much easier to source than good civil servants/whatever her role is now so fair enough.