Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

RTÉ admits paying Tubridy €345,000 more than declared

Options
1545546548550551848

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 18,657 ✭✭✭✭Strazdas


    If one assumes that *public" service broadcasting is absolutely essential in every western democracy (and it is), then the public are going to have to fund it somehow.

    Having no public service broadcasting at all would be very risky. You could eventually up with a load of Fox News or GB News type channels pumping out lies and misinformation and with nobody able to challenge them.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,187 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    Wow "Roaring alcoholic", that's straight out of valley of the squinting windows!



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,291 ✭✭✭evolvingtipperary101


    He's spoken about it himself in numerous interviews. He's built a comedy routine around it. In fact, he never shuts up about it. Is he squinting on himself?

    wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwooooooooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwww



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,187 ✭✭✭realdanbreen


    "I'm sure Kelly has plenty of dirt on him" But you're not sure are you. In fact you're just making that up aren't you. Why?



  • Registered Users Posts: 30,139 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Well I think there was a need -> should RT and NK want to continue in a working relationship with RTE.

    They should not have colluded with and kept quiet about such wrongdoing. And it is therefore entirely valid for such acts of commission and omission to have consequences to reputation and future business relationships.

    I would add their actions here have cost Tubridy the lucrative LLS gig and NK several clients. And that is just so fsr.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 819 ✭✭✭alzer100


    Look, I'm pretty convinced at this stage that Tubridy will be back at RTE doing his radio -whatever, it's really all about timing. If Forbes does appear on front of a PAC it's going to attract the same or even higher media attention as to what we have experienced over the past few weeks. RTE and Tubridy will want all of that to simmer down to some extent. I can't imagine RTE will want to put Tubridy on the air and then have to take him off again especially if Forbes were to throw a few curve balls. Again, I'm speculating here on the premise that Forbes WILL get better and WILL be called before a PAC. It could well be in RTE management's very best interests for Forbes to ride into the sunset. Backhurst wants to clean this up as quickly as possible with the least amount of complications and of course make himself look good.

    Post edited by alzer100 on


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,171 ✭✭✭limnam


    Think it was RTE yesterday were doing a vox box

    Most people on it seemed to think the blame laid with RTE and tubs should be restored to the radio.

    Maybe I'm naive. But I don't think it cost him the LLS. The same way he'll get back on the radio. He'd have gone back on the LLS.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,749 ✭✭✭sxt


    Tubridy is as untouchable as Al Capone



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,280 ✭✭✭ZookeeperDub


    if you knew the streets like I knew the streets

    not sure what you mean by "vox box", do you mean online poll?

    RTE doing a review to tell everyone that RTE is right to bring back Tubs is hardly a glowing reflection is it? after all after the disaster with Tubs in the PAC meeting RTE news played it that Tubs had a "draw" on the day because they couldn't admit he was a disaster.

    It was always on the cards from day 1 Tubs would be put back onto radio. After all RTE for years have been outbidding themselves to retain the services of Tubs with no other radio or TV channel after him.

    In reality if it was any other broadcaster in the World Tubs would be already gone. It wouldn't even be up for discussion, he would be let off and never to return.

    Yet this is RTE, the broadcaster that hires Doireann and Lottie etc. They would never sack Tubs and would never go up against Noel Kelly. Even if Tubs listeners went down to below 100k they would still keep him on. Look how long they are flogging to death 2FM



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,815 ✭✭✭Ahwell


    Ryan Tubridy is responsible for statements he makes in public. He lied about the extent of the pay cuts he took and bragged about how willing he was to take them in the future. He's still doing it now.

    "I've taken a pay cut before, I took over 30pc the last time and they've asked for more, which would bring it up to about 45pc or thereabouts since I took 'The Late Late Show' and when it comes to this sort of issue that's not something I've been found wanting in, and that continues to be the case."

    That's on him. nobody else. This kind of thing does not go down well with the public. Kevin Bakhurst will be the one deciding if he comes back, but it will be the public who decides if he stays there. It quite conceivable that people will just stop tuning into his radio show. It happened to him before, when he lost 40% of Gerry Ryan's audience. RTE won't just leave him there for five years this time though.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 9,171 ✭✭✭limnam


    Could have been newstalk. Can't remember.

    anyway peopel in the public been asked they're opinion on the situation. The vast majority felt RTE were at fault and RT was "grand"

    I'm not trying to use it as a scientific study on the state of the nation regarding RT. I was just surprised with the responses.

    The general feeling on this thread for the last number of weeks is that RT would never see an RTE studio again and would find it very hard to get work anywhere. So I don't know why you would suggest it's always been on the cards he would return. I was fairly doubtful earlier in the case myself.

    You're probably right if it was another broadcaster as they wouldn't admit they themselves were at fault and would throw someone under the bus.

    It's good to see the national broadcaster take thier wrong doings on the chin as they seem to be starting to admit they're pretty much mostly at fault here.

    Makes a change.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,171 ✭✭✭limnam


    Since he started the LLS he's taken 40%

    When the 20% cuts were introduced his base salary for the contracted work of radio and TV he took that cut also.

    The work he did for renault. Which was EXTRA work that he was paid for. I take it you don't work yourself for free?

    Neither would I.

    I've no problem with that at all.

    What I do have a problem with is RTE falsifying the income statements and paying out that money in an underhanded manner.

    RTE at fault for that also.



  • Registered Users Posts: 16,479 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    Is he insinuating the wholesome Tubbers is our very own Huw Edwards?😝



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,815 ✭✭✭Ahwell


    It doesn't matter if you don't have a problem with it, Kevin Bakhurst does...

