News:

Welcome to V.L.H

Main Menu
Welcome to verylittlehelps. Please login or sign up.

28-03-24, 09:50PM

Login with username, password and session length
Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 38,125
  • Total Topics: 630
  • Online today: 325
  • Online ever: 1,436
  • (24-01-24, 01:01AM)
Users Online

Equal Pay/Leigh Day /Tom Hewitt/

Started by OpShunned, 22-03-17, 05:49PM

Previous topic - Next topic

optout

@Panther
and
@Loki

if a company can't afford the going rate, then I am sure that the aldi could do with the  30% market share that tesco has. I feel certain that the vast majority (if we consider the past and ONGOING cuts that have happened on the unions watch) of those left (with their experience) could find alternative employment with real (not slave) rates of pay.

It is my belief (at the moment) that all of these incessant whines from distribution regarding pay increases (past and present) have led us to the point that we are at now. And as others have said (in other threads) if distribution do not like their current pay levels, then go somewhere that will pay them the going rate. OR fight for more money (which will it be), OH YEAH you have chosen (to fight), well then why don't you F off whilst we fight for US. I find it difficult to believe that distribution (or the union) have cared a FIG about shop-floor staff until now (when we start to stand up for ourselves), and now (all of a sudden) WE MATTER.

GO FIGURE

ONE THING IS FOR CERTAIN, WHEN SHOP-FLOOR STAFF FINALLY STAND-UP FOR THEMSELVES AND RECOGNIZE THEIR TRUE WORTH. GOD HELP THE REST OF YOU PARASITES. YOU HAVE TAKEN FROM SHOP-FLOOR WORKERS FOR TOOOOOOO LONG, TIME TO START GIVING BACK. :thumbup:
I AM NOT A REP, BUT......

trigger

crabbit ,see you on the frontline,,if the scots are hard enough,ha ha ha ha
BRING ON THE WELSH HA HA HA.GRAND SLAM 2008.
VOTE UKIP.

trigger

irishtescoworker ,you have more insight than me on this
BRING ON THE WELSH HA HA HA.GRAND SLAM 2008.
VOTE UKIP.

alf

Quote from: optout on 11-02-18, 12:43AM
ONE THING IS FOR CERTAIN, WHEN SHOP-FLOOR STAFF FINALLY STAND-UP FOR THEMSELVES AND RECOGNIZE THEIR TRUE WORTH. GOD HELP THE REST OF YOU PARASITES. YOU HAVE TAKEN FROM SHOP-FLOOR WORKERS FOR TOOOOOOO LONG, TIME TO START GIVING BACK. :thumbup:

So let me get this straight, distribution centres use the Union alongside actual membership participation to negotiate their pay, and you're accusing them of taking from shopworkers.

Are you not constantly banging on about how useless "tesdaw" are, yet when they and the members do something effective, you post this utter nonsense.




Loki

Quote from: panther on 10-02-18, 11:18PM
Never thought I'd see the day Loki, when I agree with you 100%. What people don't seem to be thinking is, this will affect EVERYONE. Those £££'s don't last long

I guess opinions vary a lot at times lol

At the end of the day, if there are genuine instances where there is genuine discrimination with regards to terms and conditions, then yeah, it should be dealt with accordingly. But this is just ludicrous and is indeed indicative of the claim culture in this country.

Seems many are more interested in getting one over on the Company with no thought of not only whether or not it is a case of gender discrimination, but also of what it could mean for employees in EVERY sector of employment throughout the country.
When all else fails, madness is the emergency exit.

Rigger

Quote from: optout on 11-02-18, 12:43AM
@Panther
and
@Loki

if a company can't afford the going rate, then I am sure that the aldi could do with the  30% market share that tesco has. I feel certain that the vast majority (if we consider the past and ONGOING cuts that have happened on the unions watch) of those left (with their experience) could find alternative employment with real (not slave) rates of pay.

It is my belief (at the moment) that all of these incessant whines from distribution regarding pay increases (past and present) have led us to the point that we are at now. And as others have said (in other threads) if distribution do not like their current pay levels, then go somewhere that will pay them the going rate. OR fight for more money (which will it be), OH YEAH you have chosen (to fight), well then why don't you F off whilst we fight for US. I find it difficult to believe that distribution (or the union) have cared a FIG about shop-floor staff until now (when we start to stand up for ourselves), and now (all of a sudden) WE MATTER.

