Warrington tops north west Town Hall rich list - but many top earners now gone

Warrington tops north west Town Hall rich list

Warrington tops north west Town Hall rich list

First published in News

WARRINGTON Town Hall has topped a new rich list.

Released by the Taxpayers Alliance, it shows 15 members of staff receive total money in a year of more than £100,000.

Along with Knowsley and Cheshire West and Chester councils, that is the highest figure in the north west.

It covers 2011-12 and 2012-13 - the most recent years for which data is available.

Those topping £100,000 in one or both of those periods include the head of children’s services, assistant chief executive, assistant head of planning and the solicitor.

Then chief executive, Diana Terris, who left in 2012, was paid almost £190,000 in 2011/12 - including her pension contributions.

A council spokesman said: “Warrington Borough Council currently employs four members of staff who receive a salary of more than £100,000 per year.

"Last year, the council underwent a senior management restructure which provided a saving of £200,000 per year, which included reducing the number of directors from four to three.”

Comments (13)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:07am Fri 15 Aug 14

chrisjg says...

Hmmm, so "last year, the council underwent a senior management restructure which provided a saving of £200,000 per year, which included reducing the number of directors from four to three."
That would account for the loss of the chief exec on £190k then?
Hmmm, so "last year, the council underwent a senior management restructure which provided a saving of £200,000 per year, which included reducing the number of directors from four to three." That would account for the loss of the chief exec on £190k then? chrisjg
  • Score: 5

9:20am Fri 15 Aug 14

Freeborn John says...

In April 2012 a council spokesman said: "In fact, 15 people were employed by the council on total remuneration packages (including employers pension contributions) of over £100,000 in the 2010/2011 financial year."
A situation which continued in 2011/2012 and 2012/2013 then.
Look, Mr 'Council Spokesperson', cooking the figures by knocking the quite considerable perks off isn't fooling anyone, the Hundred Thousand Pound Club is alive and well and just as big as ever at WBC.
In April 2012 a council spokesman said: "In fact, 15 people were employed by the council on total remuneration packages (including employers pension contributions) of over £100,000 in the 2010/2011 financial year." A situation which continued in 2011/2012 and 2012/2013 then. Look, Mr 'Council Spokesperson', cooking the figures by knocking the quite considerable perks off isn't fooling anyone, the Hundred Thousand Pound Club is alive and well and just as big as ever at WBC. Freeborn John
  • Score: 2

11:58am Fri 15 Aug 14

MarkB. says...

Ok.. So I do appreciate that people are paid in association to the value they add to a company, however, it isn't the wages that bother me in relation to Warrington's council... What I do find shocking is the company cars that they are providing for the execs, I live backing onto a council building, three of the company cars are Mercedes S65 amg's....! Which for one, are not a green car, financially they're uneconomical and (having owned amg's myself in the past) understand that the S65's are anywhere between £1200 and £1900+ per month to lease hire!! I don't see this as a great use of taxpayers funds personally, but that's my opinion.

Surely it's something that needs to be reviewed by the council and if they're allowing £20k + just in vehicle expenses, what other kind of unjust expenses are being claimed by the execs at the council?

M.
Ok.. So I do appreciate that people are paid in association to the value they add to a company, however, it isn't the wages that bother me in relation to Warrington's council... What I do find shocking is the company cars that they are providing for the execs, I live backing onto a council building, three of the company cars are Mercedes S65 amg's....! Which for one, are not a green car, financially they're uneconomical and (having owned amg's myself in the past) understand that the S65's are anywhere between £1200 and £1900+ per month to lease hire!! I don't see this as a great use of taxpayers funds personally, but that's my opinion. Surely it's something that needs to be reviewed by the council and if they're allowing £20k + just in vehicle expenses, what other kind of unjust expenses are being claimed by the execs at the council? M. MarkB.
  • Score: 6

4:30pm Fri 15 Aug 14

Cllr Russ Bowden says...

The Council no longer operates a car lease scheme, athough there are a small number of existing leases which will expire shortly. For the record, none of the cars you mentioned are from those leases or the Council's salary sacrifice scheme.
The Council no longer operates a car lease scheme, athough there are a small number of existing leases which will expire shortly. For the record, none of the cars you mentioned are from those leases or the Council's salary sacrifice scheme. Cllr Russ Bowden
  • Score: 5

5:28pm Fri 15 Aug 14

grey_man says...

