The unpalatable truth about the gender pay gap
hen Carrie Gracie accepted the job of BBC China editor, her bosses assured her that she was being paid the same as the other international editors. Six months ago, 55-year-old Gracie discovered her salary of £135,000 was half of what the men were getting. In an attempt to placate her, the Beeb offered her an extra £45,000 of licence payers’ money (so generous of you, chaps!). She refused, resigned from her Beijing post, and went public this week with an open letter to viewers, angrily accusing the corporation of pursuing illegal and discriminatory policies.
“There was still a big gap between myself and my male peers,” Gracie said. “I could not stay silent and watch the BBC perpetuate a failing pay structure by discriminating against women.”
Confusingly, after her principled “resignation”, Gracie turned up on Monday to co-host Radio 4’s Today programme with John Humphrys (salary, kindly donated by the public, in the region of £650k). But Carrie Gracie was not allowed to answer questions on behalf of the Carrie Gracie who was leading the news bulletins. It was farcical and it only highlighted the excruciating predicament a heinously managed, hapless BBC has created for itself. Just to add to the fun, a group of journalists called BBC Women, which includes stars like Clare Balding and Emily Maitlis, said it was hugely regrettable that the awardwinning reporter had no option but to resign because the BBC “has not valued her equally with male counterparts”.
As any employee who has spoken out in support of Gracie is forbidden by impartiality rules from reporting the story, we are fast approaching the delicious scenario where only male journalists will be able to comment on gender parity at the BBC. Seriously, the satirical sitcom W1A would struggle to imagine a better fiasco.
I should say that I think Gracie is a superb reporter. Like a self-cleaning oven, she gets on with the job. No fuss, no crooning Fergal Keane narcissism. But let’s take a reality check here. Outside the media bubble, a public servant being paid £135,000 and then turning down a whopping 45-grand pay rise looks neither principled nor brave. From Huddersfield to Harwich, up goes the cry: “I could retire on that.”
To be fair to Gracie, she believes that salaries at the top are “unacceptably high”. She doesn’t want more money; she wants equality. Easier said than done, though, isn’t it? Take the BBC’S excellent North America editor, Jon Sopel. Scampering to keep up with Trump’s Tourette’s tweeting, Sopel is seldom off our screens. Would anyone who wasn’t wearing purple-tinted suffragette spectacles seriously suggest that the China editor delivers equal value? The real question at issue here is thornier: if Jon Sopel were to be made the new China editor, would he be paid the same as an underappreciated, Mandarin-speaking woman? Factors such as length of service, star quality, transfer value and time spent on air all make it hard to agree what is meant by “equal pay for equal work”. Still, certain things are objectively unfair.
Since she took over as BBC’S Europe editor in 2014, Katya Adler has barely been off the telly. So busy has the poor woman been with Brexit that she hasn’t had time to change out of her navy, buttoned-up blouse, and appears to be wearing the same make-up as four years ago. Yet Adler is paid nowhere near the likes of Sopel and Jeremy Bowen, whose fiefdom is the Middle East.
Meanwhile, on the flagship Today programme, Sarah Montague set her alarm clock at the same hideously early hour as John Humphrys, only to find out that she was being paid less than a quarter of what her fellow presenter took home for doing the same job. Yes, defenders of the chapocracy can argue that the 74-year-old Welshman is a peerless interviewer whose veteran status commands big bucks. And I would argue back that no BBC woman ever makes it to eminence grise because her P45 arrives around the same time as her first grey hair. Where is the female David Dimbleby?
BBC managers may piously claim that they do pretty well when it comes to the gender pay gap but, as a friend who works in Broadcasting House said acidly to me yesterday: “It’s never the women who are coining it.” I strongly suspect that before the BBC was forced to publish the pay of its highest earners, John Humphrys was earning closer to a million pounds. That mortifying figure had to be hastily reduced to spare the bosses’ blushes.
Well, blush they jolly well should, and bright crimson at the culture of bloated salaries in a public-service broadcaster staffed by journalists and managers who would rarely command similar sums in the private sector. “It is extremely hard to defend such high remuneration, which damages support for the licence fee,” one despairing manager told me. While senior BBC staff have been feathering their own nest, they have overlooked the fact that the branch on which the nest sits will snap along with public patience.
This is a scandal that could bring down the world’s best broadcaster. I say that with a heavy heart. Up to 200 women across the BBC have already made complaints about unequal pay. Embarrassing legal actions will follow. Managers who thought they could buy Gracie’s silence by bunging her an extra £45K miscalculated. Gracie didn’t want cash, she wanted equal treatment. There is only one way to achieve that without fuelling public resentment: reduce excessive men’s pay, and introduce civilservice pay grades applicable to all BBC employees.
Now, which reporter is brave enough to venture into that particular war zone? Ladies and gentlemen, do we have any volunteers?
‘Seriously, the satirical sitcom W1A would struggle to imagine a better fiasco’