Jump to content

IOM DHSC & MANX CARE


Cassie2
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, rachomics said:

I'm not sure there's any number I would be comfortable with to even apply for that. 

Coincidentally, this is also why I believe that increasing MHK salaries is a waste of money. Those that will stand, will stand. The salary won't make a difference.

Rachel, do you think, scientifically, that there might be an optimum salary to pay an MHK, to maximise their utility per pound for the role? If so what would it be? Pay peanuts and get monkeys. Pay megabucks and you get chancers. What’s their optimum salary? Or is there any way beyond pay to attract good people to the role?

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wrighty said:

Rachel, do you think, scientifically, that there might be an optimum salary to pay an MHK, to maximise their utility per pound for the role? If so what would it be? Pay peanuts and get monkeys. Pay megabucks and you get chancers. What’s their optimum salary? Or is there any way beyond pay to attract good people to the role?

The remuneration of politicians should be tied directly to the average private sector wage on the Island. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, wrighty said:

If so what would it be? Pay peanuts and get monkeys. Pay megabucks and you get chancers. What’s their optimum salary? Or is there any way beyond pay to attract good people to the role?

Outside of a few exceptions it should be about parity. I bet Ashford never earned anywhere near the £70K he gets for being an MHK when he worked in the private sector. In fact I know he didn’t. There’s a fair few others too. The number of postmen who managed to double their take home by getting into keys is relatively extensive. The current rates are round about right. But you’ll still get chancers who will treat it like a lottery win. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 0bserver said:

The remuneration of politicians should be tied directly to the average private sector wage on the Island. 

Better still based on annual performance reviews.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 0bserver said:

The remuneration of politicians should be tied directly to the average private sector wage on the Island. 

You make a good point.

If this were adopted the salary for MHK would drop significantly. 

So low that only people who could afford the drop would put themselves forward. People with (mainly) altruistic reasons. Doing it for the real good. Not for the ego growth. 

The best MHK’s in right now are the ones who TRULY want to make changes and have plans to achieve them. I think we’ve got a damn good few in that bunch this time round. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, finlo said:

Better still based on annual performance reviews.

As someone once involved in this bollocks I can tell you that 85% of it is made up. It’s an appalling way to award salaries.

No. We’re going with Observer on this one. 😃

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

You make a good point.

If this were adopted the salary for MHK would drop significantly. 

So low that only people who could afford the drop would put themselves forward. People with (mainly) altruistic reasons. Doing it for the real good. Not for the ego growth. 

The best MHK’s in right now are the ones who TRULY want to make changes and have plans to achieve them. I think we’ve got a damn good few in that bunch this time round. 

I've thought a bit about the whole idea that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys... but then look at the Civil Service... some utterly eye watering high salaries and the system is in a state of decay. 

I think as long as the salary is enough to get buy and pay your bills with a bit left over, then that's enough. 

It makes me think when an MHK/MLC says they know how difficult it is to deal with the cost of living crisis... raking in £60-70k probably means most of them don't have to check their bank account each month when their utility bills go out... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, wrighty said:

Rachel, do you think, scientifically, that there might be an optimum salary to pay an MHK, to maximise their utility per pound for the role? If so what would it be? Pay peanuts and get monkeys. Pay megabucks and you get chancers. What’s their optimum salary? Or is there any way beyond pay to attract good people to the role?

I don't think science, per se, is really going to help. More an 'ology'.  The point behind my OP in the thread I started was whether no or a nominal reward actually attracted people who would seek election because they truly wanted to benefit the island rather than the financial reward.  Becayse there was little remuneration, you would expect they would be people who had succeeded elsewhere, had broad experience and something of a cynical view when presented with information.

Something of an elitist view, I understand, and some very able people would be put off by the prospective fall in income, particularly if they are still in the prime of their working life. But when you have the voter turnout we have, the number of votes to get a golden ticket is pretty low. 

 

Edited by Gladys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

You make a good point.

If this were adopted the salary for MHK would drop significantly. 

So low that only people who could afford the drop would put themselves forward. People with (mainly) altruistic reasons. Doing it for the real good. Not for the ego growth. 

The best MHK’s in right now are the ones who TRULY want to make changes and have plans to achieve them. I think we’ve got a damn good few in that bunch this time round. 

No that wouldn’t work, you’re not going to get a very wealthy lawyer or accountant, surgeon etc give up their job to earn £25kpa no matter how much they want to help make changes.

I find that highly successful people who want to contribute do it via charitable means either joining boards of charities & donations to them . Also they try & influence politicians from position of strength 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Banker said:

Also they try & influence politicians from position of strength 

Like Albert Gubay, for instance?

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Banker said:

No that wouldn’t work, you’re not going to get a very wealthy lawyer or accountant, surgeon etc give up their job to earn £25kpa no matter how much they want to help make changes.

I find that highly successful people who want to contribute do it via charitable means either joining boards of charities & donations to them . Also they try & influence politicians from position of strength 

Why do you think we need a wealthy lawyer, accountant or surgeon? What would their very specific skills bring to Tynwald?

Why are you presuming that because someone earns lots of money they will be a better politician? Do you think poor people are not worthy?

Read this.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

Why do you think we need a wealthy lawyer, accountant or surgeon? What would their very specific skills bring to Tynwald?

Why are you presuming that because someone earns lots of money they will be a better politician? Do you think poor people are not worthy?

Read this.

I agree.

I think it's a false premise that you'll only get "the right people" wanting to be MHKs if you pay them a significant amount of money.

I think it's also a false premise that only people who currently earn a significant amount of money will be "the right people".

"The right people" are people who want to make things better because they need to be made better - not because they'll get paid more for doing so or because it inflates their ego.

Unfortunately, I suspect the Isle of Man just isn't big enough to have sufficient of "the right people" in the first place, and that if you pay more you'll just end up with different (or the same!) people who are just as useless or incompetent, but cost you more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Roxanne said:

...So low that only people who could afford the drop would put themselves forward. People with (mainly) altruistic reasons. Doing it for the real good. Not for the ego growth. 

The best MHK’s in right now are the ones who TRULY want to make changes...

I agree with the bit I've put in bold.  You need people who want to be MHKs for the right reasons.  Not for the money and not to massage their egos.

But I don't agree with the bit i've italicised.  You seem to assume - wrongly I think - that only people who could afford a drop in salary would make worthy MHKs?  I'm sure that's wrong.  (Apologies if i've misunderstood... )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

Why do you think we need a wealthy lawyer, accountant or surgeon? What would their very specific skills bring to Tynwald?

Why are you presuming that because someone earns lots of money they will be a better politician? Do you think poor people are not worthy?

Read this.

I was replying to a previous post who said we needed to reduce wages & attract candidates who don’t need the money so I agree with you but you obviously didn’t read the post correctly !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...