5 ms·
Deloitte Australia CEO tells Senate committee his work not worth $3.5mAUD salary
- stuartjohnson12 3y agoHe said his work isn't worth 7x that of the prime minister, not that his work isn't worth 3.5m.
- robertlagrant 3y ago"How to get a Deloitte executive to shill for your pay rise".
- re-thc 3y agoMaybe he thinks he's worth more than 7x.
- hammock 3y agoThe comparison gets interesting in Australia (as opposed to say the US), since Australia’s neighbor Singapore pays its prime minister $2 million a year. The average Singapore government official makes $10,000 a month. Singapore has a unique philosophy when it comes to civil servant pay
- kfk 3y agoAnyone understands why the Australian senators are attacking Deloitte's executive compensations instead of the government leadership that signed the pricey contracts with consulting suppliers in the first place?
- boobsbr 3y agoTo shift the blame from Government to 'evil capitalists'.
- Maxious 3y agoLabor senators. With the 2015 introduction of the Average Staffing Level cap, the shrinking of big government (read: selling off everything that wasn't bolted down) was wild. This was always part of their platform to reverse that trend and Robodebt/ATO leaks handed them a free kick https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-19/promise-check-abolish-average-staffing-level-cap/101791444 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-19/promise-check-abolish...
- akdor1154 3y agoThey are doing both, the current left leaning government is examining both the firms, and their utilisation by the government (in practice, the previous conservative government) . For example, see https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-06/public-service-audit-reveals-21-billion-consultant-bill/102312730 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-06/public-service-audit-...
- Grimburger 3y agoIt's questionable whether bringing the cost in-house will be cheaper. Australian public servants come with a very large price tag that not even our sovereign wealth fund can handle. Like a good CEO for the big 4 consulting firms that no one else can compete with he wants all the good PR he can get right now, but the question still remains whether paying this man egregious amounts of money is more expensive than paying some boffins in Canberra to do the same job.
- ggm 3y agoNo way will this be as expensive in house.
- re-thc 3y ago> No way will this be as expensive in house. Hard to tell. Relatively easy to get rid of consultants and contractors. A lot harder to get rid of permanent staff even if they don't perform well. This means you may need 2-3x the headcount in comparison. You save some. You lose some.
- batiudrami 3y agoThe government mostly hires staff on 3 year contracts anyway. Not much different to a 2 year consultancy contract, except the hourly rate is 3x as much.
- red-iron-pine 3y agoI got friends in KPMG and they bill on the order of 900/hr per team. I have little doubt the consultants work harder -- they bloody well better -- but if that's 2x or 3x the regular hires is absolutely up for debate. I'd argue probably not. And it leaves out the main point: most of these consultants are blame shields for officials -- "we moved to technology X because Bain & Deloitte told us to". But when you look at the numbers, the spreasheets don't add up, and it's clear that a VP decided this was the course and needed ammo to back it up.
- getmeinrn 3y agoYeah, I would much rather live in a world where some disconnected busybody goes around assigning salaries to everyone based on $CURRENT_SOCIAL_TREND, than to have wealthy people who feel guilty about their earnings. /s
- quickthrower2 3y agoThey are indeed barking up the wrong tree. Rather than asking what Deloitte pays this guy, they need to be asking what the government pays Deloitte and for what?
- jmyeet 3y agoThe rising class consciousness I've seen this year has really warmed my cockles. One thing I've realized is very few people actually know what capitalism is but they sure as hell will defend it. Capitalism is simply the economic system for the extraction of wealth from the poor to the wealthy where once it was from the poor to the monarch and the artistocratic class (ie feudalism). That's it. Someone will be tempted to pipe up with something about "free markets". Markets are commerce. They happen in every economic system. So you see a lot of people flounder in this area in a way that is curable with the barest introduction to Marxism, specifically the labor theory of value [1]. So profiteering off government contracts is nothing more than the extraction of wealth from the poor to the rich via the government. Yet you'll find many who say we're simply not doing enough capitalism. This is also why culture war issues are manufactured: to stop the development of class consciousnes and solidarity. It is an intentional distraction so you won't pay attention to the wealth transfer going on through tax cuts, deregulation and, of course, government contracts. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value
- smitty1e 3y ago> Capitalism is simply the economic system for the extraction of wealth from the poor to the wealthy where once it was from the poor to the monarch and the artistocratic class (ie feudalism). That's it. Someone will be tempted to pipe up with something about "free markets". Markets are commerce. They happen in every economic system. Capitalism is buyer, seller, marketplace, and sufficient regulation to prevent sellers from buying the marketplace. Materialism, not captialism, leads to the class distinctions that the Marxists fetish (as they boost themselves into aristocracy while shrilly claiming to give a French frigate's fo'c's'le about the workers). The proper remedy for the excesses of capitalism is ensuring competition in the marketplace, to stabilize the system.
- gaganyaan 3y agoNo: > The meaning "political/economic system which encourages capitalists" is recorded from 1872 and originally was used disparagingly by socialists. https://www.etymonline.com/word/capitalism https://www.etymonline.com/word/capitalism
- listenallyall 3y agoWith all due respect, if he goes up there, kisses the ring and successfully says whatever needs to be said to save a $712 million dollar government contract, he's worth a lot more than $3 million.
- klyrs 3y agoIs that true? I really don't see what special talent he's got that wouldn't be easy to replace for pennies on the dollar. What he has, that the rest of us don't, is the opportunity to stick his hand into a $712M cookie jar.
- blurrybird 3y agoProven experience doing exactly that, time and time again, affords you the opportunity to do it at the highest levels for the greatest rewards.
- klyrs 3y agoI know, right? He's repeatedly shown the ability to stick his hand in the cookie jar, that definitely means he's qualified to have a cookie.
- LatteLazy 3y agoThe one part of being a CEO I could never do would be sitting through this bullshit without speaking my mind.
- chii 3y agoAnd that's why you're not paid $3.5mil salary.
- cuttysnark 3y agoThe best CEOs avoid sitting in chairs such as those chairs specifically. If you're sat there on behalf of your company, suit and tie, starting every sentence with "Senator, I.."—you have somehow messed up, big time.
- red-iron-pine 3y agoin that case, robot up
- foogazi 3y agoAnyone else feel that way too? Impostor syndrome is real