GO FIGURE

ONE THING IS FOR CERTAIN, WHEN SHOP-FLOOR STAFF FINALLY STAND-UP FOR THEMSELVES AND RECOGNIZE THEIR TRUE WORTH. GOD HELP THE REST OF YOU PARASITES. YOU HAVE TAKEN FROM SHOP-FLOOR WORKERS FOR TOOOOOOO LONG, TIME TO START GIVING BACK. :thumbup:

1/10 for the rant

It's not distributions fault they still have an individual vote for any pay negs, sounds like the bulk of your rant should be directed at your union not distribution workers.

fargone

"No society wants you to become wise: it is against the investment of all societies. If people are wise they cannot be exploited. If they are intelligent they cannot be subjugated, they cannot be forced in a mechanical life, to live like robots. They will assert their individuality. They will have the fragrance of rebellion around them. They will like to live in freedom. Freedom comes with wisdom, intrinsically. They are inseparable, and no society wants people to be free. The communist society, the fascist society, the capitalist society, the Hindu, the Mohammedan, the Christian — no society — would like people to use their own intelligence because the moment they start using their intelligence they become dangerous — dangerous to the establishment, dangerous to the people who are in power, dangerous to the 'haves'; dangerous to all kinds of oppression, exploitation, suppression; dangerous to the churches, dangerous to the states, dangerous to the nations. In fact, a wise man is afire, alive, aflame. But he cannot sell his life, he cannot serve them. He would like rather to die than to be enslaved." ~Osho
 

Loki

Quote from: optout on 11-02-18, 12:43AM
@Panther
and
@Loki

if a company can't afford the going rate, then I am sure that the aldi could do with the  30% market share that tesco has. I feel certain that the vast majority (if we consider the past and ONGOING cuts that have happened on the unions watch) of those left (with their experience) could find alternative employment with real (not slave) rates of pay.

It is my belief (at the moment) that all of these incessant whines from distribution regarding pay increases (past and present) have led us to the point that we are at now. And as others have said (in other threads) if distribution do not like their current pay levels, then go somewhere that will pay them the going rate. OR fight for more money (which will it be), OH YEAH you have chosen (to fight), well then why don't you F off whilst we fight for US. I find it difficult to believe that distribution (or the union) have cared a FIG about shop-floor staff until now (when we start to stand up for ourselves), and now (all of a sudden) WE MATTER.

GO FIGURE

ONE THING IS FOR CERTAIN, WHEN SHOP-FLOOR STAFF FINALLY STAND-UP FOR THEMSELVES AND RECOGNIZE THEIR TRUE WORTH. GOD HELP THE REST OF YOU PARASITES. YOU HAVE TAKEN FROM SHOP-FLOOR WORKERS FOR TOOOOOOO LONG, TIME TO START GIVING BACK. :thumbup:

"We fight for us"? Think you're  missing the point of who's taken up the mantle and why. Ironic you mention parasites when, in this case, it's the solicitors that are the parasites who, incidentally care not of the consequences of such a ridiculous claim should it succeed.

Your seemingly prejudiced views regarding distribution workers beggars belief.

Oh, I'm a shop worker by the way.  8-)
When all else fails, madness is the emergency exit.

OpShunned

So ridiculous that it makes its way to Court and is tested in front of a Judge who finds in favour of the claim progressing further depsite Asda's protestations

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/brierly-v-asda.pdf

If it was 'ridiculous' it wouldn't get past 'Go', would it?


Loki

Already aware of the current status of the Asda case and Yep, still find it  ridiculous.

We'll see what happens several years from now. In the meantime I'll remain amused by those who happily use this case as a means to justify their blinkered views.

When all else fails, madness is the emergency exit.

OpShunned

The industry will have an inkling in October of this year when Asda's hearing takes place. If they win their case the writing would be on the wall for Tesco perhaps. Would it make a union rep's position untenable if they directly oppose the aims of the boots-on-the-ground members who pay good money to receive the backing of USDAW? Naturally, it is the right of every person of influence to act on their own convictions one way or another.

