Other Citywire websites
Stay connected:

View the article online at http://citywire.co.uk/new-model-adviser/article/a494329

SFO chief: increase pay to help competition with other regulators

by Michelle McGagh on May 24, 2011 at 07:39

SFO chief: increase pay to help competition with other regulators

The head of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has called for salary increases of 50% to help the organisation compete with better-funded regulators for top class recruits.

Richard Alderman, director of the SFO, told the Financial Times: ‘I am concerned about the comparability of salaries for people who can move easily between the enforcers and the regulators, and there are different salary arrangements that cause me concern.

‘I do not want to see the very good people we have in this organisation disadvantaged.’

SFO staff are paid around half the salary of their counterparts in the Financial Services Authority (FSA), where staff are paid up to £140,000 a year. The FSA has 450 staff, compared to the SFO’s 300.

Alderman’s budget, which is paid for by the taxpayer, has been cut from £53 million in 2008 to £34 million this year.

11 comments so far. Why not have your say?

JonnieB666

May 24, 2011 at 08:48

well boo f*%king hoo!

report this

Sean Kelly

May 24, 2011 at 08:51

Maybe they should cut the salaries at the FSA then. Simples.

report this

Mal L

May 24, 2011 at 09:21

They want to recruit Fraud specialists then..................

report this

Gerry Cooper

May 24, 2011 at 09:23

Absolutely spot on Sean. Proof if it were needed, that FSA packages are ecessive and far too generous, and always have been.

report this

Anitaki

May 24, 2011 at 09:28

The biggest fraud is the amount of bonuses paid to state quangomeisters

report this

Richard Wilson

May 24, 2011 at 09:50

Sean, Gerry and Anitaki have said it all. FSA pay is really quite an embarrasment to say the least. They are paid far too much for the work that they do and to expect bonuses on top..........................well !!!!!

report this

Phil Castle

May 24, 2011 at 10:49

1. Cut FSA pay, do NOT increase SFO pay. It's like paying bribes to be honest. Whatever happened to a vocation?

2. Move as many staff as possible at the FSA and all the other organisations which do not need to be in London OUT of london to lower cost areas.

report this

Julian Stevens

May 24, 2011 at 11:12

Proof, if any was needed, that FSA salaries are far too high and that the Canary Wharf juggernaut is, in fact, a lovely gravy train for those fortunate enough to be invited aboard. But the government doesn't care a jot, because the FSA's huge salaries are paid not from the public purse but by us poor saps out here. A public sector quango (fsa.gov.uk) with private sector funding (pay up or pack up). That really is a good deal if you're in the club.

report this

chay

May 24, 2011 at 15:05

The SFO personel should pe paid the same as the average policeman. After all, they are only cops in suits. The FSA should be disbanded completely and the whole lot put out to grass. A spell on the dole would do them a whole lot of good. Might even bring them into the real world.

Think about it 450 multiplied by an average of about £100,000 equals?

report this

Phil Castle

May 24, 2011 at 15:18

I suspect SFO staff are paid a similar amount to a Policeman. To some extent you coudl argue that as the physical risk would be lower for SFO staff compared to Police, the pay should be lower. I would however argue that pay should reflect a combination of skills required and personal risk and hence they probably should be on a par. On this basis, FSA staff pay should be significantly BELOW that of a staff member of the SFO and/or the Police as the skills required for many junior staff will be lower than that of someone from the SFO and there is no risk premium required unlike for Police.

Mind you, the way the FSA is peeing off much of the public, they might need a risk premium soon! It is questionable who will be treated more like outlaws, the IFA who has had their rights under teh law removed (outlaw), or the FSA and it's staff who believe they have put themselves outside the reach of the law (outlaw).

report this

Compliance Officer

May 25, 2011 at 11:44

Can't have it both ways. FSA does have to compete for staff with institutions that pay significant salaries and bonuses (rightly or wrongly) if you want regulators who have some idea of what they are doing (and yes I know that will be seen as an oxymoron!)

report this

leave a comment

Please sign in here or register here to comment. It is free to register and only takes a minute or two.

News sponsored by:

Opportunities emerge as production moves back home


As the UK coalition government strives to rebalance the national economy, so called 'reshoring' looks set to play an increasingly important role in economic recovery.

Today's top headlines

A spotlight on Alastair Mundy


Alastair Mundy met Citywire's Daniel Grote at the London Stock Exchange Studios for a detailed interview about the Investec Cautious Managed fund.


Sorry, this link is not
quite ready yet