Alex Jones ( The One Show)

I don’t think many workplaces would let you work with the pram beside you these days paddyann I would give anything for my DD to be able to stay at home with her baby but sadly the end is drawing near and she will be forced to return and there is nothing we can do about it .

I agree Greciangirl it’s not about money, it’s about staying in the spotlight .

I don’t buy or read these lifestyle / self help books that are cropping up regularly . Written by so called celebrities who fancy themselves as psychotherapists Anniebach so if it is that kind of book then I will give it a wide berth .

Alex Jones just wants to stay in the spotlight.

She didn’t need to return to work so soon after the baby.

Holly willoughby is another one.
She is rarely of the t,v,

They are both fame hungry.

Also, they are not the main breadwinners. I could understand if they were and the need to get back to work.
So yes, I think she is being greedy.

I also agree with GoldenAge

I agree with GoldenAge.

I can't believe that in this day and age women are actually debating this issue - would anybody be asking this question if it were a man rather than a woman?

I loved my job ,I loved my babies too and I wouldn't have let one interfere with the other.That why I was back in my office 8 days after giving birth to my daughter ...with her in her pram by my side.
I was a bit longer with my son as he was very premature and his first 3 months were spent in special care with me at his side.He did come to work with me though when it was right for him.And me .
It doesn't HAVE to be one or the other,whats right for me ...or Alex Jones doesn't have to be how you play things .I daresay she thinks the same about SAHM's.

You don’t have to buy or read the book gilly.

Oh god not another one who’s turned herself into an author . What kind of book is it ? Self help, advice to yummy mummy’s ?

Alex Jones is by no means underpaid (Shame on her for suggesting she is) . Her co-presenter does far more on TV than she does, do probably should get more, although not anywhere near as much as he does. This is tax payers money after all.

When most of us had our babies we didn’t have much of a choice.
No childminders or nurseries where we lived. No concessions for mother’s at work.
I think it is so difficult for Mother’s today, they seem to have it all but they don’t really do they? I’m sure many of them would love to stay at home with their baby.
I would hope that Alex spends a lot of time with her baby and has got excellent care in place. Maybe the nanny and baby were in the “green room” while she was on loose women!

I expect if you have a high profile job that is well paid and that you enjoy very much, it is understandable that you wouldn't want to risk not being able to get a similar position if you take a long break to be with your children.

Personally, I would have been quite happy to stay at home but that was because I loathed my job and only did it because it was a financial necessity. If I had been doing a job I loved, I expect I would have felt differently.

I believe the commercial TV stations pay a lot more than the BBC. I don't understand why certain people in media and sport are criticised for the money they are paid - eg footballers and TV presenters - when people seem much more accepting of others who are paid astronomical amounts.

I don't understand it either. I've never been well-off, but when my eldest son was born, my husband and I decided I'd stay at home whilst he worked (overtime, weekends as well, to earn a decent wage). Our 2nd son was born 3 years later, and we had a mortgage by then (100% council one). That son had severe Asthma, was in and out of hospital many times. I had a few temporary evening jobs when my husband was in from work, but I didn't work full-time until my boys were 18 and 15! We never had a babysitter even once. It was a real struggle, financially, but it suited us to do that.

If your boss offered you £400k salary would you say "no go and share it among the lower paid workers"
No I wouldn't either ..it's not her or anyone else's fault they get offered stupid amounts but I don't blame them one bit for snatching their hands off because the industry is so fickle they could be on the scrapheap next week.
Hasten to add that a lot of them belong there too.

overpays

Well, that's another question altogether and well worth pursuing.

Perhaps the BBC overlpays presenters.

You're worth as much as someone is willing to pay you.

Like houses - worth as much as someone is willing to pay.

It is not my decision to make.

Is Alex Jones really worth ten times as much as a doctor, nurse, architect, engineer, teacher, firefighter or policeman?

No!
You kwim varian!
Your post

Are you assuming that poor underpaid Alex Jones is envious of her colleague?

Envy is one of the seven deadly sins.
I know a lot of people who are very well qualified, work long ours in a demanding job and still earn less than £40k?

Presumably they all had the chance to apply for that job.

Alex Jones, 40, fronts the BBC show with the former Blue Peter presenter who takes home up to £50,000 more than her each year. She weighed in on the BBC gender pay gap after a list of the salaries of the broadcaster's top earners was published.

It showed Jones took home between £400,000 and £449,000, while Baker earns between £450,000 and £499,000.

Poor Alex Jones, she is having to do double time to make up the gap between her paltry pay and that of Matt Baker who also does Countryfile.

I would say they were both worth about 10% of what they are paid- at most. How many folk do you know who are very well qualified, work long ours in a demanding job and still earn less than £40k?

superfluous and in there!

^ and is probably glad of a break too.^
what I mean by that is - having a break by going to work, putting on makeup, having her hair done and wearing and nice clothes that don't smell of baby sick