Jump to content

PIF and RB Sports & Media - Darren Eales to step down from CEO after being diagnosed with blood cancer.


Yorkie

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Jackie Broon said:

 

I think it does make a difference for FFP to some extent, because FFP only allows losses of up to £15m per season unless those losses are covered by "secure funding", the limit goes up to £115m over three seasons if those losses are covered.

 

One of the forms of "secure funding" is "contributions that an equity participant has made by way of payments for shares through the Club’s share capital account or share premium reserve account".

Interesting point. 

 

I was originally saying that this particular thing isn't really an attempt to get around the rules on FFP, since it has no relationship to your profit or loss in general.

 

And I do apologise to my friends, family and this forum for being tediously interested in this kind of thing ?

 

 

Edited by Abacus

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not sure what the benefits of that are, surely we don’t need to be part of the Living wage foundation as where a very rich business and could pay this without being required to pay this within 6 month of any increase.

 

Just feels like a way for any Corporate entity to pay a low wage and feel good about it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hudson said:

I’m not sure what the benefits of that are, surely we don’t need to be part of the Living wage foundation as where a very rich business and could pay this without being required to pay this within 6 month of any increase.

 

Just feels like a way for any Corporate entity to pay a low wage and feel good about it. 

I think the living wage is higher than the National minimum wage so they are making a commitment to pay the worst paid staff more........still a very poor rate of pay mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, madras said:

I think the living wage is higher than the National minimum wage so they are making a commitment to pay the worst paid staff more........still a very poor rate of pay mind.


Yeah the living wage is about 40p an hour more then the minimum wage from April this year.

 

That’s only £16 per week or £832 per year it’s not great and nothing to shout about really. 
 

The only real advantage is that you get the living wage at 18 and not 23 like the minimum wage

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, madras said:

I think the living wage is higher than the National minimum wage so they are making a commitment to pay the worst paid staff more........still a very poor rate of pay mind.

 

Aye, it's still a poor wage but atleast it brings people to a level where it's starting to make more sense them going to work than just signing on the dole. I suppose the reason for joining the scheme is ultimately a PR move, but it puts pressure on other businesses to do the same, more so than if we just started paying a fairer wage off our own backs.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hudson said:

I’m not sure what the benefits of that are, surely we don’t need to be part of the Living wage foundation as where a very rich business and could pay this without being required to pay this within 6 month of any increase.

 

Just feels like a way for any Corporate entity to pay a low wage and feel good about it. 

Think it’s more to be accredited by an external body which I would imagine requires auditing to show that we are paying a decent wage. The club could of course do this anyway but I think it’s the accreditation part that’s important to the hierarchy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hanshithispantz said:

 

Aye, it's still a poor wage but atleast it brings people to a level where it's starting to make more sense them going to work than just signing on the dole. I suppose the reason for joining the scheme is ultimately a PR move, but it puts pressure on other businesses to do the same, more so than if we just started paying a fairer wage off our own backs.

 

 

I get the point your making, but no business is going to feel pressure because somebody else pays more than them, also it’s been running for over 10 years and only just betters the minimum wage.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Hudson said:

I get the point your making, but no business is going to feel pressure because somebody else pays more than them, also it’s been running for over 10 years and only just betters the minimum wage.

 

I'm more onabout businesses in the same space having to catch up. So if Man City and Arsenal, for example were to also join, other teams might follow until every team in the league feels they need to do the same. It may not work like that in reality though, fuck knows.

 

And like £16 a week (minus tax) is objectively not a lot of money, but for someone on the bones of their arse it could deffinitely help. It would probably completely cover any media subscriptions someone would take for example.

 

By no means do I think it's some great, noble thing or out like. It's obviously still appauling[emoji38]

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s not much and the living wage needs to be increased, and minimum wage needs to be set at the living wage, but it is something.

I’m sure that I have read that the scheme also covers greater employment na rights as well, and also they can’t get around it by using outsourced labour, because that is calculated as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally speaking, wages aren't that bad in this country. It's the insane cost of living that's the issue. Reducing the tax burden would go a long way to helping those on minimum wage.

 

 

Edited by The Prophet

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...