Exclusive survey reveals bumper rises for housing association bosses
Highest paid chiefs pull away from the pack
Share
Housing association chief executives saw their pay jump by 7.3 per cent this year with an emerging premier league of top earners, Inside Housing’s annual salary survey has revealed.
The 10 highest paid chief executives enjoyed an average 15.8 per cent increase in their pay – double the overall figure.
Remove them from the table and the average pay increase for the remaining chief executives falls to 6.3 per cent. Six of the top 10 percentage rises appeared for housing associations with turnovers above £90 million.
John Belcher, chief executive of Anchor Trust, topped the chart with £327,000 made up of salary, bonus and car allowance. As Inside Housing revealed last month, he is the first chief executive to break the £300,000 barrier on salary and bonus alone. His pay rise was 31.9 per cent.
The salary survey came after Inside Housing revealed senior staff at the Housing Corporation also received bumper payments last year. The corporation refused to speak directly toInside Housing about this year’s survey, but in a statement it said: ‘Salary increases should be proportionate and linked to organisational performance.’
Anu Vedi, chief executive of Genesis Housing Group, who earned £200,000 this year, said he supported major associations’ decision to award high pay. ‘It is not a case of whether someone is worth X or Y, there needs to be a recognition and respect about the market we are in,’ he said. ‘Developing associations are significant businesses and in relation to the size and scale of these organisations we need to recruit, retain and reward the right people.’
But Linda McNeil, chair of Leeds Tenants’ Federation, said tenants would be disappointed to see such big wage increases when many are struggling to make ends meet.
‘I don’t agree with them getting such atrocious salaries. There are other people who work as hard and maybe do a better job and don’t get that kind of pay rise,’ she said.
The survey also revealed a jump in bonuses. Mr Belcher again topped the list with his £72,000 bonus. Mohni Gujral, chief executive of Presentation, picked up a £46,000 bonus and Don Wood, the former chief executive of London & Quadrant Group, picked up £33,600.
Full results:Amid the gloom, salaries soar
Have your say
You must sign in to make a comment
Readers' comments (5)
michael barratt | 19/09/2008 1:08 pm
Who said that housing associations were not for profit organisations? For banks lending billions to the sector, housing associations are most certainly a profit centre activity in an uncertain age. For overpaid chief executives and other senior officials, housing associations are a profit centre activity representing one might claim, gold plated welfare for the middle classes
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
andy lee | 19/09/2008 4:53 pm
let's wise up and bring this sector into the 21st century please. The CEO's of RSLs across the UK are running multi million pound revenue businesses with billions of pounds worth of assets and debt which needs careful management. Throw into that mix the many thousands of customers and staff we all interact day by day and you have complex, multi discipline businesses which are heavy scrutiny from demanding tenants, board members and regulators. I don't get paid hundreds of thousands of pounds but, with private sector salaries for comparable jobs, coming in at in excess of 500k PA with bonus and shares, I don't begrudge our CEOs what they are paid. If we want the best people we need to incentivise excellent people of high social conscience to forsake the big bucks on offer in the private and join us not criticise them for what they are paid.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Edward Case | 21/09/2008 8:38 pm
I think Andy needs to look again at the findings of the report. Pay at the senior levels of the sector is clearly not reflecting performance. To take but one example, Presentation's CEO has been awarded a massive bonus despite leading the organisation into being the new sector regulators "first victim" (see New regime's first victim -Fri 18th Jul 08) this represents apparently a 30% pay increase on last years salary! For what? Driving the organisation into the ground, jepordising the many employees jobs and reducing the number of homes available to rent at affordable levels as assets (homes) are sold in order to improve the organisations liquidity. At the same time front line staff there have been awarded below inflation pay increases i.e. a cut in salary in real terms and the overall 'market' for CEOs in the sector is further inflated as other CEOs, some no doubt more responsible and effective look at Presentation's CEO's salary and decide they are grossly under paid simply because CEO's such as this are grossly over paid.
Rather than looking to the private sector for comparisons (in other words looking up the salary market) why not look across to local government CE's whose responsibilities are greater, more high profile, and under far greater scrutiny but are receiving less than many HA CEOs. One wonders how they recruit at all!
Andy please remember that these 'businesses' you speak of do not operate in an open market, where poor performance results in reduced market share/turnover, or privately financed takeover. In these times of reduced availability of credit, any further failures like Ujima's will be paid for out of the public purse. Ultimately the many of our 'customers' as you call them cannot afford and therefore are not 'free' to go to other businesses or to use a better term landlords without getting less for the same money or paying considerably more, often still for less.
Housing is not just another commodity, it is a basic human need and it is quite right that the regulation of every aspect of the market or provision for this need be highly regulated, including pay of providers given public licence.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Pat Sheerin | 22/09/2008 11:56 am
I agree wholeheartedly with Edward Case. You would have to see the sector through rose-tinted glasses to believe that the higher the salary the more likely you are to recruit good quality senior staff. Nor are these organisations well-regulated and accountable otherwise the so-called regulators would step in much sooner and much more often - Presentation is a good example of how things can go so badly wrong for so many years without any effective intervention. If there is so much money sloshing around that the CEOs can give themselves such large salaries and bonuses, they should give across-the-board pay increases to the staff who do the real work and keep their little "businesses" ticking over.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Mr. Sharabi | 25/09/2008 9:54 pm
I really do not see what the fuss is about. High salaries only mean higher taxes. Anyone earning less than £34,800 is taxed at 20%. All income over £34,800 is taxed at 40%. Therefore, a person earning £100,000 pa would pay nearly £3000 per month in tax and NI alone! That is around £35000 per year. The remaining £65000 is then subjected to a further tax on purchased items such as fuel, stamps, food, clothing, motoring, etc. Then you have the interest payments on mortgages to think about. Not anyone earning £100,000 pa shall no doubt have the common sense to live in a more affluent area where houses cost around the £300,000 mark. Trying to secure a mortgage in the current climate with at least a 10% deposit will leave the person paying interest on a £270,000 mortgage, which comes in at around £1500 per month or £1800 per month if paying capital too. That is around £21000 pa. Added to this the Council tax in such an area at about £2000 pa and all the associated bills for utilities, there is not much change left for one to truly enjoy their disposable income. Some people get by on £5000 per year, but when you earn around £100,000 per year, it is difficult to get by on such an amount on whiskey alone! Everything is relative my dear friends. So, let's not squabble about who gets what, and instead enjoy what you have that means the most to you, such as partners, children, parents, relatives, friends, and even foe! Live happy, and live free. The hardest thing to do in life is to break free from the shackles society binds you by. For every person, there is a role they feel compelled to fulfil, for many of us, there are even more. However, fear not, because not all is lost. Enjoy the pressures that come with these roles and leave a little time in your life to remember God and give thanks for what you have been blessed with. After that, go to your nearest off license and consume life's finest! Cheers.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment