# Chelsea lead the way towards Living Wage



## Fish (Dec 11, 2014)

Chelsea FC have become the first Premier League club to agree to pay all staff the living wage rather than the minimum :thup:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-30414668


----------



## Hacker Khan (Dec 11, 2014)

Fish said:



			Chelsea FC have become the first Premier League club to agree to pay all staff the living wage rather than the minimum :thup:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-30414668

Click to expand...

I'm sure it's not just not me who finds the concept of Premier League clubs boasting about paying people a living wage a bit laughable.  Really, with all the money they have and is flowing around the game at the top levels, they are proud of paying staff, in this case in London, a minimum of Â£9.15 an hour.  

Well done guys, great gesture, how very magnanimous of you.

And the school I am a governor of has been doing this for over a year now.  And we do not pay some of our staff upwards of 200 thousand pounds a week.


----------



## Fish (Dec 11, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			I'm sure it's not just not me who finds the concept of Premier League clubs boasting about paying people a living wage a bit laughable.  Really, with all the money they have and is flowing around the game at the top levels, they are proud of paying staff, in this case in London, a minimum of Â£9.15 an hour.  

Well done guys, great gesture, how very magnanimous of you.

And the school I am a governor of has been doing this for over a year now.  And we do not pay some of our staff upwards of 200 thousand pounds a week.
		
Click to expand...

1 Premier League club actually, us, so if we adopt it and others then feel the need to follow our lead, why not market it, it can only benefit those that were otherwise being paid much lower!


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 11, 2014)

Fish said:



			Chelsea FC have become the first Premier League club to agree to pay all staff the living wage rather than the minimum :thup:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-30414668

Click to expand...

Another good example of England following Scotland's [Hearts] Lead.
I also think London based Chelski can afford it a lot better than a Scottish Championship side.


----------



## chrisd (Dec 11, 2014)

Fish said:



			Chelsea FC have become the first Premier League club to agree to pay all staff the living wage rather than the minimum :thup:
		
Click to expand...

I'm so glad of that, I was beginning to worry that some of the players may starve if they don't get their win bonus over Xmas.


----------



## bobmac (Dec 11, 2014)

Â£9.15 per hour. 

Wayne Rooney earns Â£20,000 an hour WHEN HE'S ASLEEP


----------



## Fish (Dec 11, 2014)

I'm struggling with the attitude being displayed, top executives in blue chip companies earn hundreds of thousands but the staff at the lowest level will get minimum wage at best, its no different at football clubs so, stewards, turnstile attendants, shop staff etc will now all possibly get over Â£2 more an hour from joining in this scheme, yes footballers are on silly wages but aren't top bankers in comparison to basic tellers. 

Maybe they shouldn't have bothered and saved a few quid.


----------



## bluewolf (Dec 11, 2014)

Fish said:



			I'm struggling with the attitude being displayed, top executives in blue chip companies earn hundreds of thousands but the staff at the lowest level will get minimum wage at best, its no different at football clubs so, stewards, turnstile attendants, shop staff etc will now all possibly get over Â£2 more an hour from joining in this scheme, yes footballers are on silly wages but aren't top bankers in comparison to basic tellers. 

Maybe they shouldn't have bothered and saved a few quid.
		
Click to expand...

how many people that would be affected by this decision work at Chelsea? And how many hours do they work? (genuine questions)


----------



## Fish (Dec 11, 2014)

Loads, all the staff at Cobham not to mention all the admin & match day workers, I think it will make a considerable difference for some.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 11, 2014)

Fish.
Obviously I am pleased that Chelsea will be paying a small number of part time staff a living wage.

Can you not see the absurdity of a mega-millionaires play hobby/toy claiming credit for doing what most folk on here would be very surprised they did not do already.

A bit Like Tesco's claiming credit for donating Â£50 to a food bank


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 11, 2014)

I can see both sides and the absurdity of a club of Chelsea''s wealth making a big thing of this but you also need to start somewhere and hopefully others will follow suit


----------



## Fish (Dec 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Fish.
Obviously I am pleased that Chelsea will be paying a small number of part time staff a living wage.

Can you not see the absurdity of a mega-millionaires play hobby/toy claiming credit for doing what most folk on here would be very surprised they did not do already.

A bit Like Tesco's claiming credit for donating Â£50 to a food bank
		
Click to expand...

by definition every premier league club should be able to, but they don't, however, Chelsea are the 1st, if that means others will follow then of course Chelsea should be marketing it, that can only be a good thing for those that earn less than the new rate, which their will be many, especially in the village (hotel).


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Dec 11, 2014)

Fish said:



			Loads, all the staff at Cobham not to mention all the admin & match day workers, I think it will make a considerable difference for some.
		
Click to expand...

So until now Chelsea have been paying less than the living wage to many of their employees whilst happily paying some of their players Â£8m to Â£10m p.a.

Glad they are now taking some steps but it continues to illustrate how clubs and players, not just Chelsea, have lost touch with reality.


----------



## Tongo (Dec 11, 2014)

I find it hard to applaud a club for doing something that will cost them less than peanuts when one considers their turnover. 

Boogaloo.


----------



## pbrown7582 (Dec 11, 2014)

Thats an extra 50p on the coffee and a Â£1 on the pies and beer this week then.


----------



## Tongo (Dec 11, 2014)

I will applaud Luton Town however for making the same gesture. 

Also, its ironic that Chelsea's chairman is called Bruce Buck!


----------



## Foxholer (Dec 11, 2014)

Well done Chelsea!

Hope it shames every other Football club - and every other company - into doing the same thing!


----------



## chrisd (Dec 11, 2014)

Fish said:



			I'm struggling with the attitude being displayed, top executives in blue chip companies earn hundreds of thousands but the staff at the lowest level will get minimum wage at best, its no different at football clubs so, stewards, turnstile attendants, shop staff etc will now all possibly get over Â£2 more an hour from joining in this scheme, yes footballers are on silly wages but aren't top bankers in comparison to basic tellers. 

Maybe they shouldn't have bothered and saved a few quid.
		
Click to expand...

To be fair, I don't think you would have posted the story had it been Liverpool!


----------



## Fish (Dec 11, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well done Chelsea!

Hope it shames every other Football club - and every other company - into doing the same thing!
		
Click to expand...

Is the right answer


----------



## CMAC (Dec 11, 2014)

I also think they should be ashamed of themselves for not doing it in the first place- regardless of whoever else doesn't do it. They should have just done it and not tried to get PR out of it.

It's a bit like standing up and saying "look at us, we don't treat our lower staff like scum anymore, aren't we good"!!


I know what you are saying Fish, but theres always a different perspective.


----------



## Pin-seeker (Dec 11, 2014)

chrisd said:



			To be fair, I don't think you would have posted the story had it been Liverpool!
		
Click to expand...

No but I im willing to bet that someone would have.


----------



## chrisd (Dec 11, 2014)

Pin-seeker said:



			No but I im willing to bet that someone would have.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry, can't think who you mean??


----------



## Fish (Dec 11, 2014)

CMAC said:



			I also think they should be ashamed of themselves for not doing it in the first place- regardless of whoever else doesn't do it. They should have just done it and not tried to get PR out of it.

It's a bit like standing up and saying "look at us, we don't treat our lower staff like scum anymore, aren't we good"!!


I know what you are saying Fish, but theres always a different perspective.
		
Click to expand...

wow, "scum", where does this come from, so if they were all on Â£7.28 per hour before as general cleaners, kitchen porters etc which is what the wages are at The Emirates and Wembley, Chelsea now paying Â£9.15 should be aplauded for breaking ranks and leading by example imo.


----------



## NWJocko (Dec 11, 2014)

I give them some credit but it's an absolute disgrace it's taken this long and that no other EPL clubs do it with the money in the game.

Raheem Sterling today said Â£70,000 a week was "unacceptable"!!! That is why it should stick in their throat any club crowing about paying a living wage IMO and why I don't think everyone will give them a pat on the back.......


----------



## CMAC (Dec 11, 2014)

Fish said:



*wow, "scum", where does this come from,* so if they were all on Â£7.28 per hour before as general cleaners, kitchen porters etc which is what the wages are at The Emirates and Wembley, Chelsea now paying Â£9.15 should be aplauded for breaking ranks and leading by example imo.
		
Click to expand...

where does your twisting of "its a bit like saying" come from- you know what I meant but you are clearly looking for an argument as we all dont jump on the 'arent Chelsea wonderful' bandwagon!

I will repeat- they should be ashamed for treating their staff this way while paying obscene sums of money to others. I'm glad they have done it at last but do it humbly.


----------



## c1973 (Dec 11, 2014)

Chelsea should get some credit for this (as should Hearts), yep maybe they could pay a lot more but it's a start, a step in the right direction. 

If more clubs/businesses followed suit then it's only going to be a good thing.


----------



## Sweep (Dec 11, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			I'm sure it's not just not me who finds the concept of Premier League clubs boasting about paying people a living wage a bit laughable.  Really, with all the money they have and is flowing around the game at the top levels, they are proud of paying staff, in this case in London, a minimum of Â£9.15 an hour.  

Well done guys, great gesture, how very magnanimous of you.

And the school I am a governor of has been doing this for over a year now.  And we do not pay some of our staff upwards of 200 thousand pounds a week.
		
Click to expand...

I could not agree more.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Dec 11, 2014)

c1973 said:



			Chelsea should get some credit for this (as should Hearts), yep maybe they could pay a lot more but it's a start, a step in the right direction. 

If more clubs/businesses followed suit then it's only going to be a good thing.
		
Click to expand...

I think a lot have.  As I said in another thread, the school I am governor of did this ages ago as soon as the concept was introduced. Little did I know we were missing out on a feel good story in the local or even national press as I thought we were doing the right thing. But to be fair we did have nearly a grand left over at the end of the academic year, so fair play to Chelsea for doing this with a profit of Â£18 million last year and a virtual unlimited supply of money on tap from a billionaire owner.  Well done Chelsea, I look forwards to your next press release congratulating yourselves on not taking pictures of people on the toilets on match day.   

