But Prime Minister who lied to Queen and Country gets to stay on and take several taxpayer funded holidays…
>In their ruling, the judges pointed out that “Andrewes did a good job as chief executive and was regularly appraised as either strong or outstanding”.
Does make me wonder what the fuck his job entailed if a builder with no qualifications could perform “outstandingly” at it for 100k a year
The job doesn’t always need a degree.
The guy did the job outstandingly for over a decade. Yet had he applied with his real CV, it’d have been binned by HR.
Sue him for fraud maybe, but if he did the job well he earned that money.
Shows that all the talk about needing huge salaries to attract top talent is bullshit.
Just needs someone with a bit of confidence and organisational skills.
You would think they did the checks before he was offered the job not when applying for retirement.
Still a show of unqualified doing the job well I guess.
Fake it till you make it.. right? Right?
Right so by their own records he did a good job Being classified as a strong leader. Why the fuck is he having to pay it back ? He did the job and did it well by their account.
Odd that the Supreme Court overturned the decision about paying anything back. He literally Did The Job.
Ian Duncan Smith lied about having a degree and he’s now a Lord, ffs.
How much should Farage Bojo Gove etc repay the country?
Seems to me it didn’t seem to matter whether he was qualified or not, he still did the job. I mean, fire him for dishonesty, sure, but I’m not sure taking the money back is appropriate or, dare I say it, fair.
There might be more in the article to defend the standpoint that he deserved to lose his salary but I’ll be fucked if I’m paying to read an article in the Times
I think this is probably a sensible judgment. It’s very funny that this guy exposed just how overpaid these executives are, but ultimately you do have to discourage people from trying the same thing, because it won’t always end so well, and one day some idiot could lie their way into a job they’re legitimately not qualified for and end up doing serious harm (yes yes, Boris Johnson, harharhar). You can argue it’s possible for qualified people to screw up just as badly too, but at least in that case their employers were making a fully informed choice rather than being defrauded.
Jockey who got top health job and fucked it up not required to pay back anything.
Interviews are supposed to screen for this kind of stuff.
Lol, surely the issue here is poor vetting. Lots of people lie on their CV. It’s up to the employer to actually check. Either way if he could do the job to at least a satisfactory degree then let it be
How many billions was it to develop the track and trace app again? Can we get that back? Could have developed half life 3 with that money, or even buy a major stake in valve itself……
if he did the job well he deserves the pay
we should be able to sue Boris for ushering in our next recession, clearly wasn’t qualified to run the nation and proved it to the world
Fair play to him
My MP lied on his CV to get elected. Can we have our money back from him too?
The fact he was able to run it for 10 years and *ran it well* speaks more to how little work is needed in the executive class compared to other areas for a business to actually function well.
I’m willing to bet money they’re pissed off because it shows the rest of them up, not because he lied.
He’d have been fine if he knew the right government minister and gave a legal bribe or 2.
If only he knew a Tory…
It’s not like the Tories to ask for their money back, they gave away millions on PPA that never appeared.
Fake it till you make it
Gets paid over a million has to pay 96k back
So he’s given the job, received positive performance reviews and it’s now not ok because someone didn’t bother doing adequate background checks? Sounds like he needs to be heading up the ladder because clearly he’s more competent than many others in the organisation.
Bank the money, live 2 year (he will get 14 months max) and enjoy the comforts of Prison doesn’t seem to be a bad gig.
I think as a country we need to have a serious look about what qualifications actually mean and what they’re worth. We’ve undervalued vocational qualifications and industry experience for far too long.
I’m slightly worried about the calibre of the other applicants if this guy could out talk them on NHS trust issues and strategies
I’m sorry but I fail to see why he’s having to pay back the money. i could understand if he was doing a position which relied upon professional qualifications like medicine or law but a cursory background check should have found these lies at interview or offer stage. if he’s been doing the job, why do they care whether he’s got a degree? What are the damages he has caused? Did a bad job and cost the company money?? No… ugh
Tricky because you don’t want to devalue the titles by allowing people to fraudulently adopt them, but equally the salaries should have been for the role and work required and if he was doing the job correctly and well for 13 years… like he should be fined for fraudulently adopting the titles, not for obtaining a salary fraudulently imo because a salary is (or should be) for work completed, and it sounds like he did the work?
Did a good job, deserves good pay. Pulled himself up by his bootstraps!
While it was a shitty move on his behalf, it seems like he did very little damage.
The only damage I can see is that he possibly displaced an honest person who might have done a better job. What he did was unfair.
But, if someone with no direct qualification can do the job, and do it well, then it sounds like the job is suited for someone with natural talent rather than the degrees and training from the “right” university.
This is extreme – it sets a precedent that anyone who embellishes their CV can be forced to lose their earned wages.
If he was able to show he was good enough for the job, then the employer made that decision and should own up to it.
But as usual, employers have all the optionality.
“including PhDs” Just google, every PHD is published
36 comments
Bypass paywall link:
https://archive.ph/qAdWm
But Prime Minister who lied to Queen and Country gets to stay on and take several taxpayer funded holidays…
>In their ruling, the judges pointed out that “Andrewes did a good job as chief executive and was regularly appraised as either strong or outstanding”.
