Mar 2011 02

Non-job of the week8

No so much a non-job this week, but an egregious example of an obscene salary that has stunned us. This was brought to my attention yesterday morning, and at the same time independently aroused the interest of the Daily Express and The Spectator Coffee House Blog.

An unnamed London borough (and we have tried in vain to find out which one) is advertising for an Interim Head of Parking Services. When I first looked at it I wondered why the job was being advertised. Surely there must be someone in the council who can rise to the challenge for a few months before a permanent replacement can be found? This would be the most cost effective solution to the problem. Not that cost effectiveness is in the lexicon for many councils, so perhaps I shouldn’t have been surprised.

Then my eyes scanned down to the salary for this post. If you think you are up to it, you can earn an amazing £500 – £600 a day in this temporary post. If this salary is annualised, that’s the equivalent of  £130,000 – £156,000 a year! All of this for being in charge of parking wardens.

The prime minister earns £142,500 a year. How can the head of parking in a London borough be paid (based on £600 a day) more than David Cameron? It brings town hall largesse up to a different level.

We are constantly being told councils are forced to cut essential services because the government is cutting grant money to them. We have highlighted an example from Lambeth where the council has displayed posters saying  just that, and also increased the amount residents pay for parking permits by 700%. We have heard some councils are axing school crossing patrols to save money, even though they are not contemplating a reduction in senior officers’ pay. Now a London borough – which seems determined to keeps its identity secret, probably by signing a confidentiality agreement with the recruitment agency - thinks during a time of reducing costs, it is appropriate to pay its head of parking services £600 a day!

When we find out which council this is (and we will) we will ‘name and shame’ it, and if any readers can help us, please get in touch. Councils deliberately hiding their identity when recruiting staff are treating taxpayers with contempt.

UPDATE: We found out earlier today this job has been removed from the Guardian’s jobs website and from Morgan Hunt’s website too. Fortunately, we have taken screenshots, and they can be found below. The job is either about to be filled, or they have been embarrassed by the negative publicity. Perhaps this will act as a warning to other councils who try to hide excessively paid jobs from council taxpayers.

The websites:

Related Posts

  • eammon

    The Chief Executive of Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive is a partner at Ernst & Young – he has been on ‘secondment’ from Ernst & Young since 2006. As the TaxPayers Alliance says this type of long term consultancy arrangement is inappropriate.

    However what is more worrying is that the in the three years to 31 March 2010, GMPTE have paid some £10m in consultancy fees to Ernst & Young. This just doesn’t smell right.

  • Andrew aka Sherlock

    The ad says that it’s a ‘City Council’, so the odds are that it’s Westminster. The London Boroughs don’t do so, I’m sure, and the Corporation of London always calls itself the Corporation of London, I think.

  • Steve Collins

    Christ – I NEVER agree with Andrew and the TPA but I ruddy well am on this occassion.

    This kind of money for a head of parking is quite simply obscene and completely unjustifiable. Outrageous.

  • Perth

    I think Sherlock is correct – the first png (CV Library) says the location is in the City of London, I guess the TPA had better tread carefully now, you guys don’t want a battle with the City? do you?

    • Perth

      Just to correct my comments, it is not, as Sherlock says Westminster, it is the City of London….pardon me

  • Glen

    I’d bet my pension that this is a jobs-for-the-boys post!

  • Rob Moore

    Let the war on public sector largesse continue! In my company (private sector) you get that money if you are in charge of a department with about 350 people turning over about £80 million. Presumably the parking revenues in one London borough are not this high and there are not 350 staff working in the parking department? If they are there shouldn’t be! If this were not reality I would laugh. As it is I can’t believe what I see.

  • Pingback: Non-job of the week |Pirate Scroll