As this is not an anti Chelsea rant.  But just as someone has already said, the fact that a premier league club seems to think this is something to be proud of and worthy of a press release and story. As opposed to just the right thing any business, especially a premier league football team who lets face it, if you asked the general public who pays the biggest weekly wages in this country they would, probably say premier league clubs, does.


----------



## c1973 (Dec 11, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			I think a lot have.  As I said in another thread, the school I am governor of did this ages ago as soon as the concept was introduced. Little did I know we were striking a blow for the low paid workers of this country as I thought we were doing the right thing . But to be fair we did have nearly 2 grand left over at the end of the academic years, so fair play to Chelsea for doing this with a profit of Â£18 million last year and a virtual unlimited supply of money on tap from a billionaire owner.  Well done Chelsea, I look forwards to your next press release congratulating yourselves on not taking pictures of people on the toilets on match day.   

As this is not an anti Chelsea rant.  But just as someone has already said, the fact that a premier league club seems to think this is something to be proud of and worthy of a press release and story. As opposed to just the right thing any business, especially a premier league football team who lets face it, if you asked the general public who pays the biggest weekly wages in this country they would, probably say premier league clubs, does.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not saying I disagree with your point of view (probably agree with the sentiment behind it tbh), but for me a step in the right direction is better than one in the wrong direction, all day long. 

If a few more follow suit (even if it is to 'save face') then quite a few folk should have more money in their pocket.....I like that.....and I'm pretty sure those getting a 'wee lift' will too. 

So, is it a good thing or a bad thing?  On balance, I'd say it's a good thing.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Dec 11, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			I think a lot have.  As I said in another thread, the school I am governor of did this ages ago as soon as the concept was introduced. Little did I know we were missing out on a feel good story in the local or even national press as I thought we were doing the right thing. But to be fair we did have nearly a grand left over at the end of the academic year, so fair play to Chelsea for doing this with a profit of Â£18 million last year and a virtual unlimited supply of money on tap from a billionaire owner.  Well done Chelsea, I look forwards to your next press release congratulating yourselves on not taking pictures of people on the toilets on match day.   

As this is not an anti Chelsea rant.  But just as someone has already said, the fact that a premier league club seems to think this is something to be proud of and worthy of a press release and story. As opposed to just the right thing any business, especially a premier league football team who lets face it, if you asked the general public who pays the biggest weekly wages in this country they would, probably say premier league clubs, does.
		
Click to expand...

But it is an anti Chelsea rant.  If it is such a shameful thing not to pay the living wage, perhaps you could explain why you are calling out the one Premier League club that has now signed up to it rather than the 19 who haven't?

As for who thinks it is worthy of a press release, the Living Wage Foundation appear to think so from the comments on their website, and the link from the OP was from the BBC website so they presumably think it is newsworthy; any proof that it was Chelsea that released it first?  Thought not.  Whilst I might agree that it doesn't need to be shouted from the rooftops as we should be paying a decent wage, we shouldn't be ashamed of it either when we are in a minority of one in the Premier League.


----------



## Liverbirdie (Dec 11, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



			As for who thinks it is worthy of a press release, the Living Wage Foundation appear to think so from the comments on their website, and the link from the OP was from the BBC website so they presumably think it is newsworthy; any proof that it was Chelsea that released it first?  Thought not.  Whilst I might agree that it doesn't need to be shouted from the rooftops as we should be paying a decent wage, we shouldn't be ashamed of it either when we are in a minority of one in the Premier League.
		
Click to expand...

Spot on, if they are doing it just for PR then not the right way to do it.

However, come what may, they have done it - well played.:thup:


----------



## Tongo (Dec 12, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



			But it is an anti Chelsea rant.  If it is such a shameful thing not to pay the living wage, perhaps you could explain why you are calling out the one Premier League club that has now signed up to it rather than the 19 who haven't?

As for who thinks it is worthy of a press release, the Living Wage Foundation appear to think so from the comments on their website, and the link from the OP was from the BBC website so they presumably think it is newsworthy; any proof that it was Chelsea that released it first?  Thought not.  Whilst I might agree that it doesn't need to be shouted from the rooftops as we should be paying a decent wage, we shouldn't be ashamed of it either when we are in a minority of one in the Premier League.
		
Click to expand...

I dont think anyone is slagging off Chelsea for what they have done, rather the "look at us, aren't we marvellous" attitude. They could have done it privately without any media fuss. 

As for the other 19 clubs, well if we are looking for Premier League clubs to do the right thing then we are in trouble.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 12, 2014)

Current employment laws are a total disgrace, we appear to be reverting to Victorian standards.
What next? 
Workers queuing up at the supermarket for the taskmaster to say 'I'll take you, you and you today'.

