Saints and paying the Living Wage.

[popeandrew]

Hi everyone,

 

I've been campaigning for the living wage at ALL 92 English clubs. I didn't want to post here until after the election so that I couldn't be accused of electioneering.

 

As kindly pointed out on here, I did finally get a response from HR at the club. I announced in the Southampton City Council chamber that Saints are actively considering the living wage. They pledged to put it on the agenda of the Board this month (July 2015).

 

It was reported in the Daily Echo. There was a previous piece in the Echo last year, and a piece I put in the Mirror nationally.

 

All Premier League clubs pledged to pay a living wage, but not until the 2016-17 season. This is after Mr Scudamore being adamant that what clubs paid was nothing to do with the Premier League!

 

Any help you can give to put pressure on the club, would be much appreciated. I am continuing the living wage campaign for all English clubs, with my organisation the Campaign for the Reform of Football (CRoiF).

 

All the best,

Councillor Andrew Pope

[richard]

Hi everyone,

 

I've been campaigning for the living wage at ALL 92 English clubs. I didn't want to post here until after the election so that I couldn't be accused of electioneering.

 

As kindly pointed out on here, I did finally get a response from HR at the club. I announced in the Southampton City Council chamber that Saints are actively considering the living wage. They pledged to put it on the agenda of the Board this month (July 2015).

 

It was reported in the Daily Echo. There was a previous piece in the Echo last year, and a piece I put in the Mirror nationally.

 

All Premier League clubs pledged to pay a living wage, but not until the 2016-17 season. This is after Mr Scudamore being adamant that what clubs paid was nothing to do with the Premier League!

 

Any help you can give to put pressure on the club, would be much appreciated. I am continuing the living wage campaign for all English clubs, with my organisation the Campaign for the Reform of Football (CRoiF).

 

All the best,

Councillor Andrew Pope

 

Well done, keep up the good work.

[Saint George]

It's an economic issue as well. As pointed out, no one can properly live off the minimum wage and the difference has to be made up by in work benefits and health costs when people aren't able to look after themselves as they should be able to. I'm obviously sympathetic in some senses to companies that don't have enough money to pay their workers to live on, but Saints easily do - it's literally pennies to them in the context of their entire wage budget and would make a huge difference to any workers not paid enough to live on.

 

No it doesn't.....The infamous UK welfare trap is just a symptom of over reliance on the Nanny State....Peeps could do as they do here and many other places and either work a second job or go learn a skill that will give them the ability to earn more money......Taking personal responsibility for your situation and not being reliant on total strangers, some of who, are worse off than you to bail you out is good for your soul.

[manzo]

No it doesn't.....The infamous UK welfare trap is just a symptom of over reliance on the Nanny State....Peeps could do as they do here and many other places and either work a second job or go learn a skill that will give them the ability to earn more money......Taking personal responsibility for your situation and not being reliant on total strangers, some of who, are worse off than you to bail you out is good for your soul.

 

Yes, because who doesn't look at the Victorian era and think that's what we should be aspiring to?

[buctootim]

By far most of a PL clubs wage bill is accounted for by the players. They could and should pay decent wages to the hourly paid staff, I doubt if it would add 2% to the total bill. easily

[Sour Mash]

By far most of a PL clubs wage bill is accounted for by the players. They could and should pay decent wages to the hourly paid staff, I doubt if it would add 2% to the total bill. easily

 

Would the club even be employing anyone at this level? I'd imagine cleaning, catering etc is all contracted out.

[Redslo]

Yes, because who doesn't look at the Victorian era and think that's what we should be aspiring to?

 

Top quality response to nonsense.

 

I find it difficult to understand how people in the UK don't realize that they have just reelected a government whose economic policies, if carried out, will lead to an increase in unemployment and a net increase in debt relative to GDP. But the conservative economic make the rich richer con job rolls on through out the western world. Also, Go Southampton.

 

Would the club even be employing anyone at this level? I'd imagine cleaning, catering etc is all contracted out.

 

If so, the contractors should be paying the living wage or they should be replaced by someone who will.

[Gemmel]

Hi everyone,

 

I've been campaigning for the living wage at ALL 92 English clubs. I didn't want to post here until after the election so that I couldn't be accused of electioneering.

 

As kindly pointed out on here, I did finally get a response from HR at the club. I announced in the Southampton City Council chamber that Saints are actively considering the living wage. They pledged to put it on the agenda of the Board this month (July 2015).

