Watford Community Housing Trust bosses £400k salary pot criticised

Social housing bosses £400k salary pot criticised Social housing bosses £400k salary pot criticised

A former board member of Watford Community Housing Trust has called for it to cut the £430,000 it pays its four top earners, describing the figure as "absolutely ridiculous".

Chris Blackett, who was also the chair of the trust’s Gateway Committee, said tenants would be "appalled" learn of the amounts top trust figures were making while they faced rent increases and steep new service charges.

The trust has defended the salaries of its directors arguing they represent "exceptional value for money".

Diane Lee, the chair of the not-for-profit trust, also said its board had looked at the pay of its top team as part of its corporate structure review but were not proposing any changes.

Over the last few months employees at the trust have had to reapply for the jobs as it undertakes cost-saving restructure.

Costs are also set to rise for tenants, who were informed last year that new service charges were due to be phased in over five years from April.

The new charges cover communal services and which the trust says costs it £2.5million to fund, and could see tenants paying up to an extra £600 a year.

Mrs Blackett, of Haines Way, said: "I think tenants would be absolutely appalled if they knew £400,000 was being paid for four people. It is an absolutely ridiculous amount of money. It is only a small business.

"I think the tenants will be very interested in the remuneration of directors. With the service charges and the increases in rent and they are sitting there earning that amount of money - I think people will be appalled.

"I think if you are restructuring a business, if you are making cuts, you expect it to be across the board, whether it is the chief executive or the cleaner."

The trust’s accounts show that for the last financial year (April 2011 to March 2012) the top four earners at the trust made a total of £437,000.

Top of the pile was chief executive Tina Barnard whose total pay packet came to £131,000, including £107,000 basic pay, £8,000 in allowances and £16,000 pension contributions.

Next was Gareth Lewis, director of property and new business, whose total £110,000 pay comprised of £93,000 basic pay, £8,000 allowances and £9,000 pension contributions.

The third highest paid was the director of neighbourhood and housing services Ruairi McCourt, who earned £109,000, including £83,000 basic salary, £7,000 allowances and £9,000 in pension contributions.

The lowest paid was Julie Robinson, the trust’s director of resources, who earned £97,000 in total, including her £84,000 basic pay, £7,000 allowances and £6,000 pension contributions.

The trust’s accounts showed Miss Robinson took up the post in April 2011 and her predecessor, Rosemary Farrar earned a higher overall salary of £115,000 in the previous years.

The accounts also revealed that Mr Lewis’s and Mr McCourt’s overall pay went up by £21,000 and £8,000 respectively from the 2011- 10 financial year. Ms Barnard received an overall pay rise of £1,000 from the previous year.

Diane Lee, Chair of Watford Community Housing Trust, said: "The trust’s independent board and HR committee looked at all roles in the trust during our corporate structure review, including those of the executive management team. We are not proposing any changes to their roles or their remuneration.

"The executive management team are responsible for running the largest community business in Watford and Three Rivers, with responsibility for nearly 5000 homes, and their salaries are completely in line with other housing associations of the same size.

"Given their skills, expertise and level of responsibility they provide exceptional value for money."

Comments(17)

MarsLander says...
6:11pm Sun 10 Mar 13

I don't want their salaries in line with anything else, I want them to be paid correctly for what they do and to get value for money for the trust and residents.

I doubt these salaries meet those two basic requirements.

Hornets number 12 fan says...
10:54pm Sun 10 Mar 13

Nice to know that they are squeezing the last penny out of their tenants when they are paying themselves so much money! With all the welfare reforms I find this story REALLY distasteful!

Honest Rog says...
6:05am Mon 11 Mar 13

Another case of, those who are still able to, pulling up the ladder.
Notice how apologists for these overpaid suits always fall back on the old " market place" "paid for their expertise" excuses.
I find it obscene that one of these parasites, who apparently hasn't been there long, trousered £320 a week in pension provision alone!
We're all in this together! Oh no we're not. These people wouldn't know reality if it bit their *rse.

Hornets number 12 fan says...
10:07am Mon 11 Mar 13

Thats one hell of a chunk of our rent being paid to a very few people! Disgusting!

garston tony says...
10:09am Mon 11 Mar 13

Firstly these four individuals are not responsible for setting their own salary rates. As a former board member Mrs Blackett would have had a say in those rates in the past, something she doesnt mention I see.

As a former board member why did she not raise this issue at any point in the previous what 5 years since the WCHT came into being?

I also note that the newest of the four people they mentioned is being paid less than their predecessor indication that the WCHT is indeed when it can to reduce salaries paid. That is something difficult to do for many reasons to someone in post.