To expect a minimum wage employee to stand at a till for six hours and work non stop without a break is dreadful, especially when in  some cases women are pregnant. We should take our life in our hands and start naming, shaming and boycotting these well known companies.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Dec 12, 2014)

Fish said:



			I'm struggling with the attitude being displayed, top executives in blue chip companies earn hundreds of thousands but the staff at the lowest level will get minimum wage at best, its no different at football clubs so, stewards, turnstile attendants, shop staff etc will now all possibly get over Â£2 more an hour from joining in this scheme, *yes footballers are on silly wages but aren't top bankers in comparison to basic tellers. 
*
Maybe they shouldn't have bothered and saved a few quid.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, and if a hedge fund or a multi-national bank making million of dollars in profit made an announcement that they now pay some of their staff the living wage they would get exactly the same reaction as Chelsea have got. I agree in principal paying anyone the living wage is good, but it is the very least they should be doing.   If a small business struggling in the current economic climate does this then probably worthy of comment.  If a multi-billionaires play thing does it then don't stick it on your web site as something to be proud of. http://www.chelseafc.com/news/latest-news/2014/12/chelsea-to-pay-living-wage.html


----------



## Hacker Khan (Dec 12, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



			But it is an anti Chelsea rant.  If it is such a shameful thing not to pay the living wage, perhaps you could explain why you are calling out the one Premier League club that has now signed up to it rather than the 19 who haven't?

As for who thinks it is worthy of a press release, the Living Wage Foundation appear to think so from the comments on their website, and the link from the OP was from the BBC website so they presumably think it is newsworthy; *any proof that it was Chelsea that released it first?  Thought not*.  Whilst I might agree that it doesn't need to be shouted from the rooftops as we should be paying a decent wage, we shouldn't be ashamed of it either when we are in a minority of one in the Premier League.
		
Click to expand...

To quote from an article in The Independent  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...r-league-team-to-pay-living-wage-9918689.html

In a statement from the Blues, the club said it had begun the process of ensuring that external contractors who work for the club would also eventually receive the Living Wage, as well as any other additional agency employees tied to the team. Chelsea said such a development would be complete by July 2017. The club's chairman, Bruce Buck, said in the statement, "We believe the move to the Living Wage underlines our commitment to ensuring that all our employees receive a fair rate of pay for their hard work and dedication. Quite simply it is the right thing to do."

So yup, there's the proof.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Dec 12, 2014)

How many people is this actually going to affect? I really can't see it being many and I suspect that most of those who are affected are part time employees who only work match days etc. 

So in the grand scheme of things, if they ask John Terry to take a 0.01% pay cut they should have it covered


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Current employment laws are a total disgrace, we appear to be reverting to Victorian standards.
What next? 
Workers queuing up at the supermarket for the taskmaster to say 'I'll take you, you and you today'.

*To expect a minimum wage employee to stand at a till for six hours and work non stop without a break is dreadful, especially when in  some cases women are pregnant. We should take our life in our hands and start naming, shaming and boycotting these well known companies*.
		
Click to expand...

Who is doing that ?


----------



## chrisd (Dec 12, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			To quote from an article in The Independent  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...r-league-team-to-pay-living-wage-9918689.html

In a statement from the Blues, the club said it had begun the process of ensuring that external contractors who work for the club would also eventually receive the Living Wage, as well as any other additional agency employees tied to the team. Chelsea said such a development would be complete by July 2017. The club's chairman, Bruce Buck, said in the statement, "We believe the move to the Living Wage underlines our commitment to ensuring that all our employees receive a fair rate of pay for their hard work and dedication. Quite simply it is the right thing to do."

So yup, there's the proof.
		
Click to expand...


So it'll only take them until 2017 to implement the change in full - something that they could do by next pay day! What do they do with the staff paid marginally over the living wage rate, do they give everyone the same increase as the lowest in order to keep differentials the same?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Who is doing that ?
		
Click to expand...

Many High Street Stores, that is the maximum hours staff can work so they bring them in for 6 hour shifts on zero or 4 hour contracts.
This also means that the staff get no benefits.
Even on holiday pay the firms reduce the staff members pay the previous weeks to allow minimum costs to the company.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Many High Street Stores, that is the maximum hours staff can work so they bring them in for 6 hour shifts on zero or 4 hour contracts.
This also means that the staff get no benefits.
Even on holiday pay the firms reduce the staff members pay the previous weeks to allow minimum costs to the company.
		
Click to expand...

So I'm guessing you can show the proof that pregnant ladies are being asked to "stand for 6 hours at a till"

Every till operator I see at most supermarkets etc have seats bar places like Next etc who constantly rotate their staff

As for the OP - what is the difference between what the staff are getting paid now to what they will be getting paid ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			So I'm guessing you can show the proof that pregnant ladies are being asked to "stand for 6 hours at a till"

Every till operator I see at most supermarkets etc have seats bar places like Next etc who constantly rotate their staff

As for the OP - what is the difference between what the staff are getting paid now to what they will be getting paid ?
		
Click to expand...

Yes..........Well known High Street shop chain where a friend of my daughters has a part time job, they do not have any seats or staff room. As far as rotation of the staff, they will move from till to shelf stacking but work continuously for six hours.


----------



## CMAC (Dec 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Current employment laws are a total disgrace, we appear to be reverting to Victorian standards.
What next? 
Workers queuing up at the supermarket for the taskmaster to say 'I'll take you, you and you today'.

To expect a minimum wage employee to stand at a till for six hours and work non stop without a break is dreadful, especially when in  some cases women are pregnant. We should take our life in our hands and *start naming, shaming and boycotting these well known companies*.
		