 

It was reported in the Daily Echo. There was a previous piece in the Echo last year, and a piece I put in the Mirror nationally.

 

All Premier League clubs pledged to pay a living wage, but not until the 2016-17 season. This is after Mr Scudamore being adamant that what clubs paid was nothing to do with the Premier League!

 

Any help you can give to put pressure on the club, would be much appreciated. I am continuing the living wage campaign for all English clubs, with my organisation the Campaign for the Reform of Football (CRoiF).

 

All the best,

Councillor Andrew Pope

 

You are not the pope. You are just a very naughty boy.

[popeandrew]

Would the club even be employing anyone at this level? I'd imagine cleaning, catering etc is all contracted out.

 

Yes, as stated on their own jobs website, and as per the Daily Echo article in November, they employed people below the living wage, and on zero hours contracts. For example, ticket office assistants.

 

The club also contracts out catering and I've confirmed this is not living wage either.

 

Original Daily Echo piece is here:

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/11604059.Saints_urged_to_pay_living_wage_to_staff_who_only_earn_fraction_of_millionaire_players/

 

I now have a response of sorts from the club. They don't appear to be very happy with my campaigning, and aren't giving me full and frank answers.

 

I will be communicating the full response from the head of HR further via the media...

 

but... SaintsWeb exclusive - the Board have considered the living wage at its July meeting.

[SaintBobby]

I think your understanding of economics is faulty here. If a business can get someone to do 10 pounds per hour of work for only 7 pounds, they have an incentive to pay the lesser amount and will do so unless forced to pay the higher amount either by their own morals, public pressure, the government, or the market. Given that the UK is now operating in a voluntarily austerity induced recession, workers do not have the negotiating power to push wages up at the bottom so the market cannot do the job. Since you government doesn't seem to care about ending the recession it has created, I doubt it will do the job either which leaves only public pressure and the business' own morals. The two work better in combination.

 

As for different people needing different amounts of money to earn a living wage depending on their situation, that is certainly true but I doubt there is going to be system which employers investigate how much money each employee needs to have just enough to get by and then pays each employee that minimum amount.

 

Hmmm. Well, were to start? And apologies to take ages to reply.

 

The economy isn't in recession and hasn't been for some time. There is growth of about 2-3% per annum, which is good in historical terms and there is also real wage growth. UK GDP per capita is now higher than at any time in history.

 

Negotiating power to push wages up to the actual level of productivity is pretty good. Especially so, actually, in relatively low-skilled, generic jobs. If you're a cleaner and your cleaning is actually worth £10 an hour to your company, your employer might begin by offering you £7, but would be foolish to let you leave and suffer a net loss of £3 an hour by doing so. There is a widespread market for cleaners, bar staff etc. If you're worth £10 an hour, there will be dozens of employers willing to offer u more than £7. (It's trickier if you're in a highly specialised area of work with only one or a very small number of possible employers).

 

The morals are ambiguous. A profitable company could choose to pay employees more than their labour is worth as an act of benevolence, but this carries an opportunity cost. For example, if a company chooses to reduce or cancel dividend payments in order to increase its payroll, this is likely to reduce the value of pension funds. It's not necessarily wrong to give workers more money and pensioners less money, but neither is it obviously the right thing to do. Similarly, a company could decide it can realistically increase its prices to pay higher salaries, thereby impoverishing its customers to the benefit of its workforce. Again not obviously morally wrong, but not necessarily the most benevolent strategy either.

 

On your last point, I think you misunderstand the concept entirely. It's not that employers should pay someone who has seven kids more for exactly the same job/performance as a single person, that would be grossly unfair. Rather, the prevailing market rate for the job (and its terms and conditions) will probably attract different demographics. So, you will tend to find that lowly paid, junior bar work is often undertaken by young people or students. Paper rounds are usually carried out by the very young etc. Doing many hours of charity work is quite a rarity for those in their 30s and 40s (who tend to be time poor) but more common amongst relatively affluent retirees etc.

 

I don't know if you think volunteering should be banned altogether. After all, paying an hourly wage of £0 to someone who is doing something useful and productive for your organisation must be the height of exploitation, no?

[SaintBobby]

Yes, as stated on their own jobs website, and as per the Daily Echo article in November, they employed people below the living wage, and on zero hours contracts. For example, ticket office assistants.

 

The club also contracts out catering and I've confirmed this is not living wage either.

 

Original Daily Echo piece is here:

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/11604059.Saints_urged_to_pay_living_wage_to_staff_who_only_earn_fraction_of_millionaire_players/

 

I now have a response of sorts from the club. They don't appear to be very happy with my campaigning, and aren't giving me full and frank answers.

 

I will be communicating the full response from the head of HR further via the media...

 

but... SaintsWeb exclusive - the Board have considered the living wage at its July meeting.

 

It seems to me very difficult to ask employers to make sure al their contractors pay the living wage. Even if you thought this was a good idea (I don't), it's devilishly hard to know where to draw the line. What if your contractors sub-contract, for example? And why not extend the principle to all economic activity?

 

If the company pays to put up some of its staff in a hotel for a night for some work-related matter, does it need to be sure the hotel is a living wage employer? (the company has effectively contracted the hotel to provide a service, after all). Or that the cleaning company employed by the hotel is a living wage employer? Or that the various companies providing the hotel with food, drink, toiletries etc are all living wage employers?

[Viking Warrior]

So Mr Popeandrew

 

what is your real agenda? "I will be communicating the full response from the head of HR further via the media..."

A sensible person would normally debate this with the organisation concerned , even if you do not like the answers received

No instead you run to the Media

 

know doubt you are anti Saints and want to bring bad publicity to Saints

 

I hope your doing this research in your own time and not as an elected Councillor ??

 

Also does not your Council outsource some of the Services it provides to the public?

 

PS can this not go into the Lounge , as it not really Saints related but more about wider issues of the living wage

 

Don't get me wrong. Im very much in favour of the living wage but this should be discussed through negotiation not through the Media

[Viking Warrior]

I have just seen Mr Popes original email . I see he wrote to all 92 clubs.

 

so apologies re "what is your real agenda? "I will be communicating the full response from the head of HR further via the media..." perhaps a tad harsh. apart from the bit about using the media. As his real agenda is ensuring clubs pay the living wage.

 

 

I am sure the club will do what is morally correct

but that is purely a matter for Saints FC not us or the media

 

I would be interested to see what all the other 91 clubs responses were

and has he spoken to the other regional papers about other clubs not paying the living wage?

[buctootim]

there is also real wage growth. UK GDP per capita is now higher than at any time in history.

 

 

Ignoring inflation is a wonderful thing. Yes there is current real wage growth but that comes about after a prolonged period of real wage reduction. Average wages in 2015 are only just approaching in real terms what they were in 2007. Similarly with GDP per capita, its still below 2007 on a PPP or constant exchange rate basis.

Edited 5 August, 2015 by buctootim

[buctootim]

It seems to me very difficult to ask employers to make sure al their contractors pay the living wage. Even if you thought this was a good idea (I don't), it's devilishly hard to know where to draw the line. What if your contractors sub-contract, for example? And why not extend the principle to all economic activity?

 

If the company pays to put up some of its staff in a hotel for a night for some work-related matter, does it need to be sure the hotel is a living wage employer? (the company has effectively contracted the hotel to provide a service, after all). Or that the cleaning company employed by the hotel is a living wage employer? Or that the various companies providing the hotel with food, drink, toiletries etc are all living wage employers?

 

You do know the law applies to everyone right? and that includes sub contractors. How do I know my subcontractors aren't murdering babies, its too tricky to tell so there shouldn't be a law against it. If only someone had invented something like a police force, or a civil court.

[SaintBobby]

You do know the law applies to everyone right? and that includes sub contractors. How do I know my subcontractors aren't murdering babies, its too tricky to tell so there shouldn't be a law against it. If only someone had invented something like a police force, or a civil court.

 

It's unlikely you'd be held responsible for a sub-contractor murdering babies.

 

If someone from your company buys a coffee and claims it back on expenses, what steps should the employer take to make sure that the café and all it's contractors and sub-contractors pay the living wage (or aren't murdering babies etc)?

[SaintBobby]

Ignoring inflation is a wonderful thing. Yes there is current real wage growth but that comes about after a prolonged period of real wage reduction. Average wages in 2015 are only just approaching in real terms what they were in 2007. Similarly with GDP per capita, its still below 2007 on a PPP or constant exchange rate basis.

 

UK GDP is measured in real terms. Average income per capita (which isn't quite the same as average wages, of course) is now the highest in history in real terms, I understand (well, if the last quarter's growth stats are accurate).

[buctootim]

If someone from your company buys a coffee and claims it back on expenses, what steps should the employer take to make sure that the café and all it's contractors and sub-contractors pay the living wage (or aren't murdering babies etc)?

 

Err none. Just as you aren't responsible for making sure your suppliers comply with their other obligations under UK laws. I'm not sure why you are throwing in red herrings unless its to justify an untenable position. You disagree with bringing in the living wage, fine. Just don't try to bolster that position by pretending its an unworkable idea.

 

Having a proper grip on who your suppliers are and their business practices is good practice though. You avoid reputational risk and if done well like John Lewis or M&S you get improved market share and margins.

[hutch]

Err none. Just as you aren't responsible for making sure your suppliers comply with their other obligations under UK laws. I'm not sure why you are throwing in red herrings unless its to justify an untenable position. You disagree with bringing in the living wage, fine. Just don't try to bolster that position by pretending its an unworkable idea.

 

Having a proper grip on who your suppliers are and their business practices is good practice though. You avoid reputational risk and if done well like John Lewis or M&S you get improved market share and margins.

At least he knows he can count on your vote at the next election. Now can we get back to the football?

[buctootim]

UK GDP is measured in real terms. Average income per capita (which isn't quite the same as average wages, of course) is now the highest in history in real terms, I understand (well, if the last quarter's growth stats are accurate).

 

It isnt. The only definition by which GDP per capita is currently higher than 2007 is at constant prices, an unusual and little used measure. GDP is usually measured by US$ or by Purchasing Power Parity. By both of those we are still lower than 2007.

[buctootim]

At least he knows he can count on your vote at the next election. Now can we get back to the football?

 

If you have nothing to add to the debate about whether it is reasonable for this football club to pay some employees £1,840 per hour and some £6.50 on a casual basis then you can of course remove yourself to the Is Ronnie at the airport?" thread.

[Sergei Gotsmanov]

Ethically when you pay your players up to £60,000 a week it is morally questionable to be paying some of your workforce £7.50 an hour. I am sure the club will recognise that and address it. As someone pointed out - this will probably add less than 1% to the total wage bill. I think it compromises the values of the club. I don't support a corporation I support my local football club.

[Viking Warrior]

One of the potential problems of the Living wage within the public sector is that it will erode the differential grades above them if it is given as a consolidated rate. The two or three grades above a cleaner might be miffed , if they see the cleaners suddenly getting the same rate as a janitor. road worker . admin employees . This will of course have an impact on public sector grading structures.

 

the Unions may well want to ensure a clear pay differential being maintained between the employees at the bottom of the grade structure and those 2/3 grades above . And the knock on affect of higher wage claims being made .

While the public sector are signed up to the living wage there is quite a heavy burden to be incurred by Public sector bodies especially as there are higher NI Cost to the employer and employee next April, and at a time of public services having to reduce costs even further and the likely hood of further job losses

 

Its possible that the Public will keep the grading structures they have but pay the difference between the hourly salary they currently receive and living wage purely as a living wage supplement

[hutch]

If you have nothing to add to the debate about whether it is reasonable for this football club to pay some employees £1,840 per hour and some £6.50 on a casual basis then you can of course remove yourself to the Is Ronnie at the airport?" thread.

How could I possibly add anything when I have absolutely no knowledge about what the club pays it's employees. I don't make stuff up to try to generate an argument out of thin air.

 

Celtic look as if they're more than holding their own at the moment.

[buctootim]

How could I possibly add anything when I have absolutely no knowledge about what the club pays it's employees.

Probably best to read a little then. http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/article/20150330-southampton-financial-results-2013-14-2367070.aspx Some players are on £50,000 pw, the Club made a £33m profit, wages overall went up 35% last year but some employees are still on minimum wage or near to it.

[SaintBobby]

Ethically when you pay your players up to £60,000 a week it is morally questionable to be paying some of your workforce £7.50 an hour. I am sure the club will recognise that and address it. As someone pointed out - this will probably add less than 1% to the total wage bill. I think it compromises the values of the club. I don't support a corporation I support my local football club.

