Tag Archives: service

Vietnam and The Three Resolutions

Featured

Posted by in Character and Competence, General, Purpose and Service

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

For the past 8 days I have been dutifully watching a PBS documentary series on the Vietnam War, covering the 1961-1973 American involvement in what had hitherto been a French problem. And the overarching message that I have received has been – if they’d just applied the Second and Third Resolutions, maybe the lives of 282,000 US/South Vietnamese and other allies’ service personnel, 444,000 North Vietnamese/Viet Cong soldiers, and  627,000 civilians, would have been saved. Not all, I suspect – if North Vietnam had simply been handed control there would no doubt have been the kind of casualties usually associated with a communist takeover.*

Why would the Second Resolution have saved them? Character.

You see, the recurring message of the testimony and evidence produced showed (a) how often the US authorities admitted, in secret, that they were fighting a losing battle from when Kennedy was still alive and (b) that the self-interest of Presidential re-election was the focus of some of their decision-making. They even produced evidence that Nixon sabotaged peace talks as a way of supporting his efforts to replace Lyndon Johnson in the 1968 elections. How many of his citizens dies because of self-interest – because of a lack of character?

Which also brings up the Third Resolution. The other factors that killed countless people was unbridled ambition on the part of the leaders of both sides. The North could argue that they wanted to unite their country under one flag, albeit a communist one. The American evidence was clearly that, rather than acknowledge a huge error and step back from it with careful consideration as to how, they just threw people at it to avoid having to admit to a mistake – even someone else’s! Just to maintain power 6,000 miles away.

When I saw how many soldiers died taking ‘strategically important’ hills, only for the victors – survivors – to leave them once they got to the top, I was grateful that my children never volunteered to join the Forces, and simultaneously even more respectful of those who do.

I have always been willing to acknowledge and apologise for my mistakes. Even when my efforts have been rebuffed, and lies told about my errors, my disappointment has been more about another’s unwillingness to accept my apology out of self-interest, than it has been about the negative personal consequences.

Saying sorry often takes courage. It means acknowledging imperfection, it means risking a reputation – it means being vulnerable. Acknowledgement of a genuine effort to apologise is the least one can ask for.

But as Vietnam shows, stubborn insistence on ‘being right’ when patently ‘doing wrong’ in an effort to hide being even more wrongis dangerous to everyone involved.

Particularly for those who didn’t realise they were being misused by the players in the game.

Tell the truth. Live the truth, Acknowledge the truth.

Whatever happens.

*Turns out there weren’t any massacres. Just big re-education camps. Honest.

Handforth and the Third Resolution

Featured

Posted by in General, Purpose and Service

≈ Comments Off on Handforth and the Third Resolution

Tags

, , , , , , ,

As I write this blog, the Handforth Council Planning Committee video is viral, the major press has got wind of it, and it has apparently chosen sides. Having been party to many a committee meeting myself, I thought I’d explore the concept from a Third Resolution (service) perspective. The question so obviously arising from this amusing event is – why do people choose to serve?

The most attractive and most frequently given answer will be ‘I want to serve the association, public, country, community’ (delete as applicable). For many, that is true. I know I wanted to serve my own Institute when I volunteered. Which was not necessarily my only motive, and therein lay the crunch.

In my opinion, when volunteering there is also the ego-driven desire to be/do something of importance. Don’t judge – there is an element of ‘What’s In It For Me’ in everything we do. That is a psychological truth. If there was nothing at all in it for you – what possible reason would you have for doing it? My evidence? ‘I want to be a nurse’ is a worthy vocational ambition, but years later ‘emptying Gladys’ colostomy bag’ loses its edge. You still do it because it serves your greater vision, but you’d be equally happy if you didn’t have to. We want the good stuff of the service we provide, and we endure the bad. Which is why there is no such job as ‘colostomy bag emptier’. No-one wants it. But they will do it as part of work they do want. You wanted the overall job, and to serve. You do the bad because it serves something else that IS in it for you.

The problems arise when instead of serving in order to get ‘something’, you start to serve with a view to making that service – serve you. Instead of giving to the cause, you start to demand that the cause gives to you – not just emotional contentment and a sense of purpose (which is why you started), but everything. The cause/organisation you serve now belongs to you, and you demand to direct it.

When I watched the Handforth video I found myself asking questions the press seemed to have ignored. Why was this ‘volunteer’ running the Zoom meeting and deciding who was in charge? Was she there because she wanted to serve – or because she didn’t like what she (or someone else) was hearing and wanted to stop it despite really having no business doing so? Watching the earlier part of the meeting suggests at least some internal politics at play.

If someone turned up in your meeting and declared she was running it because a third party ‘asked her’, what would your response be? If s/he rejigged the agreed agenda, added bits in and threw the Chair out because he wasn’t content to allow the hijack – would you go, ‘Fine, no problem’? And what if it was clear that half the attendees seemed to be either in on the hijack or willing to endorse it? (Which, if that was the case, would explain the anger displayed by the Chair/Vice-Chair particularly if it was happening ‘again’ and they’d had enough of it. Half a story is not a whole story.)

The Third Resolution is intended to counter the Restraining Force (possibly) demonstrated in Handforth. (And I emphasise – none of us knows the whole story, so that’s a big ‘possible’.)

That RF is UNBRIDLED Aspiration and Ambition. Note the importance of the adjective ‘Unbridled’ – aspiration and ambition in an individual is laudable until it becomes self-serving, and serves the individual at the very expense of the body being served. My observation of the meeting – which is admittedly subjective and may be misinformed – was that someone appeared to be interfering in someone else’s game, as modest and (in fairness) emotionally cool as she appears in the video, and perhaps shouldn’t have. I have done some research and have some questions but – not here. 🙂

So was she there to serve? And if so, serve whom? Only the parties involved know the whole truth. But if I wanted to serve the local authority I’d seek election or employment. And I’d only do it because I wanted to serve, even if I wanted to progress and serve from the top. Ambition good, unbridled ambition, bad.

 In the interests of balance, I might do a blog on emotionally-controlled addressing of interference and trespassers…….

Your Vision REQUIRES The Three Resolutions

25 Wednesday Nov 2020

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on Your Vision REQUIRES The Three Resolutions

Tags

, , , , , ,

Vision is often a beautiful product of an individual’s creative imagination, but it is achieved through application of that same individual’s independent will, allied to the faithful assistance of those whose sense of purpose complement that of the dreamer.

This means that while the former is a function of identity, experience and desire, it is nothing at all unless and until it is given life through conscious activity. Performance of that activity at a higher level brings with it an expectation that the individual directing that activity is, or becomes, competent in whatever skills are used in order to achieve the outcome, including those skills that engender, empower and enable the contribution of others in the enterprise. For everything we do well and for ourselves in pursuit of a dream, we do with, for and because of other people.

That is the motivation behind application of The Three Resolutions. Whether you use those three words or prefer to use different conceptual tropes, or are even just ‘winging it’ in the sense that you are ‘doing without thinking’, all successful endeavours rely on faithful application of The Three Resolutions.

The Three Resolutions are at the heart of any success. They state:

First Resolution – “To overcome the restraining forces of appetites and passions, I resolve to exercise self-discipline and self-denial.”

Second Resolution – “To overcome the restraining forces of pride and pretension, I resolve to work on character and competence.”

 Third Resolution -“To overcome the restraining forces of unbridled aspiration and ambition, I resolve to dedicate my talents and resources to noble purposes and to provide service to others.”

The primary message of each of these statements needs little explanation – they are all self-evidently true. No success would argue that they are not.

Yet people will actively argue that they are not, that there are nuanced rationales as to where and when they do not strictly apply. And even as they make those arguments they seem unaware that any success they have is the result of focused effort, industry competence, knuckling down when they’d really rather not, and providing sufficient service to others so that those others help them as they are themselves helped in a synergistic relationship.