Click to expand...

and are you going to do what you so passionately advocate?

your post above would appear like you dont want to practice what you preach!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Yes..........Well known High Street shop chain where a friend of my daughters has a part time job, they do not have any seats or staff room. As far as rotation of the staff, they will move from till to shelf stacking but work continuously for six hours.
		
Click to expand...

A friend of a friend ?

And which high street shop ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 12, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			A friend of a friend ?

And which high street shop ?
		
Click to expand...

No, as stated my daughters friend.

Take your pick as most of them are at the same game.
I would imagine a few Forum members employ folk in a similar manner but would be too embarrassed to come clean.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Dec 12, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			To quote from an article in The Independent  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...r-league-team-to-pay-living-wage-9918689.html

In a statement from the Blues, the club said it had begun the process of ensuring that external contractors who work for the club would also eventually receive the Living Wage, as well as any other additional agency employees tied to the team. Chelsea said such a development would be complete by July 2017. The club's chairman, Bruce Buck, said in the statement, "We believe the move to the Living Wage underlines our commitment to ensuring that all our employees receive a fair rate of pay for their hard work and dedication. Quite simply it is the right thing to do."

So yup, there's the proof.
		
Click to expand...

That's proof that the club that the club made a statement.  It's no proof that they released it before the Living Wage Foundation did, nor that either the BBC or The Independent picked it up from the club website as opposed to the Living Wage Foundation.  So not actually proof of Chelsea pushing it into the public domain at all.



Hacker Khan said:



			Yes, and if a hedge fund or a multi-national bank making million of dollars in profit made an announcement that they now pay some of their staff the living wage they would get exactly the same reaction as Chelsea have got. I agree in principal paying anyone the living wage is good, but it is the very least they should be doing.   If a small business struggling in the current economic climate does this then probably worthy of comment.  If a multi-billionaires play thing does it then don't stick it on your web site as something to be proud of. http://www.chelseafc.com/news/latest-news/2014/12/chelsea-to-pay-living-wage.html

Click to expand...

What do you suggest; open a wall of shame and post it there for being the only current Premiership club to be doing it?  Throw our higher earners off the roof of the stand whilst begging for public forgiveness?  I'll agree that it should have been done sooner rather than later but it's been done, and it might help to push others to do it.  I'll say it again, Chelsea haven't necessarily made a press release; the statement is on a club website primarily intended for club supporters and the push into the wider arena appears to have been made by the BBC, a national newspaper, the Living Wage Foundation and the Mayor of London.  If other agencies have chosen to bring it to a wider audience why blame the club? 

For the second time, how about laying into the 19 that aren't rather than the 1 that is?


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			We should take our life in our hands and start naming, shaming and boycotting these well known companies.
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			Many High Street Stores
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			Yes..........Well known High Street shop chain where a friend of my daughters has a part time job
		
Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			Take your pick as most of them are at the same game.
		
Click to expand...

So despite your big speech about naming and shaming these firms you have refused three times when asked directly to actually do what you were preaching. How are we meant to boycott them if you won't name them?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 12, 2014)

I will not name the company in public as what my daughter told me was I assume in confidence.

I shall PM Phill and hope he has the decency to respect that.


----------



## Pin-seeker (Dec 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I will not name the company in public as what my daughter told me was I assume in confidence.

I shall PM Phill and hope he has the decency to respect that.
		
Click to expand...

So why Message Phil? 
What will that accomplish? 
You don't have to prove anything to him,& it's not going to make anyone boycott the store


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I will not name the company in public as what my daughter told me was I assume in confidence.

I shall PM Phill and hope he has the decency to respect that.
		
Click to expand...

So "naming and shaming" but only in private? I think I can see the flaw in your plan to "boycott" these companies if no-one is allowed to know who they are.


----------



## Pin-seeker (Dec 12, 2014)

ColchesterFC said:



			So "naming and shaming" but only in private? I think I can see the flaw in your plan to "boycott" these companies if no-one is allowed to know who they are.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah but Phil will stop shopping there,that'll show em


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Dec 12, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



			For the second time, how about laying into the 19 that aren't rather than the 1 that is?
		
Click to expand...


I obviously cannot speak for others but my criticism was not specifically aimed at Chelsea but more generally at all Premier League clubs for thinking that it is OK to pay many of their staff less than a living wage. Also criticism is directed towards the Living Wage Foundation for their supine acceptance of the situation in a business sector that is awash with money and seemingly untouched by austerity measures.

Whilst Chelsea's action should receive credit it should not be forgotten that, until now, they have been as guilty as all others.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Dec 12, 2014)

I suspect quite a lot of companies exploit lower paid workers to some extent, whether it be cheap Indian call centres or sweatshops in the far east producing garments. To do my bit I will continue not to support Chelsea or indeed any Premier league clubs if none of them are doing it. That will teach them.


----------



## Hacker Khan (Dec 12, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



			That's proof that the club that the club made a statement.  It's no proof that they released it before the Living Wage Foundation did, nor that either the BBC or The Independent picked it up from the club website as opposed to the Living Wage Foundation.  So not actually proof of Chelsea pushing it into the public domain at all.