Does make me wonder what the fuck his job entailed if a builder with no qualifications could perform “outstandingly” at it for 100k a year
The job doesn’t always need a degree.
The guy did the job outstandingly for over a decade. Yet had he applied with his real CV, it’d have been binned by HR.
Sue him for fraud maybe, but if he did the job well he earned that money.
Shows that all the talk about needing huge salaries to attract top talent is bullshit.
Just needs someone with a bit of confidence and organisational skills.
You would think they did the checks before he was offered the job not when applying for retirement.
Still a show of unqualified doing the job well I guess.
Fake it till you make it.. right? Right?
Right so by their own records he did a good job Being classified as a strong leader. Why the fuck is he having to pay it back ? He did the job and did it well by their account.
Odd that the Supreme Court overturned the decision about paying anything back. He literally Did The Job.
Ian Duncan Smith lied about having a degree and he’s now a Lord, ffs.
How much should Farage Bojo Gove etc repay the country?
[*R v Andrewes*](https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2022/24.html) [2022] UKSC 24 – full judgment. The press summary is [here](https://www.supremecourt.uk/press-summary/uksc-2020-0166.html). [More information.](https://www.supremecourt.uk/press-summary/uksc-2020-0166.html)
Seems to me it didn’t seem to matter whether he was qualified or not, he still did the job. I mean, fire him for dishonesty, sure, but I’m not sure taking the money back is appropriate or, dare I say it, fair.
There might be more in the article to defend the standpoint that he deserved to lose his salary but I’ll be fucked if I’m paying to read an article in the Times
I think this is probably a sensible judgment. It’s very funny that this guy exposed just how overpaid these executives are, but ultimately you do have to discourage people from trying the same thing, because it won’t always end so well, and one day some idiot could lie their way into a job they’re legitimately not qualified for and end up doing serious harm (yes yes, Boris Johnson, harharhar). You can argue it’s possible for qualified people to screw up just as badly too, but at least in that case their employers were making a fully informed choice rather than being defrauded.
Jockey who got top health job and fucked it up not required to pay back anything.
Interviews are supposed to screen for this kind of stuff.
Lol, surely the issue here is poor vetting. Lots of people lie on their CV. It’s up to the employer to actually check. Either way if he could do the job to at least a satisfactory degree then let it be
How many billions was it to develop the track and trace app again? Can we get that back? Could have developed half life 3 with that money, or even buy a major stake in valve itself……
if he did the job well he deserves the pay
we should be able to sue Boris for ushering in our next recession, clearly wasn’t qualified to run the nation and proved it to the world
Fair play to him
My MP lied on his CV to get elected. Can we have our money back from him too?
The fact he was able to run it for 10 years and *ran it well* speaks more to how little work is needed in the executive class compared to other areas for a business to actually function well.
I’m willing to bet money they’re pissed off because it shows the rest of them up, not because he lied.
He’d have been fine if he knew the right government minister and gave a legal bribe or 2.
If only he knew a Tory…
It’s not like the Tories to ask for their money back, they gave away millions on PPA that never appeared.
Fake it till you make it
Gets paid over a million has to pay 96k back
So he’s given the job, received positive performance reviews and it’s now not ok because someone didn’t bother doing adequate background checks? Sounds like he needs to be heading up the ladder because clearly he’s more competent than many others in the organisation.
Bank the money, live 2 year (he will get 14 months max) and enjoy the comforts of Prison doesn’t seem to be a bad gig.
I think as a country we need to have a serious look about what qualifications actually mean and what they’re worth. We’ve undervalued vocational qualifications and industry experience for far too long.
I’m slightly worried about the calibre of the other applicants if this guy could out talk them on NHS trust issues and strategies
I’m sorry but I fail to see why he’s having to pay back the money. i could understand if he was doing a position which relied upon professional qualifications like medicine or law but a cursory background check should have found these lies at interview or offer stage. if he’s been doing the job, why do they care whether he’s got a degree? What are the damages he has caused? Did a bad job and cost the company money?? No… ugh
Tricky because you don’t want to devalue the titles by allowing people to fraudulently adopt them, but equally the salaries should have been for the role and work required and if he was doing the job correctly and well for 13 years… like he should be fined for fraudulently adopting the titles, not for obtaining a salary fraudulently imo because a salary is (or should be) for work completed, and it sounds like he did the work?
Did a good job, deserves good pay. Pulled himself up by his bootstraps!
While it was a shitty move on his behalf, it seems like he did very little damage.
The only damage I can see is that he possibly displaced an honest person who might have done a better job. What he did was unfair.
But, if someone with no direct qualification can do the job, and do it well, then it sounds like the job is suited for someone with natural talent rather than the degrees and training from the “right” university.
This is extreme – it sets a precedent that anyone who embellishes their CV can be forced to lose their earned wages.
If he was able to show he was good enough for the job, then the employer made that decision and should own up to it.
But as usual, employers have all the optionality.
“including PhDs” Just google, every PHD is published