WIGAN METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL - SALARIES

In the year 2006/07 the council employed 183 staff paid salaries in excess of £50,000 p.a.In the year 2007/08 this rose to 220 staff paid in excess of £50,000 p.a. An increase of 37 people paid more than £50,000 p.a. Employee pension contributions are included A better pension scheme than most of you can even imagine.

Every £5000 is near enough £100/week, so £50,000 is about £1000/week or £4000/month; £100,000 is about £8000/month. £200,000 is about £16,000/month. At a reasonably good guess, I'd say a very large number of people in Wigan earn between £8-£16,000 a YEAR! That's somewhere between £160-£320/week or £640-£1280/month. Many people can only get part-time work. The numbers are based on a 50-week year, so are only an approximation.

These numbers were made up as follows:

£50,000 - £59,999
2006/07 126 2007/08 154
An increase of 28 people in that salary range (about £1,000-£1,200/week or £4,000-£4800/month).

£60,000 - £69,999
2006/07 32 2007/08 36
An increase of four people in that salary range ( about £1200-£1400/week or £4800-£5,600/month).

£70,000 - £79,999
2006/07 11 2007/08 14
An increase of three people in that salary range (about £1,400-£1,600/week or £5,600-£6,400/month).

£80,000 - £89,999
2006/07 3 2007/08 6
An increase of three people in that salary range (about £1600-£1800/week or £6400-£7200/month).

£90,000 - £99,999
2006/07 3 2007/08 1
A decrease of two people in that salary range (about £1800-£2000/week or £7200-£8000/month) .

Where did those two people go? I suspect up a band or two, not down (unless retired, moved to another council (I doubt if it would be to the private sector for these sorts of salaries and benefits packages) or (doubtfully) fired).

£100,000 - £109,999
2006/07 1 2007/08 2
An increase of one person in that salary range (about £2000-£2,200/week or £8000-£8,800/month).

£110,000 - £119,999
2006/07 1 2007/08 1
No change (about £2,200-£2400/week or £8,800-£9,600/month).

£120,000 - £129,999
2006/07 1 2007/08 0
A decrease of one person in this salary range (about £2,400-£2600/week or £9,600-£10,400/month).

I would add the same comment for this decrease as for the previous one

£130,000 - £139,999
2006/07 3 2007/08 0
A decrease of three people in this salary range (about £2,600-£2800/week or £10,400-£11,200/month.

Again, I would add that same comment. And coming up is where I suspect - but don't actually know for sure - five of those decreases in numbers went.

£140,000 - £149,999
2006/07 0 2007/08 2
An increase of two people in this salary range (about £2,800-£3,000/week or £11,200-£12,000/month).

£150,000 - £159,999
2006/07 0 2007/08 2
An increase of two people in this salary range (about £3000-£3200/week or £12,000-"£12,800/month).

Now we have to skip a £10,000 band and go into the £170,000+ range.

£170,000 - £179,999
2006/07 0 2007/08 1
An increase of one person in this salary range (about £3400-£3600/week or £13,600-£14,400/month).

Again we skip £10,000, and get to the top salary:

£190,000 - £199,999
2006/07 1 2007/8 1
No change (about £3,800-£4,000/week or £15,200-£16,000/month).

This last salary is, I should think, that of Ms Redfearn. I will not pass judgement on this or any others of the salary ranges listed here. I am not qualified to pass judgement other than to say that these sums of money are fabulous amounts in my experience of life. Please make comments in the comments section. All are welcome - we need to talk about this, especially as the gap between top and bottom of the pay range in this country is now at levels not seen since Victorian times, and social mobility has all but ground to a halt.

Now then, having said that, let me give my opinion on how this council is run, and note this is all subjective opinion only: I hear numerous complaints about the council - the council this, or the council not that. I don't really say much about those complaints as they seem to come mostly from people who have never been residents (residents - this is from a resident's point of view) under the jurisdiction of any other council. I have been resident in the jurisdiction of exactly ten other councils (two of them twice, and for years at a time), and I must say that Wigan is probably the best, friendliest, most informative and efficient council I've ever encountered (arguably Bucks County Council is up there with Wigan). My view may be coloured by having lived five years in Plymouth before coming back north to live - that was without a doubt, the opposite of my above description of Wigan - from a resident's point of view. The parks are pleasant, my bin is regularly emptied on a weekly basis, I get informed in advance of any changes in routine services, my opinion is asked on various matters, for example the ongoing consultation about Congestion Charging (I'll be voting against it unless by some miracle there are rapid improvement in public transport), the town centre is kept clean by real human beings using a brush and shovel, plenty of flowers are planted throughout the town centre and in the parks (I like flowers all over the place). All in all I'm quite content.