What do you suggest; open a wall of shame and post it there for being the only current Premiership club to be doing it?  Throw our higher earners off the roof of the stand whilst begging for public forgiveness?  I'll agree that it should have been done sooner rather than later but it's been done, and it might help to push others to do it.  I'll say it again, Chelsea haven't necessarily made a press release; the statement is on a club website primarily intended for club supporters and the push into the wider arena appears to have been made by the BBC, a national newspaper, the Living Wage Foundation and the Mayor of London.  If other agencies have chosen to bring it to a wider audience why blame the club? 

For the second time, how about laying into the 19 that aren't rather than the 1 that is?
		
Click to expand...

Yea right, cause that's the way it works, premier league clubs post stories on their web sites that are only for supporters.  And in no way do they expect that it will get picked up by today's 24 hour media culture who are desperate to publish any press release in lieu of actually doing some journalism.  if only we had access to http://www.chelseafc.com/the-club/about-chelsea-football-club/media-centre.html we would know for sure.  With you blue tinted spectacles on you suspect there is nothing in there about this.  With my cynical head I I bet a pound to a penny there is.

And to please you, the rest of the Premier League clubs are scumbags for not doing this.  But I will cut Villa some slack as they had Acorns Childrens Hospice on their shirts when they could have got as lot more money from other sponsors.


----------



## Stuart_C (Dec 12, 2014)

Well done to Chelsea for this, there's one particular premier league club that have given their part time staff 0hr contacts never mind the  minimum wage.


----------



## Pin-seeker (Dec 12, 2014)

I suspect that people employed by premier league clubs are on a similar wage to people employed by other companies for doing the same type of work. 
Should a cashier at UTD/Arsenal or Chelsea be on more money than a cashier at Asda just because Rooney or Hazard are on Â£200k+ pw? 
Of course they shouldn't. 
It's as stupid as saying Nurses or soldiers should be on more than footballers.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I will not name the company in public as what my daughter told me was I assume in confidence.

I shall PM Phill and hope he has the decency to respect that.
		
Click to expand...

Read the PM and it will come down to the shops manager as opposed to company policy - but i will be amazed if they make a pregnant lady stand for 6 hours non stop without a break - sorry don't believe that 

Your story seems to contradict what I have seen 

Also suggesting members of this forum act that way towards any of their employees ? That's not on imo 

As for the company - well I'm not sure why you won't name and shame them when you state we should name and shame them ? Which is it ?


----------



## Blue in Munich (Dec 12, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			So until now Chelsea have been paying less than the living wage to many of their employees whilst happily paying some of their players Â£8m to Â£10m p.a.

Glad they are now taking some steps but it continues to illustrate how clubs and players, not just Chelsea, have lost touch with reality.
		
Click to expand...




MetalMickie said:



			I obviously cannot speak for others but my criticism was not specifically aimed at Chelsea but more generally at all Premier League clubs for thinking that it is OK to pay many of their staff less than a living wage. Also criticism is directed towards the Living Wage Foundation for their supine acceptance of the situation in a business sector that is awash with money and seemingly untouched by austerity measures.

Whilst Chelsea's action should receive credit it should not be forgotten that, until now, they have been as guilty as all others.
		
Click to expand...

MetalMickie, I don't see that you have to justify yourself.  Your first post qualified that it was a a football-wide problem rather than limited to Chelsea, but obviously as the first club to do it we are going to be the one most talked about.  The comment wasn't aimed at you, my apologies if you felt it was.  

I'm not suggesting that we should be receiving credit for it, just that we shouldn't be receiving a kicking for doing it as Hacker Khan continued to do.  I see that Hacker Khan has now called out the rest of the Premier League but, according to the post, only to please me, rather than because it would have been the right thing to do in the first place.


----------



## Stuart_C (Dec 12, 2014)

NWJocko said:



			I give them some credit but it's an absolute disgrace it's taken this long and that no other EPL clubs do it with the money in the game.
*
Raheem Sterling today said Â£70,000 a week was "unacceptable"!!! T*hat is why it should stick in their throat any club crowing about paying a living wage IMO and why I don't think everyone will give them a pat on the back.......
		
Click to expand...

That should say " A source close to the negotiations" said!!!


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 12, 2014)

Hacker Khan said:



			But I will cut Villa some slack as they had Acorns Childrens Hospice on their shirts when they could have got as lot more money from other sponsors.
		
Click to expand...

When I saw Villa and also Barcelona with Unicef (?) on their shirts my immediate reaction was that what they were doing was brilliant. Thinking about it some more I wondered if the charities would've been better off if the club had taken the money from a more traditional sponsorship deal and then donated it to them instead. I don't know what the going rate is to sponsor a mid table Premier League team but it must be Â£2 million plus a year. And as for Barcelona, to be the first company to sponsor them after they had refused for so many years to have a sponsor must have been worth Â£10 million a year. Imagine the amount of good the charities could've done with that sort of cash and they would've still got the publicity from the clubs donating and then publicising the "This is what we've done with Barcelona's generous donation...."


