I don’t get the NatPo’s issue with this. They want the CBC to be more like a business, more conservative and less progressive, right?
Isn’t this exactly what Conrad or Izzy would have done?
The Overton Window
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
Subtly over time just shifting the entire conversation more to the right all the time … the extreme far right enters the conversation but is still unacceptable, the right becomes more acceptable, the center becomes the new right, the left moves to the middle, and the left is presented as the far left which becomes unacceptable
Nat post wants their competition to go away
They’re putting in overtime licking PP’s boots.
The issue is the CBC is state owned, so it’s the enemy. They go off on the NFB too.
So those employees got an average bonus of $13,000. Not nothing, but hardly c-suite insane levels of compensation.
Also, what do the relevant employee contracts look like? A lot of the time bonuses are built into the contract and tied to very specific metrics. If that is the case, the CBC would have to pay out that bonus, regardless of the overall state of the company.
Natpost suddenly forgets that CBC is competing against right-wing controlled private enterprises for the talent they have. If they don’t give bonuses, they will lose the media talent.
Oh they are fully aware of that. That’s why they wrote this article
I suspect even CBC contractors get paid better than folks in the private sector. The salaried employees definitely do.
Good. I’m glad that my tax dollars are going towards good jobs with fair wages.
14,902,755/1,143 ~= 13,000
A nice bonus, but not entirely unreasonable for a professional. I have no idea how evenly that was spread out exactly.
So on average a 13k bonus per employee that got one
And if we say average salary is 60k * 800
48 million was taken off the books.
Math seems to suggest they aren’t related
Wouldn’t the math would also suggest they could have retained 1/3 of the fired employees if they’d forgone the bonuses?
If the budget is so tight that they have to fire hundreds of employees, why are bonuses deserved?
Wouldn’t be surprised if it was to make sure the experienced and mission critical people stick around, instead of jumping off a sinking ship. Downsizing can lead to a panic where you lose the people you vitally need.
Yeah, at this point we’re hitting a level of nuance that would require more information than I have. There was also the surprise budget cut somewhere along the way.
Right. A company that can lose 800 employees doesn’t consider a few million to be that big a deal. Especially if it helps secure future income. Which is kinda the point of the whole thing.
spoiler
asdfasdfsadfasfasdf
I’m curious, did NatPo also cover the fact that Bell was subsidized $40 million by the federal government for losses suffered by Bell Media, a bill pushed forward by the Conservatives and supported by the NDP, only for Bell to turn around, fire thousands, all while giving a 3.5% increase in dividends for shareholders?
I’m pretty pissed about that too. All corporate subsidies need to end
Tait, who earns $497,000 per year
She’s laughing all the way to the bank.
I’m not saying that’s a small salary but compared to a lot of CEOs that’s nothing
Most CEOs make their money in stocks and bonuses, neither of which falls into the salary category.
BBC’s CEO salary is equivalent to $904k CAD.
Watch an all new Elsbeth this Thursday on CBS.
