The real living wage.

[Anthomic]

Apparently only four premiership clubs have signed up to pay the "Real living wage". When you think of the obscene money that they pay players to kick a ball around a field and yet are not prepared to pay a real living wage to someone doing a proper job ,this is a disgrace.

 

[Essexyellows]

The players are the "product/merchandise/sponsorship" and create the income ........... not Doris in the office who makes the tea.

 

[Witney Wag]

The players are the "product/merchandise/sponsorship" and create the income ........... not Doris in the office who makes the tea.

So only the players create the income ? Like all businesses, without the Dorises or the Stevens, the business would ground to a halt.

 

[Corporate_Clive]

The players are the "product/merchandise/sponsorship" and create the income ........... not Doris in the office who makes the tea.

you really are a ....

 

[Essexyellows]

Doris in the office gets a salary commensurate with her position. If she doesn`t like it..... get another job. Why reward lack of ambition or drive?

 

[Essexyellows]

you really are a ....

And I care what you think for what reason exactly?

 

[Essexyellows]

So only the players create the income ? Like all businesses, without the Dorises or the Stevens, the business would ground to a halt.

See above..... they pay the "going rate".............its how they make millions in profit.....

 

[Essexyellows]

Forget who adds more to the 'value' of a Premiership club. How about paying the tea lady a decent wage just because it's the right thing to do and the clubs can easily afford it?

Its business. They are there to maximise profit....... the working mans game was sucked into the vacuum of "squeeze as much out as we can" a long long time ago.

 

[Essexyellows]

How much do "we" think the catering staff at the Kassam get paid? The cleaners etc etc etc....................... the game was screwed as soon as SKY appeared on the scene. Got a SKY subscription? YOU are funding it! Hypocrisy at its finest.

 

[Essexyellows]

Rather judgemental. Maybe there are many reasons Doris can’t ‘get on her bike’ a la Tebbitt. Maybe her options are restricted by low intelligence (not her fault), lack of education or training, a need to look after children or sick relatives? To suggest she lacks ambition or drive might be a tad unpleasant, don’t you think?

We're not talking about giving Doris a massive salary here, just enough income to stave off poverty.

Doris gets paid what her employers think she is worth. As do hundreds, if not thousands of other employees.
State intervention (irrespective of the business) says she must get NM/NL Wage.
A change to the "Real Living Wage" from NM/NL wage is roughly 80p an hour.

Trouble is if you boost the bottom tier you then need to continue the push up the organisation.......... Doris gets 10% a week rise, then so does Doris`s boss.... and so it goes on.

 

[Anthomic]

Doris gets paid what her employers think she is worth. As do hundreds, if not thousands of other employees.
State intervention (irrespective of the business) says she must get NM/NL Wage.
A change to the "Real Living Wage" from NM/NL wage is roughly 80p an hour.

Trouble is if you boost the bottom tier you then need to continue the push up the organisation.......... Doris gets 10% a week rise, then so does Doris`s boss.... and so it goes on.

So you are saying that if the tea lady gets a 10% rise so that she has enough to live on,overpaid players on mega millions a year must also get a 10% rise. What planet do you live on? And before you insult the intelligence of tea lady's again I am sure that there are many out there that are far more intelligent than many .footballers, at the end of the day they can only kick a ball around a field and many of them are not very good at that.

 

[Foley]

I agree that the greedy Premiership Clubs have no excuse as to why they can't play the living wage.
Do we know which four clubs have signed up to it?
And in response to somebodies argument, far from all businesses pay the minimum they can get away with.

 

[Corporate_Clive]

And I care what you think for what reason exactly?

Well you replied to my post, so yes...

 

[Essexyellows]

Yeh, we all know that football is a mega-business now, and every club in the Premiership is rolling in volumes of money that were unimaginable 30 years ago.

But let's say Club X has 500 employees earning below a living wage. (Made up number of employees but probably over-stated). To give each employee an extra £1.00 per hour would cost that club £1 million per annum. If the club's that concerned about its costs, they could always knock a £1,000 per week off the salary of 20 of their footballers to balance the books. I'm sure the little loves would survive and be pleased to help the Dorises live to a decent standard.

You can`t reduce someones salary without creating a lot of issues. Do we not think that the players and their agents give a fig about "Doris" when they are negotiating their contracts? "Do you pay the National Living Wage" isn`t very high up the list of questions at a guess.

Its a strange irony that the chap from Persimmon has been asked to leave for making the business successful and earning a £75 million bonus.... sacked for "doing your job" or sacked because "people think its too much" ??

 

[ZeroTheHero]

A £75 million bonus? The most ridiculous thing I have heard for a while. Who ever allowed that to be in his contract ought to be sacked, not the chap himself.

Maybe he could have put a couple of million back into the business to pay for the living wage for his workers?

 

[Essexyellows]

Problem with Fairburn was that they signed up to the share deal in 2012 at a much lower price.......... then he was successful and doubled the value.
I doubt he`ll lose much sleep and will, probably, walk into another similar role.

As for Premier League Clubs "doing the right thing" the reality is they think they are.............. profit at all costs.

If Doris needs £300 a week and Julia from Eastern Europe will do the job for £250 then its bye bye Doris.
Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Didn`t mither about it,or blame anyone else its just business.

 

[Essexyellows]

Believe it or not I`m fairly altruistic as well.... yes...really!
What I don`t tolerate well is folk who think others should get a "leg up" just because they are less fortunate.
I have utmost admiration for those who achieve great things irrespective of their poor start in life.
However, not everyone can be at the top & somebody always has to be at the bottom..... that`s how life is.

 

[Essexyellows]

I concur with the idea................ it won`t happen is the reality.

 

[MarkG]

I just don't think paying a person a living wage is giving them a 'leg up', it's making their lives tolerable.

I think we ultimately think similarly. I don't support positive discrimination, for example, that gives people a better chance of acquiring job X simply because of their gender or religion or ethnic background, and with little consideration of their skills and abilities.

If a small business can only afford to pay a Doris the bare minimum wage, that seems fair and reasonable. For Premier League club X to do likewise, rather than pay a living wage, seems inexcusable, not to mention the reputational damage it might do them if they're named and shamed.

watch this. It's not just about gender, religion, ethnicity. But does go some way to show the meaning of 'privilege'. I'm sure someone will come along and say how they didn't have all of those advantages either, but I reckon most of us posting on here will be near the front of this race.

 

[Pompeyyellows]

watch this. It's not just about gender, religion, ethnicity. But does go some way to show the meaning of 'privilege'. I'm sure someone will come along and say how they didn't have all of those advantages either, but I reckon most of us posting on here will be near the front of this race.

Wouldn't say I'd be near the front but certainly not near the back. Does make you stop and look at things differently though.

I would say that if that guy did that 50 or 60 years ago the haves and the haves not would of been a lot clearer, probably to the extent of there not being a lot in the middle.

If you used that concept to football teams it would be totally different to how live is now. The football teams of today would be the people of a generation ago. The haves and the have not.

 

[Essexyellows]

Like I said that is just life, we all get dealt different cards.
What would have impressed me is if the person winning the race had blasted through from the back.
You make your own way & your own choices.

 

[Essexyellows]

That fundamentally is NOT what the film was trying to show. Those 'at the back' lacked advantage (stable home life, fees for tutoring, access to private education etc), none of which was their fault as individuals. Their circumstances were nothing to do with choices they themselves made, but those circumstances did affect the path their lives took.

You don`t live in the past you strive for the future.
There is nothing to stop any of those people improving their "lot".
I get that their start was not as easy as others but you don`t/shouldn`t let that hold you back.

 

[Marked Ox]

Disagree! How you're brought up can affect your life chances. The more advantages you have as a child, the more likely you are to 'succeed' in life, although 'succeed' will inevitably mean different things to different people. Better education = better job prospects = better chance to accumulate wealth.

Of course there are plenty of examples of people from poorer backgrounds doing well in life, but I would suggest they are anomalies and generally the privileged do better overall.

Reminds of a guy I was talking to many years ago whilst in New York. He said he was sick of ghetto people moaning about their lot, and that if they didn't like their current life they should get on a bus, move out to a better neighbourhood and get a decent job. He held the view that everyone was in control of their destiny, but was unable to explain in practical terms how these improvements could be achieved. It's stuck with me ever since.

I would add that better education, well private education, in some cases can also provide contacts/networks that boost your job prospects.

 

[Essexyellows]

Disagree! How you're brought up can affect your life chances. The more advantages you have as a child, the more likely you are to 'succeed' in life, although 'succeed' will inevitably mean different things to different people. Better education = better job prospects = better chance to accumulate wealth.

Of course there are plenty of examples of people from poorer backgrounds doing well in life, but I would suggest they are anomalies and generally the privileged do better overall.

Reminds of a guy I was talking to many years ago whilst in New York. He said he was sick of ghetto people moaning about their lot, and that if they didn't like their current life they should get on a bus, move out to a better neighbourhood and get a decent job. He held the view that everyone was in control of their destiny, but was unable to explain in practical terms how these improvements could be achieved. It's stuck with me ever since.

I`ll say it again.
Someone is at the top, someone is at the bottom.....all our lives are different.
Of course being born to wealthy parents "helps" that`s the luck of the draw but even "poor parents" can instill some virtues of work hard, learn, better yourself.
In practical terms? So you leave school with a poorer education, you get a job, you save,you invest, you work at improving yourself, you achieve...the only limitations to that are judgement and a splash of luck!
Compare it to what "we" are doing now................... university is almost mandatory for many yet the qualifications are barely worth the paper they are written on. Yet, barely 35 years ago, my sister was the first person in our family to ever go to University.
I left school with a motley array of CSE`s & GCSE`s.............. now, at 53, I`m doing a degree course in Management!

Never give up pursuing a dream..............the only person holding you back is you!

 

[ZeroTheHero]

I`ll say it again.
Someone is at the top, someone is at the bottom.....all our lives are different.

That is certainly true. But that does not mean that if you are at the 'top' you should not care about those at the 'bottom' - in fact if you have worked your way up then surely you would be sympathetic to those trying to better themselves? Perhaps people who are doing all the right things, but just haven't had that 'splash of luck'? Because if the main aim is just to acquire wealth and if that's at the expense of other people (by paying them as little as you can get away with, probably with short term contracts and a miserly pension), then who cares - it's all a bit hollow. IMO of course.

 

[Anthomic]

They say that you should always be nice to people on your way up as wil meet the same people on you way down.

 

[Deleted member 291]

I would add that better education, well private education, in some cases can also provide contacts/networks that boost your job prospects.

Funnily enough I agree with this statement but the 3 people I know who went to private school all work in manual labour/basic jobs.

They came from familys of 'new money' and being forced to go to private school as it was a bit of a badge of honour. What happened was the effort wasn't put in at home and it was assumed private school would whip out someone who would end up a doctor or lawyer.

There are fantastic opportunities that come with being privately educated but it doesn't always equal automatic success.

 

[Peterdev]

I was watching the Martin Lewis presentations on TV recently and he said hard work played a major part in being successful. He also mentioned there was a key part to doing very well and that was luck.
A number of my clients attend private schools and have parents who are especially well off. They all seem to be nice people, and have a drive to get on. If they have a particular interest it is nurtured, for example, golf, orienteering, squash etc. Specialist tutors to assist in chess. One particular guy I know there can play many games simultaneously blindfold.
There is certainly not equality of opportunity, and that is one of the reasons why there will always be a sharp division in wealth.
If an analysis of the MPs in the House of Commons is carried out is shows that many of its members succeed largely because their parents also did well there. Many of todays footballers have done well because their fathers did too, and they all have their network they can rely on.
I went to school in Oxford, living in Cowley and Headington, and have done reasonably well, but struggled at first. I’ve been in contact with some I knew years ago in Cowley, and not many have had the opportunities. One has ended up in prison twice, one died from a heroin overdose, two others have drifted into poorly paid jobs.
Background pays a key part, and it’s often not what you know but who you know

 

[pooshooter]

Doris makes nice tea and she gives me extras...

 

[Sarge]

I would add that better education, well private education, in some cases can also provide contacts/networks that boost your job prospects.

The old (public) school tie network and membership of societys ( such as the Bullingdon club/ aka riot club) when at Uni' certainly helps some from more affluent & privileged backgrounds 'get on' in life ...,. as does being a member of the funny handshakes mob too, so Im led to believe ?