Chelsea lead the way towards Living Wage

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 £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 £9.15 should be aplauded for breaking ranks and leading by example imo.
 
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 £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.......
 
Fish said:
wow, "scum", where does this come from, so if they were all on £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 £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.
 
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.
 
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 £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.
 
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 £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.
 
Last edited:
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 £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.
 
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 £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.
 
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:
 
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.
 
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.
 
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 £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
 
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.
 
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 :whistle:
 
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 ?
 
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 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 ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
House Price Outlook
2
Replies
22
Views
7K
KenL
KenL
T
Equality & Diversity in the NHS
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
11K
Robster59
Robster59
T
Help Needed Lengthy post but please read it and support us.
2
Replies
29
Views
6K
Doon frae Troon
D
1
West Coast Golf Trip
Replies
12
Views
7K
patricks148
patricks148
rudebhoy
The Hole-in-One Gang: How Golf Bettors Beat The Bookies
Replies
8
Views
5K
abjectplop
A
Top