But the question is - and I can't answer it - are those salaries justified? I suspect that with the hard times that are coming - and they are - that if all those salaries were cut by 20% NOBODY WOULD RESIGN, and Wigan would operate just as it does now. The hard times and inevitable coming redundancies may make the council staff work even better, if only for fear of being on the next redundancy list, much as many people in the private sector have already experienced, and will no doubt be further experiencing in the near future. That, of course, is just an opinion. Please comment.

How much do binmen, street sweepers and park gardeners get paid? They all seem to do a good job. And almost any medical doctor would agree with me that sanitation workers contribute more to public health than does the medical profession ... if that doctor is being honest and actually understands what I just said - PUBLIC health, not the same as the health of any individual. It was changes to water supply and sewage systems that brought the scourge of typhoid to an end in this country, not advances in medicine, for example.

Note: yes, all these fabulous salaries are taxed, but so are the low salaries I mentioned at the beginning. It's also noticable that the bottom 10% of wage earners in this country pay about 37% of their earnings in tax, but the top 10% (over £50K p.a.), pay only 34%. On average.

That's the modern-day Labour party and government for you. Mind how you vote come general election time (maximum 19 months from now, unless a State of Emergency can be faked and elections called off. Probably indefinitely).

How can people on these sorts of salaries possibly comprehend what life is like for people living on benefits, or at or near minimum wage?

Comments, please - from BNP members and non-BNP members. Comments on this blog are open to all, and all opinions are welcome. Other than for using foul language, gratuitous insults or threats, nobody is ever censored.

CRIME,VANDALISM AND "RACISM" IN WIGAN

Every day we have instances of crime and petty vandalism, locally and nationally. Schools are rife with drugs and in the papers today calls are being made for police to be stationed in schools.
Last week the car of one of our members was stolen and wrecked, yet another instance of the mindless vandalism prevalent in our society.
In today's Observer is a report of football changing rooms being torched in Ince and so the toll goes on.
Local councillors find this vandalism "disgusting"and asks for a greater police presence.

Well I find the whole criminal justice system disgusting! with the low life who commit these crimes let off with a slap on the wrist if they are ever caught.

The answer is simple, severe punishments including the birch would at a "stroke" no pun intended, solve the problem.
This punishment is said to be barbaric, but the destruction of peoples lives and property is equally barbaric and such punishment would in most cases turn the offender's lives round and save them from a life of crime.
Additionally the birch would not need to be used often as the threat would deter others from criminality and save millions in prison costs.

So you Labour supporters, councillors, MPs and other do gooders the fault is yours, but I fear that as yet you are too thick to see it.

What you see as more important than the protection of peoples property and rights is "race crime" where a minor insult is considered serious enough to warrant a suspended jail sentence.
Why is this offense so important? Why is it an offense at all? I can be insulted and often have been. I didn't like it but never considered it to be criminal.
Why is a racial insult worse than any other? One can't help one's race but neither can one help being ugly, but an insult over ugliness is not a criminal offense.
Why is an insult against ethnics more serious than one against English people? Why are we not allowed to say we do not welcome these uninvited people in such numbers, and the changes they are bringing to our society?

It seems there is a not so hidden agenda to destroy our culture and society, which has served us well for a thousand years, instigated by those who we trusted to represent us.
AGAIN WHY?

WHY ARE WE FORCED TO PAY FOR PEOPLE LIKE ELLIOT BROWN our "Hate crime coordinator"

WE WERE NEVER ASKED.

The only solution and hope for our country is to rid ourselves of the traitorous politicians as soon as possible, and--

FOR ENGLAND'S SAKE,

VOTE BNP, before the pot boils over and we have a Balkan like situation here.