It says "The Respondent has not shown that the difference in pay was because of a material factor" it is referring to the points under 7 a) - f).
Had 7a)-f) been true then they would have justified the BBC's actions. Consequently one can only assume that they were neither true not accurate.
Why isn't there some punishment for that? There b***** should be.
The BBC is horribly biased, and not just over sex. Age, School, Friends, History etc. etc. etc. It is also completely cowardly when it is dealing with a stroppy yet successful presented.
This will, of course, force the BBC to reduce the pay of the preferred presenters as well as increasing the pay of the less-preferred. This will in turn lead to high profile and thus highly paid people leaving the BBC.
Which is as it should be. The BBC lovers to refer to it's special funding, and it needs to realise that special behaviour should come with that. They are not there to compete with commercial broadcasters. You'd think they'd get that considering how special they like to think they are.
|
BBC Discrimination new
BBC Discrimination new