----------



## Liverbirdie (Dec 12, 2014)

ColchesterFC said:



			So despite your big speech about naming and shaming these firms you have refused three times when asked directly to actually do what you were preaching. How are we meant to boycott them if you won't name them?
		
Click to expand...

Friends of friends re-united?


----------



## NWJocko (Dec 12, 2014)

Stuart_C said:



			That should say " A source close to the negotiations" said!!!
		
Click to expand...

For complete accuracy I guess so.

If he was happy with it he would sign for that though.....

Zero hours contracts and not paying a living wage with the money in the premier league is disgraceful.  Not surprising but disgraceful.


----------



## Pin-seeker (Dec 12, 2014)

Stuart_C said:



			That should say " A source close to the negotiations" said!!!
		
Click to expand...

Yet again agents trying to hold a club to ransom I reckon. 
With Liverpools current problems it will probably play into Sterling & his agents hands when negotiating,like it did with Rooney & UTD. 
Haven't QPR got something like A 20% cut of any sell on fee?


----------



## Liverbirdie (Dec 12, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			I obviously cannot speak for others but my criticism was not specifically aimed at Chelsea but more generally at all Premier League clubs for thinking that it is OK to pay many of their staff less than a living wage. Also criticism is directed towards the Living Wage Foundation for their supine acceptance of the situation in a business sector that is awash with money and seemingly untouched by austerity measures.

Whilst Chelsea's action should receive credit it should not be forgotten that, until now, they have been as guilty as all others.
		
Click to expand...

MM - I know what your saying, but like the slave trade, when one country stands up others can follow suit in time. Not comparing the slave trade to Chelsea's new policy, but at the same time, somehow apt.


----------



## bozza (Dec 12, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well done Chelsea!

Hope it shames every other Football club - and every other company - into doing the same thing!
		
Click to expand...

So a club like Everton who i support who don't have a billionaire owner or anywhere near the type sponsorship money coming in to the club should have to follow suit?


----------



## Liverbirdie (Dec 12, 2014)

bozza said:



			So a club like Everton who i support who don't have a billionaire owner or anywhere near the type sponsorship money coming in to the club should have to follow suit?
		
Click to expand...

I think Everton would have to start with the players...


----------



## ADB (Dec 13, 2014)

chrisd said:



			So it'll only take them until 2017 to implement the change in full - something that they could do by next pay day! What do they do with the staff paid marginally over the living wage rate, do they give everyone the same increase as the lowest in order to keep differentials the same?
		
Click to expand...

Currently working on the implementation of Living Wage for a local authority service and this is a long and complex process to balance staff gaining sometimes a 20% increase without any change in duties, to the staff who are perhaps in a junior supervisory role having no real term increase. It cannot be done overnight and, the evidence appears to show that the introduction of Living Wage tends to go hand in hand with a general policy of rationalisation of numbers over the consultation period. In short, those that stay get more, but head count is reduced.


----------



## Liverbirdie (Dec 13, 2014)

snaphookwedge said:



			Currently working on the implementation of Living Wage for a local authority service and this is a long and complex process to balance staff gaining sometimes a 20% increase without any change in duties, to the staff who are perhaps in a junior supervisory role having no real term increase. It cannot be done overnight and, the evidence appears to show that the introduction of Living Wage tends to go hand in hand with a general policy of rationalisation of numbers over the consultation period. In short, those that stay get more, but head count is reduced.
		
Click to expand...

Boooooo - Chelsea want to make redundancies, and they are doing it under this guise.

I knew they were up to no good.......


----------



## ADB (Dec 13, 2014)

Liverbirdie said:



			Boooooo - Chelsea want to make redundancies, and they are doing it under this guise.

I knew they were up to no good.......

Click to expand...

 the rotters


----------



## Hacker Khan (Dec 13, 2014)

bozza said:



			So a club like Everton who i support who don't have a billionaire owner or anywhere near the type sponsorship money coming in to the club should have to follow suit?
		
Click to expand...

As I said in another post, the *annual* budget for the school I am governor of is probably half of the total *weekly* wages most premier league clubs pay their players. So yes, if schools can do it then so can premier league clubs. It's just a case of extra money going somewhere and less money going somewhere else. And it is a bit worrying if a premier league claims they cannot afford to do as as you think, jeez, what kind of pittance have you been paying some (but obviously not all) of your employees?


----------



## Hacker Khan (Dec 13, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



			MetalMickie, I don't see that you have to justify yourself.  Your first post qualified that it was a a football-wide problem rather than limited to Chelsea, but obviously as the first club to do it we are going to be the one most talked about.  The comment wasn't aimed at you, my apologies if you felt it was.  

I'm not suggesting that we should be receiving credit for it, just that we shouldn't be receiving a kicking for doing it as Hacker Khan continued to do.  *I see that Hacker Khan has now called out the rest of the Premier League but, according to the post, only to please me, rather than because it would have been the right thing to do in the first place. * 

Click to expand...

if you look at post 2 you will see I referred to all premier league clubs and the absurdity of the situation.  Sorry if you felt if this was an attack on your beloved Chelsea from a bitter rival.  It is not, I support a Conference team if any, and I would kind of thought that it went without saying that other premier league clubs were scumbags for not doing it.  But if it needed spelling out to maintain the moral high ground then I have done so.