    "The new director general of RTÉ Kevin Bakhurst has said that he doesn’t “see the logic” in the assertion from Ryan Tubridy and his agent Noel Kelly that payments made to him tied to a Renault deal are separate from his RTÉ pay.

    Mr Bakhurst said that because RTÉ paid Tubridy the €150,000 agreed in a ‘tri-partite deal’ with Renault, it “should be seen as part of his pay package” from the national broadcaster."

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-rte-boss-kevin-bakhurst-contradicts-ryan-tubridys-claims-that-renault-payments-are-separate-contract/a763618732.html



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,171 ✭✭✭limnam


    Great.

    If that's the case RTE should have declared it in his earnings then :)

    Then the issue wouldn't have arrived in the first place.

    Hopefully Kevin will be a transparent DG.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,815 ✭✭✭Ahwell


    And Tubridy shouldn't of been making misleading public statements about the extent of the pay cuts he took,



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,280 ✭✭✭ZookeeperDub


    The general feeling was RTE wouldn't take back Tubs because of the mess. But the general feeling I would say now is that no matter what the public want RTE will still bring him back. Plus they will have Noel Kelly and everyone else, brush this under the carpet and move onto trying to get the tv license automatically taken.

    They haven't taken anything on the chin. They have lied for weeks and weeks. Just look at the legal person brought in this week who didn't know the PAC wanted email and didn't know about that.

    if you go back over the history you will see years ago procurement went into PAC saying they had issues with procurement and people do things outside of their control, but don't worry government we are shutting all that dodgy business down and implementing a new system to stop any dodgy deals. Sound familiar?



  • Registered Users Posts: 18,480 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    You are going over old ground because you tried this exact same argument previously, it was explained to you why Tubridy has culpability, it was asked and answered and yet here you are pretending none of that happened.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,317 ✭✭✭gameoverdude


    He shouldn't be consulting with staff unless they're senior management (I know).

    Can you imagine, alright nacho, what do you think as an it manager, sound engineer, business analyst...should we bring rt back? Yep? Done!



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,171 ✭✭✭limnam


    If RTE didn't put the renault contract into his base contract then his income was as it's stated.

    The renault gigs were not contracted as part of that base figure.

    The work he did was outside what he was contracted for.

    EXTRA work.

    The base contract that the earnings were listed for were hit by the 20% pay cut.

    So while Kevin doesn't understand it or is not happy with it. I assume Kevin also doesn't work for free

    Kevin can't have it both ways. If he was doing EXTRA commercial work outside of the RTE contract then it's not part of the base and hit with the cut.

    If it was in the base it should have been stated so, paid out like that. Then RT wouldn't have been able to make any statement false or otherwise



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,317 ✭✭✭gameoverdude


    Hey NK. Here's my bic and Iban...that's where its going.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,171 ✭✭✭limnam




  • Registered Users Posts: 18,480 ✭✭✭✭bucketybuck


    No matter what I say, I suspect you would still come back here in a week and say "I don't see the problem".



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,171 ✭✭✭limnam




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,815 ✭✭✭Ahwell


    In Tubridy's second statement he admitted knowing the figures published for his salary was incorrect. They were incorrect because the Renault payments were not included. If they were included it would of shown that he had not, in fact, taken the pay cuts he was claiming to have taken.



  • Registered Users Posts: 9,171 ✭✭✭limnam


    I thought he said that he should have looked for clarification on them.

    But either way we're at the same point.

    The base was hit with the pay cut.

    The work for renault was a commercial agreement outside of the contract

    his contract was for radio and LLS.

    His base contract has nothing to do with commercial work done with Renault.

    If it does. Why was not stated by RTE on the income statement? RTE at fault.

    If it's not. it's extra work outside contract = salary statement correct and includes cut.

    As I Said. Kevin can't have it both ways/ It's one or the other.

    What should have happened here is simple.

    NK goes to RTE. Tells them to shove thier contract up thier jaxy. His client wants X/Y/Z

    RTE tell RT and NK to go fck themselves. OR go to the business with a business case for tubs and pay him what BK wants

    Then RTE publish the correct income. Everyones happy

    At every step of this. RTE is to blame.



  • Registered Users Posts: 21,444 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    RT very foolish to stick so close to NK. Maybe he had no choice?? Really had vibes of 'Thank you Mr. Eastwood' about it.

    Backhurst obviously prizing him away.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,815 ✭✭✭Ahwell


    No, he didn't just say he should have looked for clarification on them, he said...

    "when my earnings were published I should have asked questions at the time and sought answers as to the circumstances which resulted in incorrect figures being published."

    He knew his "salary" was incorrectly reported and by extension he would of known the claims he was making about the extent of the pay cuts was also incorrect.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,280 ✭✭✭ZookeeperDub


    No. Tubs said at the hearing he seen the number, knew that they were wrong. Did nothing about them.

    HIs kind of excuse was he asked for them before they went public so he could make sure the correct ones got given to the public.

    But once he seen the incorrect one was given out he done nothing to change them.

    Not sure what you have been watching for the past few weeks but all of this discussed to death and covered already. At every step RTE and NK/Tubs are to blame to update.

    Of course it was a magical coincidence that his payments outside of the contract was the same as his reduction. THe money he said he would pay back if anyone asked him, safe in the knowledge that nobody can ask him. That's the innocent Tubs

    If he wasn't just a money grabber he would have given the money back already, or donated to charity. but not our Tubs



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,763 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    Yes, I think you're right, it suits all sides for Forbes not to appear before the committee.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement