I noticed in the media this week that the new Governor-General, Quentin Bryce, is to be paid $394k when she takes up the post. This is for no more than meeting dignitaries, making speeches, shaking the hands of all and sundry and being the Commonwealth's official rubber stamp. She will also make more than the Prime Minister, who will be paid $330k.

Now this isn't bad work if you can get it. But hardly fair when many hard-working Australians are scraping through their life on the minimum wage. Even the Prime Minister gets less when he has to routinely take political heat as well as make often important and tough decisions in the national interest. We have a pyramid structure in our society, where those who already have the most and are at the top, have the easiest and most privileged lives. They hardly represent ordinary Australians.

In case people think I'm picking on the incoming GG because she's a woman, not so. I think exactly the same should have applied to the previous male ones (although I do seem to remember that Bill Deane was not getting paid anywhere near as much - does anyone know whether this is right?).

The Hollingsworth's, I believe, were rather arrogant and let the power and position get to their heads. Do we need/want this in a head of state? I think not.

RobP,

I think the high "tax-fee" salary reflects the statue of the Office, not the effort of the holder.

You've presented a good case, Rob.

I agree, at that figure, the GG is definitely being overpaid. A salary somewhere between that of an MP and the Prime Minister would be more appropriate.

It looks like a tedious and somewhat pompous job. But when it's done well, as in the case of Sir William Deane, it's a role that can lift a nation.

Regarding Sir William Deane's salary, I found this on the Parliamentary Library website

In 1996 the tax-free salary for his replacement, Sir William Deane, was increased by 42% to $135 000 (but then at his own instigation reduced to $58 000 to take account of his High Court pension).

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/Pubs/bd/2000-01/01BD165.htm

http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/RN/2003-04/04rn12.htm

The GG's salary, as from 2001, is no longer tax-free.

Yes... Is there much else to say?

Yes over paid and the sooner we have no need of one the better

Pay is very much in the eye of the beholder but yes from me - overpaid.

The role of GG is very much a ceremonial one for the most part and while there are probably many pressures on the GG's time, no more than a Prime Minister, or a surgeon or nurse in an understaffed hospital etc.

There are many anomalies like this. The value we place on certain roles over others. Salesmanship, marketing, PR and image skills often attract higher salaries than roles involving real 'hands on' or frontline work. Then there is the disparity between industries ie. IT and banking for example; and the issue of celebrity.

That begs the question on how do we value different types of work?

An egalitarian society would be one where the difference in the minimum wage and those at the top end would be smaller rather than larger while being balanced to retain incentives for hard work or greater time spent at work etc, however that might be defined.

We can see a huge problem with this creeping of salaries at the top end and the reduction in real wages for lower incomes after WorkChoices. The ensuing economic and social problems with that predicament are vast.