13-10-2023, 10:54 PM
(13-10-2023, 08:37 PM)DTV Wrote: 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.