Anyway, this is getting childish now as from the vast majority of the football posts it is pretty clear that most club supporters think their club can do little wrong it is mostly pointless arguing.  So I will stop. Honestly.


----------



## JCW (Dec 13, 2014)

Russian money , no big deal to a man who pays players lots to play for other clubs .


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 13, 2014)

JCW said:



			Russian money , no big deal to a man who pays players lots to play for other clubs .
		
Click to expand...

What nationality is Usmanov ?


----------



## CMAC (Dec 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



*I will not name the company in public *as what my daughter told me was I assume in confidence.

I shall PM Phill and hope he has the decency to respect that.
		
Click to expand...

but you'll publicly shout on a forum that everyone else should! 

during the referendum debate you posted unsubstantiated nonsense daily, now you're doing it again. 

I put it to you that no 'well known high street store' would make a pregnant woman stand continuously for 6 hrs, it's against the law, employee rights and would leave them wide open to a compensation suit. Despite this, you still wont say which in my books makes you as bad as the alleged retailer. If however, you embellished the story you heard with no facts then say so. 

_The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

Edmund Burke_


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 13, 2014)

CMAC said:



			but you'll publicly shout on a forum that everyone else should! 

during the referendum debate you posted unsubstantiated nonsense daily, now you're doing it again. 

I put it to you that no 'well known high street store' would make a pregnant woman stand continuously for 6 hrs, it's against the law, employee rights and would leave them wide open to a compensation suit. Despite this, you still wont say which in my books makes you as bad as the alleged retailer. If however, you embellished the story you heard with no facts then say so. 

_The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

Edmund Burke_

Click to expand...

To the best of my knowledge it is not against the law or employment rights.

Can you prove me wrong, I shall be more than willing to apologise. If not are you just doing what you accuse me of ?


----------



## CMAC (Dec 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			To the best of my knowledge it is not against the law or employment rights.

Can you prove me wrong, I shall be more than willing to apologise. If not are you just doing what you accuse me of ?
		
Click to expand...

its not about proving you wrong! you said all companies should be named and shamed but you dont practice what *you *preach! 


as an aside _An employer should give an employee enough breaks to make sure their health and safety isnâ€™t at risk if that work is â€˜monotonousâ€™_(Gov official website on contracts of employment and working hours)  I'd say stacking shelves is regarded as that. It's also just decency to have a pregnant woman resting or sitting if required. If she works 1 second over 6 hrs she must have a minimum 20 minutes. I've never heard of an employee in a 'well known company' not to get at least 2 separate breaks in a shift.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 13, 2014)

CMAC said:



			its not about proving you wrong! you said all companies should be named and shamed but you dont practice what *you *preach! 


as an aside _An employer should give an employee enough breaks to make sure their health and safety isnâ€™t at risk if that work is â€˜monotonousâ€™_(Gov official website on contracts of employment and working hours)  I'd say stacking shelves is regarded as that. It's also just decency to have a pregnant woman resting or sitting if required. If she works 1 second over 6 hrs she must have a minimum 20 minutes. I've never heard of an employee in a 'well known company' not to get at least 2 separate breaks in a shift.
		
Click to expand...

So not against employment law as you stated earlier.


----------



## CMAC (Dec 13, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So not against employment law as you stated earlier.

Click to expand...

Employment health and safety law- that ok? 

now, back to your preaching? or are you going to deflect and duck yet again despite numerous requests by numerous posters?


----------



## JCW (Dec 13, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What nationality is Usmanov ?
		
Click to expand...

You not very clever  are you , you already know the answer to that question , and you also know his money is not wanted by Arsenal board and that as the 2nd biggest shareholder he does not even have a say or a seat on the board and you still choose to ask me  , Are you Cat 1 yet or you still telling everyone you are , i know the answer to that too , LS is not leaving Liverpool lol


----------



## Pin-seeker (Dec 13, 2014)

Doon obviously doesn't want to name the store so maybe that should be an end to it.


----------



## CMAC (Dec 13, 2014)

Pin-seeker said:



			Doon obviously doesn't want to name the store so maybe that should be an end to it.
		
Click to expand...

agreed, he shouldnt make these wild accusations and cries of name and shame then.


----------



## Pin-seeker (Dec 13, 2014)

CMAC said:



			agreed, he shouldnt make these wild accusations and cries of name and shame then.
		
Click to expand...

Yeah I agree,but no point badgering him to do it.


----------



## JCW (Dec 13, 2014)

What is a living wage anyhow , whatever we get paid we could always use more , I got plenty but i still would not say no to anymore


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 13, 2014)

JCW said:



			You not very clever  are you , you already know the answer to that question , and you also know his money is not wanted by Arsenal board and that as the 2nd biggest shareholder he does not even have a say or a seat on the board and you still choose to ask me  , Are you Cat 1 yet or you still telling everyone you are , i know the answer to that too , LS is not leaving Liverpool lol 

Click to expand...

What does my Handicap category or Suarez have to do with my question ?

Don't bleat about other clubs money and their owners when Arsenals owners aren't short for cash themselves.


----------

