The Myth of Bob Crow’s £145,000 salary

Andy McSmith

Bob Crow died not knowing how well off he was, to judge by today’s news. The Daily Telegraph opens its tribute to him with the words: “Bob Crow defended his £145,000 salary, insisting: ‘I am worth it.’ And so he was.” Yesterday’s Standard referred to his “£145,000 salary.” On the BBC website he is described as having “lived in a council house, despite earning £145,000 a year.” The same words are on page 13 of The Times. Even Reuters, normally so reliable, reported that he was on “an annual salary of 145,000 pounds ($241,200)”

No he wasn’t. His annual salary was around £96,000. The confusion arises because when the Certification Officer examines trade union accounts, he asks not what the General Secretary is paid, but what it costs to employ him. I can’t find the latest figures on line, but the 2012 figures are here. Scroll down to page 11, and you find that Bob Crow’s salary was then £89,805. With £10,313 employers’ national insurance, and £34,429 pension contributions, which came to an overall pay package of £134,547.

Bob Crow was well paid, but never had anything approaching a £145,000 salary.

  • gr_wgtn_j8

    What planet are you on? £34k a year paid (tax free) into your pension pot is far better than getting it in your salary. If this £34k was paid as salary he would have lost his personal allowance and paid 40% tax on all of it.

  • Voice of reason

    Bob Crow worked for, and was paid by, the members of the union he led. He did the job of representing them exceedingly well, and the organisation he led was successful in meeting its aims. This performance stands in stark contrast to that of the over-paid, and bonus rewarded members of the financial sector.

  • GaryMac09

    I think a 96k salary plus a 34k payment into a pension is DEFINITELY approaching 145k… it’s hardly minimum wage is it ?

    And what about that council house …?

  • limpopo89

    Whats to complain about? Bob Crow did a great job of representing his membership ,ensuring that they did not succumb to the bully boy tactics of modern management who would see the lower tiers live in relative poverty whilst being driven harder and harder to ensure that management get paid more and more for their “success”. I only wish he had been my Trades Union officer.

  • scampy1

    Huge amount for a fat semi literate drunk.

  • mardyman

    What an ignorant remark.

  • DeadReckoning

    But you have a choice of which bank you use, if any. You don’t have a choice of which underground system to use in London.

  • steve19999

    his salary may not have been £145k if you include employer’s NI, but that just reduces it by 11%. pension contributions made on his behalf are effectively pay. so his pay package wasn’t far off £145k. this article is therefore nonsense. i don’t know what the fuss is about, even if he was on a package of £135k, he was still cheap when you think of how he represented his members, whether you approve of his methods or not.

  • onthetreadmill

    Now you know how the GPs feel when the press report their income with exactly the same imbalances.

  • Pacificweather

    You don’t have a choice of a bank where the CEO earns no more than £145,000 but you do have choice not to live in London or to use the bus.

Most viewed



Property search
Browse by area

Latest from Independent journalists on Twitter