In my mind they should'nt....

It would mean that they can all walk after a couple of days and still receive a big fat pay cheque. Now obviously if someone is Genuinely taken ill then of course that it is different it would be cruel to see them suffer.

It would be like taking a job and only doing half the work required and still get rewarded the same as the others who have completed the task..

I think they should only get paid if they stay for the duration, unless as you say they have a genuine unavoidable reason for leaving.

Totally agree with you. Maybe some kind of compensation if they are ill but if they walk then they should get paid dependent on how long they have been in for. They are already getting free publicity and a wee holiday for the family.

If they have to leave for medical reasons or ,say, a family tragedy, then they should be paid but if they choose to leave because they are fed-up or don't like it, then only a pro rata rate should be paid

Quite agree.

At the risk of being unpopular, I think it depends on why they leave. If you can't hack it psychologically and you had mental health issues before going in then I don't think you should get the full fee as it's not really a surprise; if, on the other hand, there's an unforeseen tragedy then I think you should probably get the whole fee.

btw, before you all start calling me cold hearted, I have managed depression for the past 14 years and have headed a business throughout this time, so I'm 100% not unsympathetic to the demands of dealing with mental health issues. I would, nonetheless, apply the above philosophy to myself and would hope that other would do so as well.

Don't see why anyone would call you cold hearted! I for one agree entirely with your 'well put' post

Nobody goes there expecting to leave before being voted off. If someone leaves because they are ill, or hate it then they should still be paid otherwise no one would agree to go.