At the same time as they argue against the timeless wisdom of philosophies that parallel The Three Resolutions, these people discover that their success is fleeting – they spark brilliantly for just a few moments before indiscipline, incompetence, a lack of character or a burgeoning, overwhelming self-interest grips them and casts them down – often very publicly.

Those who argue against such concepts as The Three Resolutions are hopeful that they won’t need to be disciplined; that they don’t need to have character; that they need serve only themselves.

For the most of us, however: we don’t argue against them. We acknowledge them, even as we wish they weren’t true!

So be in no doubt. Writing the book was and remains easier than complying with it. But well worth the effort.

Look at YOUR Vision. Will it/did it happen without application of The Three Resolutions?

If you find that you did apply them in order to achieve success in terms of your Vision – tell someone else. They need to know, too. So that they can work on their own.

When over-focusing won’t work.

08 Thursday Oct 2020

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on When over-focusing won’t work.

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

“The key to meeting an unmet need is in addressing, not ignoring the other needs.” Stephen R Covey.

It is widely acknowledged that we humans have four needs. Various writers have jiggled with them, added some, changed the terminology and so on, but for the purpose of this article I’ll use Covey’s four – the physical (food, drink, rest, exercise), the social-emotional (relationships), the mental (intellectual growth) and the spiritual (meaning). Covey opines that so often, when one of these needs is unmet we tend to address that gap it by only focusing on that area – for example, by exercising passionately when we need to lose weight. This can work, of course it can, but what about the other needs that are being minimised or even ignored while you sit and sweat on the exercise bike? Are you ignoring your spouse? Are you moving forward on your other, important goals? Are you ignoring professional development? Are all these areas suffering because of your manic focus on the ‘one problem’ you have identified? The answer is often Yes.

To the same degree, I decided to explore The Three Resolutions. In my book I describe how they present a progressive self-development from self-discipline and self-denial, through competence and character, to the achievement of a self-identified purpose through service to others.

I consider they confirm Covey’s thinking. My life’s experience is full of examples of people who focus in one or two areas identified in the Resolutions, and yet remain oblivious to the fact that their singular focus in one area prevents them becoming the best that they could be. (Of course, I also have examples of great successes who, coincidentally, demonstrate compliance with all three.) Athletes who excel – and then we find they used performance enhancing drugs. Amazing singers – whose hypocrisy about green issues gets laid bare when they buy a plane ticket for their hat. Dedicated politicians – whose expense claims render them untrustworthy.

For me, as for Covey – and I’ll be candid and say I ain’t no perfect example either – the finest expression of greatness is seen when all Three Resolutions are addressed, and when all three are addressed simultaneously. When we utilise our self-discipline to empower our competence, which is founded in great personal character, and serve others for a worthwhile purpose.

You can train in each area separately, but success in each enables success in all of the others.

So, just as Covey suggests with his needs, consider this: when you have a problem or personal challenge, don’t just think which ONE of the Three Resolutions you need to address: think how you could address that issue with all three.

Not fit enough? Don’t just hit the bricks (discipline) – research fitness (competence), train with and help others (service), and do so with dedication (character).

Don’t know enough? Don’t ‘just’ study (discipline) – carefully identify what you need to learn and set about it (competence), resist others’ invitations to take unnecessary breaks (character), and teach as you learn (service), which enhances that learning.

Want to serve others but don’t know how? Consider and understand your needs, capacities and competencies (character/competence), identify what service you can provide (purpose) and then learn ways of using that before allotting time (discipline) to providing the optimum service to the best effect.

You can be the buffest, prettiest, strongest, fittest, shiniest narcissist in the gym – but you won’t get the respect you’ll get if it’s all about you.

Exercise all the Resolutions. The best among us have shown you this works.

Why you should share this post.

30 Wednesday Sep 2020

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on Why you should share this post.

Tags

, , ,

The challenge with LinkedIn and the Coaching Industry is this: I believe that most of the people on LinkedIn are, judging by their posts, pretty much where they want to be. They have the jobs they want in the fields that pull them. The posts I read are often swollen with justifiable pride at an Award, ‘delight’ at obtaining a new role, and gratitude for having experienced an old one as they moved on. That underpins the professionalism that LinkedIn is expected to reflect, surely?

