A senior BBC executive who was exposed by The Times trying to hide the number of staff earning more than £100,000 has resigned.
Robert Johnston, who as reward director has been paid almost £200,000 a year, asked staff responsible for releasing salary data to “deliberately disguise” the number of managers on six-figure salaries.
Mr Johnston, 53, issued an apology after his e-mail was published in April. He then faced further embarrassment last month when MPs on the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee demanded to know why Mark Thompson, the Director-General, had kept him in his post.
In an e-mail to staff last night, Lucy Adams, the BBC’s human resources chief, said that Mr Johnston — whose pay package is worth £196,550 — “has decided it is time to move to a less high-profile and demanding role. He will leave at the end of this week.”
While the BBC is committed to reducing senior manager numbers by 20 per cent, Mr Johnston’s post will remain. Rachel Currie, who is currently paid £161,783 as human resources director for journalism and employee relations, will take the post.
Mr Johnston is understood to have become uncomfortable with the attention he received after the revelation. His comments came at a sensitive time for the BBC, which has been trying to demonstrate its commitment to transparency over pay.
During a stormy meeting of the Commons committee last month, John Whittingdale, its chairman, described Mr Johnston’s actions as “absolutely outrageous”.
Mr Thompson told the committee: “The suggestion in the e-mail was not adopted and I would not defend what was said.
“It was made quite clear to the individual involved it was totally unacceptable. The proposal should not have been made, the proposal was rejected.”
Mr Johnston’s e-mail referred to plans to publish figures for high-earners in salary bands of £30,000. Mr Johnston and Phil Austin, a “reward manager”, suggested to the BBC’s direction group — the board responsible for the day-to-day running of the corporation — that staff paid between £80,000 and £110,000 should be banded together.
Mr Austin wrote: “We purposely changed the bands in attempt to make it less obvious how many of the employees were above £100k, there are quite a few that fall between £100k and £110k but if they sit in an £80k to £110k band it’s not so clear how many of them there are!” When staff queried the decision, Mr Johnston said: “We are sticking to the salary bands ... to deliberately disguise the number in the over £100k band.”