 

 

I don't understand why this applies within a specific company rather than, say, across a city or country. Why should a cleaner at a football club get more money for exactly the same job as a cleaner in a Southampton department store? It seems to me pretty irrelevant that the former employs some highly expensive staff.

 

We have progressive tax to even out poverty/inequality. Saints players on £60,000 a week should be handing over about £25,000 a week in income tax (plus, no doubt, other taxes such as stamp duty when they buy expensive houses). It's this cash that should be used to relieve poverty, not an attempt to fix prices or wages.

[hutch]

Probably best to read a little then. http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/article/20150330-southampton-financial-results-2013-14-2367070.aspx Some players are on £50,000 pw, the Club made a £33m profit, wages overall went up 35% last year but some employees are still on minimum wage or near to it.

Where does that say we're paying our employees £6.50 an hour?

[buctootim]

Where does that say we're paying our employees £6.50 an hour?

 

Okay lets make it abundantly simple. The living wage is only £7.85 and the club have not yet agreed to honour that.

[hutch]

So you made it up?

 

I'll stick to the football, I'm not cut out for this politics stuff.

[buctootim]

So you made it up?

 

I'll stick to the football, I'm not cut out for this politics stuff.

 

Which part of "minimum wage or near to it" aren't you grasping? You aren't cut out for logic, that's the deficit.

[simo]

Until people start campaigning for me to get a pay rise level with what my profession gets everywhere else I couldn't care less how much the usless ****s who serve the warm wartered down beer on match days get!

[SaintBobby]

Okay lets make it abundantly simple. The living wage is only £7.85 and the club have not yet agreed to honour that.

 

I haven't checked the employee details, but let's say there are 50 full time equivalents on the minimum wage. The club could hand over an additional c £2,500 per annum in salaries or, instead, say donate an additional £2,500 to a worthy charity. It's not obvious to me that the former is the morally proper thing to do.

[buctootim]

It's not obvious to me that the former is the morally proper thing to do.

 

If you were talking about paying staff more in a cash limited essential service where more staff pay equals less service I'd agree its more morally ambiguous. In a business that is paying Ramirez £70,000pw, its pretty clear cut.

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/9879668.Saints__agree_record_fee_for_Ramirez_/

[Delboy Dave]

Don't forget employers national insurance contributions. So the more the employees earn the more the employer has to pay

[eelpie]

No it doesn't.....The infamous UK welfare trap is just a symptom of over reliance on the Nanny State....Peeps could do as they do here and many other places and either work a second job or go learn a skill that will give them the ability to earn more money......Taking personal responsibility for your situation and not being reliant on total strangers, some of who, are worse off than you to bail you out is good for your soul.

 

Shameful

[SaintBobby]

If you were talking about paying staff more in a cash limited essential service where more staff pay equals less service I'd agree its more morally ambiguous. In a business that is paying Ramirez £70,000pw, its pretty clear cut.

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/9879668.Saints__agree_record_fee_for_Ramirez_/

 

Why is that clear cut?

 

Saints are paying a hugely underperforming member of staff £70K a week.

 

So the club should extend this lunatic inability to pay people their productive worth to waiters, bar staff, cleaners and toilet attendants?

 

Or is it better to just say, heck, Ramirez isn't worth £70k a week? Rather than spreading the underperform/overpay meme through out the club?

[ant]

Until people start campaigning for me to get a pay rise level with what my profession gets everywhere else I couldn't care less how much the usless ****s who serve the warm wartered down beer on match days get!

 

What a disgusting, unempathetic attitude.

 

It seems some are so short-sighted as to not realise that people paid less than a living wage will need to be subsidised by the state. That affects us all, quite aside from the morality of the situation.

 

It is a football-related matter because it directly relates to the operations of the club. Even if you ignore the disparity of the wage allocation, when a company's turning a profit as large as we are and none of it trickles down that's wrong.

Edited 6 August, 2015 by ant

[Pastor Patrón]

What a disgusting, unempathetic attitude.

 

It seems some are so short-sighted as to not realise that people paid less than a living wage will need to be subsidised by the state. That affects us all, quite aside from the morality of the situation.

 

It is a football-related matter because it directly relates to the operations of the club. Even if you ignore the disparity of the wage allocation, when a company's turning a profit as large as we are and none of it trickles down that's wrong.

 

Pipe down you broke hippy. A vending machine could do the majority of their jobs, they should be grateful for being employed.