Occasionally a poster seeks advice or help, but in the main they are marketing or they are demonstrating personal pride. Me too – there’s no judgement in that last sentence. So this is a message for all of our fellow professionals on LinkedIn.

What about your employees and peers that aren’t yet where they want to be? And what about your other roles? Do you need coaching/advice in their regard?

John Allan, architect at Stirling Castle, raised a stone upon which was inscribed the legend, “Whate’er thou art, act well they part.” It was widely thought this was a quote from Shakespeare but apparently not. It has inspired great leaders, regardless of where it was derived. But it isn’t about work alone. It is about all of your roles.

Back to the posters. Now and then, a post appears on my feed where someone has arrived at or pulled through a challenge that isn’t related to work. And that is the great leveller, isn’t it? Everyone on LinkedIn is a professional.

And everyone on LinkedIn has a life outside of their work. And everyone who works with or for a LinkedIn ‘name’ has the same challenges and issues as we members.

Allan’s quote reminds us that we play many roles in life, and that we should dedicate our ‘professionalism’ to all of them. We know of great actors and scientists and politicians whose personal lives were a mess – they played one role with aplomb, but bombed elsewhere.

One of your roles as a professional is your ‘job’. the other roles are trainer, mentor, team-mate, administrator. Your personal roles include brother, sister, son/daughter, spouse/partner, home-maintainer, finance manager – I give up, you make your own list.

And it pays us to be good at all of those individual roles, doesn’t it?

Going back to coaching – I know you might read posts such as mine and enjoy them. (Or not.) But your role as a mentor and colleague and yes, family member, behoves you to consider passing the content on to those you love, respect and empower. They may not be on LinkedIn: they may not feel as empowered and successful as you and may just appreciate the content of coaching posts because of that – and they may appreciate you for making it known to them.

Don’t look at a coaching post and think “I like that”, and/or “I don’t need it, though”, and stop there. Share it amongst your peers and hierarchy – sideways, up and down. Somebody might just see something they need at just the time they need it.

That is a service you can provide at the click of a button. Don’t just Like – SHARE.

You’ll be acting one of your roles very well indeed.

For more, go to threeresolutionsguy.com or visit HERE for the book, The Three Resolutions.

Here we go again? GREAT!!

23 Wednesday Sep 2020

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on Here we go again? GREAT!!

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

What have you achieved during the ‘first’ COVID Lockdown period?

How you define ‘achievements’ in the question I leave up to you. You may choose work-related successes, which will include how you adapted your working practices to address the restrictions and the (yuk) New Normal; you can list any charity or community efforts you undertook; you can rattle through the personal development you made.

Or.

You can consider the lack of initiative you might have displayed in any or all of those areas. You can now consider what you could have done. You can think ‘I could’ve’ (not could OF) and ‘I should’ve’ and ‘I might’ve’. And you can wallow in the self-pity that ensues if you did nothing to take advantage of the developmental opportunity that this pause could have provided.

But GREAT NEWS!

In my area, several local authorities have been re-locked down. (In fact, Cardiff is technically under siege as it is surrounded by locked down unitary authorities.) There are constant rumours, even expectations that another national lockdown is a-coming our way. A second pause-button that you can press and decide ‘What can I do in this period of change?’

I’m lucky. I have no formal occupation other than writing and blogging so I had massive amounts of discretionary time. Oddly, I still have a 9-5 mentality and regularly ‘pack in’ at tea-time. Weird.

But in the period since March I have:

  • Lost 35lbs.
  • Increased my cycling – time and distances travelled.
  • Attended umpteen free webinars to stay on top of my game.
  • Sorted out some home-environments.
  • Written The Way.
  • Edited Three Resolutions. (Okay, I finished that just before it started but it needed a proof read.)
  • Rewritten Police Time Management (still doing that).
  • Had two mini-breaks with the extended family during the eased-off hiatus in the Pandemic Panic.
  • Refocused my mind.