Russ

How many managers have been made redundant in total, out of interest?
Russ How many managers have been made redundant in total, out of interest? grey_man
  • Score: 3

6:53pm Fri 15 Aug 14

Cllr Russ Bowden says...

In May 2011, there were 6 Directors - there are now 4.
In May 2011, there were 6 Directors - there are now 4. Cllr Russ Bowden
  • Score: 1

6:56pm Fri 15 Aug 14

Cllr Russ Bowden says...

Note that I have included the Chief Executive in my number - the reduction from 4 to 3 in the quote relates strictly to senior managers in charge of Council directorates last year.
Note that I have included the Chief Executive in my number - the reduction from 4 to 3 in the quote relates strictly to senior managers in charge of Council directorates last year. Cllr Russ Bowden
  • Score: 1

6:53am Sat 16 Aug 14

grey_man says...

So how come the discrepancy between the Taxpayers Alliance reporting 15 members of staff and the council saying 4? Is it the distinction between salary and the full employment package?
So how come the discrepancy between the Taxpayers Alliance reporting 15 members of staff and the council saying 4? Is it the distinction between salary and the full employment package? grey_man
  • Score: 2

10:55am Sun 17 Aug 14

Freeborn John says...

If there really are only 4 members of the WBC Hundred Thousand Pound Club left, what happened to the others?
Did they all take enormous pay cuts? Are they buried under the mayors patio? Will there be a small plaque dedicated to the 'Disappeared' on the new Bank Park bandstand?
Here's a list of HTPC members from a couple of years back:
Chief Executive
Director of People and Improvement
Executive director of Neighbourhoods and Improvement
Executive Director of Children and Young People
Executive Director of Environment and Regeneration
Assistant Chief Executive
Solicitor to the Council
Chief Finance Officer
Assistant Director Targeted Services
Assistant Director Neighbourhood and Cultural Services
Assistant Director Development and Housing
Assistant Director Transportation,Engin
eering and Operations
Assistant Director Integrated Adult Health
Assistant Director Business Planning and Resources
Assistant Director Universal Services
Assistant Director Community Support
Or are they all alive and well...enquiring minds would like to know.
If there really are only 4 members of the WBC Hundred Thousand Pound Club left, what happened to the others? Did they all take enormous pay cuts? Are they buried under the mayors patio? Will there be a small plaque dedicated to the 'Disappeared' on the new Bank Park bandstand? Here's a list of HTPC members from a couple of years back: Chief Executive Director of People and Improvement Executive director of Neighbourhoods and Improvement Executive Director of Children and Young People Executive Director of Environment and Regeneration Assistant Chief Executive Solicitor to the Council Chief Finance Officer Assistant Director Targeted Services Assistant Director Neighbourhood and Cultural Services Assistant Director Development and Housing Assistant Director Transportation,Engin eering and Operations Assistant Director Integrated Adult Health Assistant Director Business Planning and Resources Assistant Director Universal Services Assistant Director Community Support Or are they all alive and well...enquiring minds would like to know. Freeborn John
  • Score: 0

12:23pm Sun 17 Aug 14

Paul Kennedy says...

In the year 2013/14 there were 5 senior employees including the Director of Public Health, (who transferred to WBC from the NHS on 1 /4 / 2013 ) with a salary in excess of £100,000. The highest paid employee had a salary of £123,300. If employers pension contributions are included, and which amount to approximately 20% of salary, then the number of senior employees where total remuneration including the employers pension contribution, rises to 13. The highest paid employee on that basis had a total remuneration package of £144,929 and it is not the same person who had the highest salary as they do not receive an employers pension contribution. An employers pension contribution is not income as such, but is paid to the Cheshire pension fund by WBC to provide a pension to the employee when they retire. It is worth noting that the Taxpayers Alliance have a dislike of the Public Sector and as such will use figures that strengthen their argument........ther
e is a saying: Lies, **** lies and statistics. I think that salary levels are an important topic for discussion, but such a discussion does need to be based on accurate information.
In the year 2013/14 there were 5 senior employees including the Director of Public Health, (who transferred to WBC from the NHS on 1 /4 / 2013 ) with a salary in excess of £100,000. The highest paid employee had a salary of £123,300. If employers pension contributions are included, and which amount to approximately 20% of salary, then the number of senior employees where total remuneration including the employers pension contribution, rises to 13. The highest paid employee on that basis had a total remuneration package of £144,929 and it is not the same person who had the highest salary as they do not receive an employers pension contribution. An employers pension contribution is not income as such, but is paid to the Cheshire pension fund by WBC to provide a pension to the employee when they retire. It is worth noting that the Taxpayers Alliance have a dislike of the Public Sector and as such will use figures that strengthen their argument........ther e is a saying: Lies, **** lies and statistics. I think that salary levels are an important topic for discussion, but such a discussion does need to be based on accurate information. Paul Kennedy
  • Score: 3

2:02pm Sun 17 Aug 14

Freeborn John says...