The Rover says...
12:13pm Mon 11 Mar 13

These salaries are by no means excessive. If you want the right person you have to pay the price.

How much does the Chief Executive of the Peace Hospice earn, or the Chief Executive of the NHS Trust, or our local MP and mayor?

The staff at the Housing Trust do not decide on their wages, this would likely have been the salary that was advertised when they applied for the position.

Wacko Jacko says...
4:13pm Mon 11 Mar 13

These salaries might not seem excessive in London, but Watford is a different market. They certainly look generous here. The question is do they give value? only residents and non executive Board members can properly judge, but if the Board is dominated by these four they can dictate what they pay themselves. It all looks inappropriate given the state of the economy and the recent increase in charges for residents

Veritas says...
4:21pm Mon 11 Mar 13

they are grossly overpaid,

the savings in salary should
go back in lower rent, otherwise they are no better
than a dodgy private landlord,
people are in these houses for that reason, cheap rent!!

this is ex council houses
ditched by Watford Council to be run by supposedly by a non-profit group, all savings should be recycled back into the trust, thats why the rents are meant to be affordable.
It is not meant to be an exercise in fat cat salaries!!

If it were a private landlord all profits would go to them, hense the higher rent, to give them more profit.

A "Charity" shop on the high st relies on unpaid or cheap
workers so the profits go to "Charity!
People would not be impressed with high wages and no money for Charity, as
they could give to a charity that has lower running costs.

£120,000 would more than pay for a few doctors and nurses, who work far longer hours than these executives
why so many?

Paul Gadd says...
4:33pm Mon 11 Mar 13

This organisation is not supposed to be of the blood-sucking City variety, at the whim of rich shareholders.....yet it is acting in exactly the same way.

Although portrayed as for the Community and not for profit...it is certainly profitable
for some more than others

number48 says...
8:22pm Mon 11 Mar 13

For some time now, it has been my opinion that those that sit around the top table were out of touch with reality. I now believe they simply don't care. To be paid those sums of money for doing so very little can only encourage a care free attitude to life.
It's a shame we can't all decide our next pay rise, oh how happy we would be. Instead we fear the next round of cuts, the next rent increase or another ill thought scheme such as forcing unwarrented service charges for sub standard services.
Way to go Tina!

Mohandas says...
8:58pm Mon 11 Mar 13

Honest Rog says it as it is 'We're all in this together! Oh no we're not.' Think how well Tony Blair is doing.

It's one of the oldest lies which is alive and well.

garston tony says...
10:18am Tue 12 Mar 13

Wacko Jacko wrote:
These salaries might not seem excessive in London, but Watford is a different market. They certainly look generous here. The question is do they give value? only residents and non executive Board members can properly judge, but if the Board is dominated by these four they can dictate what they pay themselves. It all looks inappropriate given the state of the economy and the recent increase in charges for residents
None of those people are on the board so therefore they have no say in what pay they get.

Five of the board including its chair are tenants or leaseholders, four are from other firms and or have expertise in the social housing area and one is a representative of WBC.

How please can the four directors who are employed by the board in the first place influence what pay they get. The fact the newest of the four is getting paid less than their predecessor shows that that isnt the case at all

garston tony says...
10:26am Tue 12 Mar 13

Chris Blackett, who is a tenant of WCHT, sat on the board from before it actually took over the housing stock from WBC. As such she has from the start had a say in the rates of pay for its directors, as have all the other tenants and leaseholders who have sat on the board from day one and who make up it seems roughly half of the board.

The fact that Mrs Blackett chooses to voice her opinion over a situation she has had a hand in creating sounds like sour grapes as she is now no longer on the board.

A quick google search shows that the rates being paid are not unlike those being paid in similar organisations accross the country.

And I wonder how many of those who made comments about those people doing very little for their money actually know what they do? I suspect from the very comments they made, they know practically nothing of what is involved

EU_OUT_NOW says...
1:54pm Tue 12 Mar 13

Do the (unpaid) tenant board actually have any influence over the WCHT or are they just there as a puppet front?

EU_OUT_NOW says...
2:02pm Tue 12 Mar 13

Does anyone know how much was paid for that "prime location" posh office building that the WCHT now occupy? I have always wondered, such a big jump from the back of the Town Hall

garston tony says...
9:35am Wed 13 Mar 13

EU_OUT_NOW wrote:
Do the (unpaid) tenant board actually have any influence over the WCHT or are they just there as a puppet front?
Its not a tenant board, its tenants ON the board

John Dowdle says...
10:26pm Sun 17 Mar 13

For comparative purposes: pay of the UK Prime Minister (David Cameron) is £142,000 (including £65,000 MP's salary). Do any of the WCHT execs have similar levels of responsibility?

click2find

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