And here we find ourselves at the cusp of another, allegedly 6-month lockdown opportunity.

The Three Resolutions ‘commitments’ provide a framework for consideration of exactly what you can do to take advantage of the gap. You can reinforce your self-discipline by choosing to eat less and exercise more. You can redefine your personal values and your congruence or incongruence in terms of how you behave in their respect. You can learn new stuff, or you can study the old stuff you need to know in order to do an excellent job. You can revisit your sense of Purpose and decide if what you are doing is right for you, while simultaneously considering what service, or what better service you can provide to others – either through work or in a voluntary capacity.

Or you can just accept the entropy that doing nothing engenders. You can actively pursue the self-redundancy that ‘just doing enough’ causes.

Which is the right choice? You KNOW it.

Now DO it.

Serve – but don’t be selfish.

05 Thursday Mar 2020

Posted by in Purpose and Service, Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on Serve – but don’t be selfish.

Tags

, , , ,

“The smallest good deed is better than the grandest good intention.” Duguet.

Having done time management to death for a wee while, I am reverting to promotion of the effective tenets of The Three Resolutions as I have reviewed, amended, added to and then re-published the book of the same name, available in paperback or Kindle.

The Three Resolutions propose that there are three commitments an individual can make in an effort to live a principled life. Those three commitments build upon each other, and while some may say they are common sense my response would be that ‘common sense is not common practice’, which is not me being clever, it was Stephen Covey who said it to me first.

Others may look at the subject matter and contents page and say, “I’m doing that already.” I know. Lots of people on LinkedIn are ‘doing’ a lot of that stuff. But I bet they aren’t doing it all, any more than I am. Yes, folks, I hereby acknowledge the imperfection in my dedication to applied common sense.

Ultimately, and without going through the whole Three Resolutions process, the end objective of the The Three Resolutions commitment is service to others, hence my quote. If i was to ask you the names of people who dedicate themselves to the service of others I am positive you would identify many a celebrity or other ‘name’ who clearly do serve in a charitable fashion.

But when I talk of service to others I am not focused solely on people who get great public acknowledgment (and publicity) for their efforts. I also mean the old lady in the charity shop: the man on a motorbike delivering blood: the lollipop man or woman interrupting their day to keep children safe: the administrator whose accurate records and good memory detects a murder (did happen): and many more unsung providers of service to others.

I’m often amused how someone at the top of their game being paid many thousands of pounds gets a medal for their service to their profession when the lower ranks who work harder, physically, get diddly squat. Their service is just as, if not arguably more, valuable than the knight’s.

The principle, for me, is this – service provided, whether for payment or for free, is service. There are no levels of superiority of service. However, there are services provided purely out of self-interest that I do NOT consider to be service at all. There is no harm in application of a ‘What’s In It For Me’ approach, because the answer could merely be ‘It’s the right thing to do and in keeping with my values system’, but when the question is asked and answered wholly in a ‘if there’s not enough in it for me I’m not interested’ manner – service it ain’t.

Going above and beyond the call, is service. Being paid for and doing a good, professional job, is service. Anything done completely out of self-interest, is not.

That is selfishness.

It’s just occasionally annoying how selfish people get rewarded, but they never said life is fair.

To paraphrase Mother Teresa, “Life is sometimes unrewarding: serve anyway.”

What will you do today, to serve?

 

For more on the subject, buy m’book on Kindle or hardcopy through the above links.

Book Cover Front

Choice keeps the wolf from the door.

28 Sunday Jan 2018

Posted by in Character and Competence, Uncategorized

≈ Comments Off on Choice keeps the wolf from the door.

Tags

, , , , ,

“Unemployment is a characteristic unique to the human species only. All the other creatures and creations seem to know what they are supposed to do.” This was a quote ascribed to an unnamed economist who I am sure had his tongue half-squished into his cheek, but it is a thought provoker. Of course, the human condition means we can demonstrate compassion to those who have not and who cannot, whereas the animal world rarely shows that (dolphins, whales?).

My question, which might invite challenge, is – should we be so compassionate towards those who will not?

As a police officer, I met people of all three ‘persuasions’. I met the poor, the challenged and the disabled, who to my mind represented the have not and cannot and for whom I had some sympathy. But for too often, and presumably because of the circumstances surrounding the ‘call for service’ that resulted in our meeting, I met those who would not.

Those who would not work in case it made them have to get up in the morning. Those who would not because it involved being subject to supervision and rules. Those who would not because of the inconvenience. They would do one thing – they would go and collect their benefits and then pop next door – and it was next door – to buy their beer. Then they would go out and steal and rob ‘because they needed money to live, Your Worship’.

In a nutshell, there are those who can’t exercise the Three Resolutions,  there are those who don’t know how to exercise them, and there are those who won’t.

And there are those who defend the latter by lumping them in with the former. They make excuses and seek evidence to justify their findings. Instead of giving them a metaphorical slap and showing them how to get a grip, they pander to their failings instead.

Fortunately, there are also those who come half way, giving that metaphorical slap and then helping them to discover a new sense of personal discipline, a new and better sense of character and new competencies. And my experience suggests that those who are helped to achieve and execute those First and Second Resolution ethics frequently go on and execute the Third Resolution in ‘paying forward’ what they were given, to the benefit of all.

I love seeing that. I love seeing people rescued from hopeless and useless to helpful and useful. I remain scathing towards those who are useless and hopeless but who revel in it and demand respect for it.

And I feel that way because, unlike animals, such people – all people – have the ability and capability to do and be better because they have a choice. Animals are usually led by instinct. A dog chases a car but probably doesn’t know why. A human who ‘is’ useless is well capable of choosing better and should be encouraged and helped to do so.

Once. Maybe twice. Maybe even three times. But after that – let the wolves have them. Wolves know what they’re there for.

 

For more, got to Amazon and buy the book on Kindle or  paperback.

51SrzOWl+nL__SX312_BO1,204,203,200_

You’ve got me all wrong. Probably.

04 Friday Aug 2017

Posted by in Character and Competence

≈ Comments Off on You’ve got me all wrong. Probably.

Tags

, ,

Gretchen Ruben is an American author and lawyer, and I have enjoyed reading a couple of her books, most notably her last one – which has become an accidental precursor to her next book. In said next book, she will expand upon what she has called The Four Tendencies. These tendencies are four ways in which we can identify our predilection and motivation for action, or otherwise. Three of those are Upholder, Questioner and Rebel. Those of you who know me have already decided which of those three I am.

Guess what? You’re wrong.

According to the definitions and the pseudo-test she has provided and which I have circulated through Facebook (as requested by the test – read on and giggle), I am the fourth type – an Obliger.

Stop laughing.

An Obliger is defined as responding ‘readily to outer expectations but struggle to meet inner expectations.’

To me, that means that when a person is called upon to do something for others, they do it. But when they have to do something for themselves, they don’t.

I see me in that definition. A sense of duty exists at the workplace, of course. Most of the time I go about my business routinely. I’ll plan my time to enable completion of the required work. But sometimes, when asked to do something, I might (do) whinge and bitch and suggest there is a better way. Nevertheless, in the end, I always do it. I oblige.

But when I call upon myself to do something and the only person to whom I am accountable and responsible is me – I waiver. A lot, in my experience. Even if I have seemingly volunteered to join some enterprise, I haven’t created an inner obligation – I have self-created an obligation to another.

A good friend recently suggested something to me, and while he isn’t aware of the Tendencies I think he did inadvertently confirm the solution for an Obliger. I had ‘complained’ that once when I get to the gym I can train – but thinking about going to the gym often stopped me actually doing it.

He suggested that when it comes to physical exercise (and my stated reluctance to go to a gym unless I could go there straight from work without having to think of something else in between) I would improve my chances if I exercised with someone else. Think about that – going alone is a problem, but if someone else was involved, my Obliger Tendency would ensure that I honoured my commitment to that other person.

Thinking through this using the paradigm of the Three Resolutions, any reluctance to comply with the First Resolution could and would be offset by compliance with the Third Resolution, confirming my hypothesis that adherence to one Resolution often serves compliance with another. Serving a friend would also and simultaneously serve me. So, where discipline is weak, service can provide support.

Me and Gretchen – we’re thinking along the same lines.

Today’s joke – Matt Damon’s chicken dinner has gone cold. Bourne’s Supreme’s icy.

Please buy me.

100-Day Challenge, Day 20. And ‘Look what THEY have done!’

20 Thursday Jul 2017

Posted by in General, Purpose and Service

≈ Comments Off on 100-Day Challenge, Day 20. And ‘Look what THEY have done!’

Tags

, , ,

It hasn’t been a great week for the challenge. Fitness wise I haven’t run since Sunday because of the knee, and the (possibly psychosomatic) pain in the back where, until the doctor suggested I should have pain, I didn’t have. Damnit! And I am too easily succumbing to the evening ice cream. What part of “Don’t buy any more!” don’t you understand!

On a better note, I have launched myself into the services I provide, soberingly realising that the social benefits of being an Institute Director, a driving Observer and a Speakers Club President in addition to my own ‘stuff’ mean – additional workload! Well, I never.

For those who know me, rest assured that I deliberately chose those service roles because they involved no physical effort whatsoever (even if my brain sometimes gets fried).

 

Ooh, look what they get!

It’s all kicked off at the BBC, hasn’t it? For those out of the loop, they have voluntarily (!) revealed large pay gaps between male and female presenter/celebs/newscasters, resulting in much debate on other programmes presented by those not earning as much (sic).

Shortly, it will be a legal requirement that businesses with over 250 staff will be forced to publish their pay structures/details, and one suggestion to counter the BBC-initiated but now extended issue of gender/race-related pay gaps ‘in the whole world’ is that ALL business should publish their pay details.

When I was young, my father said, “What I earn and what I pay in tax is my own business”. (He wasn’t a fan of Cliff Richard so he wasn’t talking about bachelorhood.*)

Outside of some public services, where pay IS publicised – like the police service where rates of pay are published, if not individual income – this would mean that everyone would be legally entitled to know what you were being paid. Everyone.

I wonder how that would benefit people? I know that the motive is positive, but like many good-natured ideas, has it been thought through? Imagine schoolyard bullies being able to pick on kids whose parents earn less than theirs. The phone calls to HMRC or Crimestoppers because Fred’s mum is deriving a Range Rover on a private plate and she only earns £21,000 a year so she ‘couldn’t possibly afford it’. The thrifty being asked for charitable donations by chuggers. And so on.

There is an economical tenet to which I subscribe, conditionally. It is that you get paid what you’re worth in terms of service provision. Which is why people who do jobs that ‘anyone can do’ get paid less than jobs which required years of training and effort. After that, the next leveller of pay is the number of people who want to do the job or who could do it – if only 5 people could do a particular job, then the rate of pay would probably be higher than if everyone wanted it – and the lowest bidder would win. That might explain public sector pay. (Hey, I am no economist and this argument may hold no water!)

All of which brings me around to the BBC issue. Notwithstanding the gender/race gap, which is an issue, is it just possible that the service provided by the best-paid talent is paid for at a rate that was agreed by the two parties involved, and was the result of a negotiation from which either side could have withdrawn, thus lowering the proverbial bar for the next applicant? In other words, “I want YOU,” resulted in the response, “Okay, this is what I want” and off they went.

Nothing. Wrong. With. That.

Perhaps the race/gender gap is a reflection of all of the aforementioned factors – plus an unwillingness of some to ask for more. “Life will give to you what you ask of it,” as Tony Robbins espoused.

And for some of those so offended by this issue, I have a question. Do you watch the drivel that is driving this pay up so high?

    I know my place.

*Look it up