[ViridianFan]

Maybe I’ve read the article wrong, but it’s not a good look when you have a whistle blower actually saying they had a tap on the shoulder to say they’d secure one of the posts and that Maitland has effectively dismissed this.  

Surely in a situation like this you’d want someone from outside of the organisation, something they normally seem only too happy. Then you have a whistle blower saying this happen but that someone from bbc studio hr dept say it doesn’t it’ starts to make you think there is some truth and it’s why someone out side of the organisation wasn’t asked because they knew it. And yes these things happen. A place I worked did effectively the same thing. A complaint went in and the academy chain investigated and said it never did despite them being part of the whole thing.

[qwerty123]

It doesn't seem especially difficult. Either they'll be appointed as presenter-reporters (with salary raised for others, which'll likely be less than £100k, so meaningless in budgetary terms), they'll create a staff presenter role (there is clearly already a third option (Bundock), but they can also claim they need to revise initial plans for the channel), or they'll be made redundant (will cost a bit, but a drop in the ocean of wider BBC News redundancies).

They won't be promoted to chief presenters, as the BBC has found they were not unlawfully denied the positions and therefore will not be compelled to give them salary-doubling roles or compensation. As ever, the concern over the budgetary impact of presenter salaries is overdone - giving the few already appointed presenter-reporters a few extra k is basically a rounding error in financial terms and likely offset by a reduction in freelance expenditure.

I think Bundock appearing to be outside of the process is more due to historical differences rather than her being an example of a genuine 3rd option. It seems likely that Bundock (and Victoria Valentine) never held the position of lead news presenter even prior to the merger but instead held a different position with elements of News and Business that was never put at risk due to the slot essentially having been left untouched by the merger and therefore the slot remained outside of the consultation process in its entirety. This being the case would be backed up by the fact that this slot only seems to be presented by those attached to the business unit or those who are known to be freelance and is never presented by staff presenters or the currently appointed presenter reporters.

[DTV]

I think Bundock appearing to be outside of the process is more due to historical differences rather than her being an example of a genuine 3rd option. It seems likely that Bundock (and Victoria Valentine) never held the position of lead news presenter even prior to the merger but instead held a different position with elements of News and Business that was never put at risk due to the slot essentially having been left untouched by the merger and therefore the slot remained outside of the consultation process in its entirety. This being the case would be backed up by the fact that this slot only seems to be presented by those attached to the business unit or those who are known to be freelance and is never presented by staff presenters or the currently appointed presenter reporters.

Yes, this is almost certainly the case. But the point is there are clearly more than two pay grades for presenters who appear on the channel, there's nothing to prevent the BBC creating an extra category of staff presenters on that intermediate level (if they wanted to go down that route) - the rigidity of chief presenters vs presenter-reporters isn't set in stone.

[House]

They won't be promoted to chief presenters, 

They already are chief presenters - it wouldn’t be a promotion. Being taken off air won’t have changed their employment contracts. If the five presenters decline to accept an alternative position (especially a demotion), the BBC will either have to keep them on their current terms or make them redundant.

[DTV]

They already are chief presenters - it wouldn’t be a promotion.

None of them were on the top pay grade for either BBC World News or BBC News channel presenters pre-merger, with none even earning enough to feature on the BBC's pay disclosure list. Even if they were given the title during the BBC's weird 'everybody's a chief presenter' phase, that wouldn't be indicative of being in line with the current position - which is substantively different to the roles that the sidelined five presenters had pre-merger. You're right that the BBC will have to keep them on their current terms or make them redundant, but their 'current' terms just aren't anything like that of the actual chief presenters - not in terms of pay, seniority or work schedule.

[all new phil]

I went through a similar process a few years ago. The options are you either take the new role including the new terms, or you take redundancy. I would assume staying on previous terms is not an option, and likely what the hold up is.

I would guess the recent ruling was what has been holding things up - one (or more) of the five will have put in a grievance, which will have paused the process.

I imagine we’ll see a resolution soon.

[Stuart]

This afternoon we were delighted to yet another failed junction. Matthew Unspellable thought he was throwing to a break/weather forecast or a set of promotional trailers. Instead we were treated to hearing him clicking his mouse and also staring at his monitor for 2 minutes.

Then he suddenly looked up and said "Welcome back to BBC News live from London". Bless, we'd never left you!

[interestednovice]

This afternoon we were delighted to yet another failed junction. Matthew Unspellable thought he was throwing to a break/weather forecast or a set of promotional trailers. Instead we were treated to hearing him clicking his mouse and also staring at his monitor for 2 minutes.

Then he suddenly looked up and said "Welcome back to BBC News live from London". Bless, we'd never left you!

Matthew Amroliwala, lol.

Oh dear, it sounds like a pretty awkward error there - but then again, Across the UK filler is almost as awkward anyway.

[Rolling News]

m.youtube.com 

[Brekkie]

Have they continued without the usual weekend filler today?