balance replies to me in person

[aymes]

I don't dispute the salary spread per annum, however, if ?23k is the average and there is ?5.5m in basic salary (exc NI and pensions) that is still a fair head count and from whats being aired at the moment, the underlying question is does it represent value for money and are they representing their membership with a whole package of services and information that the membership wants?

QUOTE]

Oh yes, value (and quality) for money is a whole other issue, and one they don't seem to be doing well on!

 

[mikep1979]

Mike, I'm not planning to get into a debate about their individual recruitment practices, the office managers role they are advertising, and the duties that the jd describes seems reasonable to me, my perspective only. The only point I was making was that although a wage bill of ?6.7m sounds a lot when highlighted it is not necessarily unreasonable nor any different that what would be expected of a similar organisation in the sector.

im not debating the recruitment policies or the particulars of this position. all i was saying was as an office administrator it is excessive. also for a lot of other sectors they would get virtually nothing over minimum wage. the office lot in my place have a duty to make a rotation around certain offices we have in other countries, but it doesnt increase their salaries at all.

 

[angel30eyes]

I don't dispute the salary spread per annum, however, if ?23k is the average and there is ?5.5m in basic salary (exc NI and pensions) that is still a fair head count and from whats being aired at the moment, the underlying question is does it represent value for money and are they representing their membership with a whole package of services and information that the membership wants?

It rather appears that perhaps this isn't the case.

How many people actually use the DUK helpline?

In which time its time DUK begin to listen rather than spouting the message they wish us to listen to.

Have just had a look on some agenices in London where the wage will be high and among those recruitment agencies for an office admin job the salaries are between ?17 - ?20k maybe a few at ?21k at a push but this is London whe wages are at there highest. So yes ?23 is excessive for a chairty organisation tbh

 

[Einstein]

So not only has the writer of the said insulting letter got us seeing red now we are fighting amongst ourselves, I bet she is sitting there laughing her socks off!

It was an observation I made before my copy landed about her getting more exposure and letting it drop.

However, the whole tone and tarring of the letter that Balance deemed fit to publish is diabolical and clearly doesn?t show any editorial control or consideration for the vast majority of their members and especially for any insulin dependant diabetics.

Our emotions are raw over this, think about the poor individual who is new to injecting or worse still the parent of a child who now thinks that there are such strong prejudices against insulin dependants and this is coming from, as she states time after time an ex-nurse whose diabetic and thinks that you or your child is a junky.

The fact stands the shallow, faceless editor of this publication should be providing an acceptable, factual explanation of what planet he was on, (or perhaps he is a recreational drug user?) when he made the decision to publish these insults ? especially with the smug, egotistical opening paragraph of the letter.

For me, this is no longer about the author of the letter, she is an inconsiderate, self opinionated, arrogant individual who really should know better than to write such rants, never mind putting them in an envelope and sending them off.

My issue is with the coward of an editor who won?t face up to his responsibility and is hiding behind his staff and a vague claim its not the opinion of the publication ? she had her chance to air a controversial letter, there was a strong feedback against it, and this moron decided to publish her defence, thus proving they both ought to be kicked out, her as a member and he as editor should be sacked as he clearly has no valid reason for publishing and upsetting so many people.

 

[Sugarbum]

i find ?23000 for an office administrator to be well over the going rate!!!! i would say between ?15k and maybe at a push ?20k would be reasonable. over this is excessive. the office administrators where i work get about ?14.5k a year.

Yes HERE HERE Mike! I damn well agree. I can tell you an admin assistant in the NHS working around the clock does not earn near that and I would have expected a charity salary to be comparable to that! I would be very interetsd to know how their expenses break down.

 

[mikep1979]

Yes HERE HERE Mike! I damn well agree. I can tell you an admin assistant in the NHS working around the clock does not earn near that and I would have expected a charity salary to be comparable to that! I would be very interetsd to know how their expenses break down.

well unfortunatly the financial stuff i have on them does not go into great detail unfortunatly. so we would never know what is what with them.

 

[Sugarbum]

[/COLOR]

Oh yes I wholeheartedly agree with this David. I wonder who is regulating the editor, and is this being contained or do they know how controversial this is. The editor should stand down, get the chop, resign. End of. You just know we havent heard the last of this and the next edition will offend as well, its just not on....

 

[Einstein]

Oh yes I wholeheartedly agree with this David. I wonder who is regulating the editor, and is this being contained or do they know how controversial this is. The editor should stand down, get the chop, resign. End of. You just know we havent heard the last of this and the next edition will offend as well, its just not on....

I did take the option to raise this directly with DUK yesterday in the form of a formal complaint and my resignation from DUKs panel of media volunteers.

The reasons were stated quite clearly. I am not prepared to assist a charity who deem that it is fit to insult me publically by telling me I am a junky.

The disclaimers simply don't count, this is imcompetence, pure and simple.

Lets see on the response. I know that a complaint into Balance won't get anywhere, simply shielded from the gaze of the charity as a whole.

As for who controls the editor, well, another point raised, the direction of the magazine is without and control, at least by anyone who cares that this is the way the charity touches their members every two months. It should at least be in touch with what we want, not what some half-wit thinks is what we want to read.

Looks like Sweet is becoming a much more attractive proposition, they will listen, because they fail if they don't adapt with us.