Some of you should try funding the club. It's a harsh world, harsh times, and we have a vastly reduced budget. And automated turnstiles. I have read enough shot on here about pointless stewards and people on turnstiles when they are automated. Fact is we have no queues now and smaller crowds and we don't need them. Make them redundant, and move on. It's ****, but it's business. If you don't like it try and pay for it yourself?
A business like this isn't a charity. last time I was at another championship club with automated turnstiles there wasn't a person in sight on the gates, bar security.
Will I? Whatever. One thing I won't do is start sharpening my pitchfork on speculation, hearsay and rumour.
Were you complaining when it was being run as a 'charity' in the past? Or have you just started pretending in the last hour that you always thought we had too many turnstile staff Pathetic.
Yes you will Youre like a politician You will spin it around and around to suit your ends ( a bit like a female does) Then conclude that you are correct ???
Obviously it's difficult to judge until we know more, but Obi's not one for **** stirring or idle gossip. That said, if it is true, there's no excuse for not compensating people properly, or not passing on the news in a dignified manner, especially not if they've given years of loyal service. One question it does raise is, are such cut backs acceptable if they're the way to free funds to pay the living wage?
I think you'll find most match day staff such as stewards, turnstile ops, catering etc are casual labour if they're not needed they simply won't be ask to work so no redundancy is owed. With regards to pay those on the catering and hospitality already get more than the minimum wage.
I've no idea on the employment status I've no idea exactly what has happened But it's irrelevant whether or not the club are legally able to do whatever with staff, I would still prefer it if they treated people as well as they possibly can...not treated people according to minimum employment requirements They may have done, they may not have done...we'll see
Are these those who stand in the blue jackets outside the turnstiles? Will they be the same employees who used to stand inside the turnstile three seasons ago? I did wonder why we need four people stand there with those cards at turnstiles when 1-2 was sufficient (especially when they were sharing cards at the time!). We don't need them. Queues are smaller and less people are getting closed out but there are better ways of dismissing people than telling them they've just arrived for work for the last time (should this be true I might add, we don't know all the facts yet).
If they've been made redundant there should have been a period of collective consultation. 30 days legal mimimum consultation with elected employee reps & (or) trade union reps if over 20 positions have been affected, 45 days if over 100 positions, in a 90 day period. If there are less than 20 positions affected there is no legal minimum consultaion period but there should still be a meaningful consultation period. In addition to collective consultation employers should also consult with individuals on a 1:1 basis. The employer must fill in a HR1 form which details any positions that will be lost to the DEL, this will also be shared with the Employee reps. The employer must provide the employee with reasonable, paid, time off to seek alternative employment or re-training. People on zero hour contracts have a contract of employment & are entitled to the same employment rights, including redundancy, as anybody else. If they've been made redundant, it should not have been unexpexted.
Bit of a joke when a business can pay 1, 2, or 3 million for a worker/player and not use him. A weekly wage starting at the 5 to 10 thousand range going up to 40 50 thousand for a business/club of our size. And yet when we need to cut costs the first to go are the lowest of the low and the savings made in relationship to the whole budget will be miniscule. Having said that if there are to many staff in any particular area they should not be suprised if some of them are asked/told to to leave. The way this is done is the key point.
I worked for an agency on a zero hour contract, and all they only have to give you a days notice (but you are still employed by the agency, although they don't pay you until you're in another assignment). I'm sure the stewards/ gate staff etc are casual workers so they'll have less rights (work as required, ie. we don't need you any other time like the summer months) and I suppose, technically they've been given a months notice as we don't play again (home) until October 20th. Casual or irregular work Someone is likely to be a worker if most of these apply: they occasionally do work for a specific business the business doesn’t have to offer them work and they don’t have to accept it - they only work when they want to their contract with the business uses terms like ‘casual’, ‘freelance’, ‘zero hours’, ‘as required’ or something similar they had to agree with the business’s terms and conditions to get work - either verbally or in writing they are under the supervision or control of a manager or director they can’t send someone else to do their work the business deducts tax and National Insurance contributions from their wages the business provides materials, tools or equipment they need to do the work
I think the stewards are agency staff. The turnstile staff may do occasional work for the business but that would mean working less then the usual shift, or only working a few days a season. For a number of staff they will have worked every available hour for years and it is arguable that they are not "occasionally working for the business" but are employees. Legally it is the work they are employed to do that is important, not how often it takes place and how long the time gaps are between them working.