Thank You for clearing that up Mr Kennedy, and 2013/2014 figures too, I think we can call the search party off now!
I have to say that it was a poor decision by WBC to quote a figure of 4 'salaried' employees in reply to a report by the Taxpayers Alliance claiming 15 'remunerated' employees, a move likely to confuse if ever there was one.
As far as using accurate information, WBC and the TA have clashed before, prompting the Taxpayers Alliance to remark:
"It really is disappointing to see councils smearing research when it comes straight from their own audited accounts, frankly, taxpayers deserve better."
Meow!
Thank You for clearing that up Mr Kennedy, and 2013/2014 figures too, I think we can call the search party off now! I have to say that it was a poor decision by WBC to quote a figure of 4 'salaried' employees in reply to a report by the Taxpayers Alliance claiming 15 'remunerated' employees, a move likely to confuse if ever there was one. As far as using accurate information, WBC and the TA have clashed before, prompting the Taxpayers Alliance to remark: "It really is disappointing to see councils smearing research when it comes straight from their own audited accounts, frankly, taxpayers deserve better." Meow! Freeborn John
  • Score: 0

3:03pm Tue 19 Aug 14

WInwick Pig says...

Look on the birght side.

At least these 4 senior employees can afford the increase in bus fares across Warrington. ;-)
Look on the birght side. At least these 4 senior employees can afford the increase in bus fares across Warrington. ;-) WInwick Pig
  • Score: 2

3:34pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Karlar says...

Paul Kennedy wrote:
In the year 2013/14 there were 5 senior employees including the Director of Public Health, (who transferred to WBC from the NHS on 1 /4 / 2013 ) with a salary in excess of £100,000. The highest paid employee had a salary of £123,300. If employers pension contributions are included, and which amount to approximately 20% of salary, then the number of senior employees where total remuneration including the employers pension contribution, rises to 13. The highest paid employee on that basis had a total remuneration package of £144,929 and it is not the same person who had the highest salary as they do not receive an employers pension contribution. An employers pension contribution is not income as such, but is paid to the Cheshire pension fund by WBC to provide a pension to the employee when they retire. It is worth noting that the Taxpayers Alliance have a dislike of the Public Sector and as such will use figures that strengthen their argument........ther

e is a saying: Lies, **** lies and statistics. I think that salary levels are an important topic for discussion, but such a discussion does need to be based on accurate information.
The employee's total renumeration package is what should be considered and the subject of this discussion, because howsoever the various elements of that package are manipulated to put a more "acceptable spin" on it, WBC council tax payers are the ones who end up footing the bill, be it salary, pension or perks.
[quote][p][bold]Paul Kennedy[/bold] wrote: In the year 2013/14 there were 5 senior employees including the Director of Public Health, (who transferred to WBC from the NHS on 1 /4 / 2013 ) with a salary in excess of £100,000. The highest paid employee had a salary of £123,300. If employers pension contributions are included, and which amount to approximately 20% of salary, then the number of senior employees where total remuneration including the employers pension contribution, rises to 13. The highest paid employee on that basis had a total remuneration package of £144,929 and it is not the same person who had the highest salary as they do not receive an employers pension contribution. An employers pension contribution is not income as such, but is paid to the Cheshire pension fund by WBC to provide a pension to the employee when they retire. It is worth noting that the Taxpayers Alliance have a dislike of the Public Sector and as such will use figures that strengthen their argument........ther e is a saying: Lies, **** lies and statistics. I think that salary levels are an important topic for discussion, but such a discussion does need to be based on accurate information.[/p][/quote]The employee's total renumeration package is what should be considered and the subject of this discussion, because howsoever the various elements of that package are manipulated to put a more "acceptable spin" on it, WBC council tax payers are the ones who end up footing the bill, be it salary, pension or perks. Karlar
  • Score: 4

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree