The ones who can't speak English aren't the problem It's the English ones that don't know what "bitter" is that are! (Genuine conversation!) I'd still pay her a living wage though....until dismissing her !
There's about 300 stewards, I added another 200 to cover concourse kiosks, all corporate catering staff and cleaners.
Well on that basis, if he paid the stewards five times the living wage, the relative differentials would still be obscene.
I'm not against the principle of that. I just think it needs consideration of the consequences. Isolating this from the other finances is liable to mean jobs go or prices rise. A few may be a little better off once a home game, but it could be at the expense of others. It needs a more holistic approach in my view.
Supervisors will obviously get more and the amount of agency staff depends on how short we are, it was only a guesstimate, I could easily be 100 out either way.
Or more. I'm all in favour of sharing the money out better, I just think this is more of a sound bite and needs to be looked at on a wider brief. I would have thought there were other more pressing issues that affect the trust's members more directly. Are many of those affected trust members?
Prices have risen At the same time as income is increasing, so should be easily achievable Anyway I'm off to bed to re read the Ragged a Trousered Philanthropist