Kingkong2015

guys on new generation contacts in Belfast dc are paid less, less benefits that those who are female and on old t&c's, why? Is this not discrimination?   >:D

panther

Quote from: optout on 11-02-18, 12:43AM
@Panther
and
@Loki

if a company can't afford the going rate, then I am sure that the aldi could do with the  30% market share that tesco has. I feel certain that the vast majority (if we consider the past and ONGOING cuts that have happened on the unions watch) of those left (with their experience) could find alternative employment with real (not slave) rates of pay.

It is my belief (at the moment) that all of these incessant whines from distribution regarding pay increases (past and present) have led us to the point that we are at now. And as others have said (in other threads) if distribution do not like their current pay levels, then go somewhere that will pay them the going rate. OR fight for more money (which will it be), OH YEAH you have chosen (to fight), well then why don't you F off whilst we fight for US. I find it difficult to believe that distribution (or the union) have cared a FIG about shop-floor staff until now (when we start to stand up for ourselves), and now (all of a sudden) WE MATTER.

GO FIGURE

ONE THING IS FOR CERTAIN, WHEN SHOP-FLOOR STAFF FINALLY STAND-UP FOR THEMSELVES AND RECOGNIZE THEIR TRUE WORTH. GOD HELP THE REST OF YOU PARASITES. YOU HAVE TAKEN FROM SHOP-FLOOR WORKERS FOR TOOOOOOO LONG, TIME TO START GIVING BACK. :thumbup:

Optout, I think the claim is ludicrous for a few reasons, the first one the way it is being pushed, as sexual discrimination. It is not. The pressures on DC staff FAR outweigh the pressure instore, and I would never begrudge them a penny of the extra few ££s they make. I'd have more sympathy if they didn't dress it up to be a matter of sexual discrimination.

If you are SO unhappy that you feel 'standing up for yourself' is by bringing a lawsuit which, if successful, will ruin many, many peoples lives are jobs are lost/cut/company folds, then I feel sorry for you. Better paid jobs out there? Go find one.

I also work in stores by the way

optout

@Loki

I am aware that you are a shop worker and union rep 8-)

Are the female union members in your store aware of your views? I doubt it?

@Panther

"a lawsuit which, if successful, will ruin many, many peoples lives"

So working in stores is some-sort of shortcut to martyrdom?
I AM NOT A REP, BUT......

OpShunned

Not such 'martyrs' if it comes to accepting a wage increase, should it unfold   ???

Stand forward yon Sparticus and categorically state you will not accept a payrise should it be won by your female counterparts..Pledge here and now that you find your position as an Usdaw representative untenable, on principle, given how you withdraw support for your paying members in their bid to secure parity for a job of equal value  8-)

How can some of you boast you earn 42k a year in DC yet decry your colleagues the opportunity, potentially, to earn a decent 'living wage' which may get them off working tax credits, give them some pride back as they make the effort to get out of bed every day and therein allow them to provide a few more creature comforts for their loved ones?

alf

Quote from: OpShunned on 12-02-18, 04:21AM
How can some of you boast you earn 42k a year in DC yet decry your colleagues the opportunity, potentially, to earn a decent 'living wage' which may get them off working tax credits, give them some pride back as they make the effort to get out of bed every day and therein allow them to provide a few more creature comforts for their loved ones?

No one is, you can quite easily transfer to DC and get their pay (though i wouldn't hold out for that random 42k figure).

Of course that would actually require some work on your part.


OpShunned

No intention to join any DC Alf. I foresee muchos grief for said department. Booker merger spells the end of the fruits enjoyed by them. Drastic will wreak havoc! No point in jumping from one sinking ship to another..no 'work' expended on my part in that area..I am making plans to get out of retail altogether..Sad that I feel that way but I see no future in hanging around waiting and dodging one guillotine blade after another.

Loki

Quote from: optout on 12-02-18, 02:47AM
@Loki

I am aware that you are a shop worker and union rep 8-)

Are the female union members in your store aware of your views? I doubt it?

Why yes of course they are. I've nothing to hide and have said nothing discriminatory. Whereas you, my friend seem to have some deep rooted issue with DC workers. But that's your problem to deal with, not mine.
When all else fails, madness is the emergency exit.

optout

No problem with DC in general, just those in DC who are decrying our right to legal redress, because it may affect them.
I AM NOT A REP, BUT......

Duracell

#344
Ironically the Gender reference comes from claim supporters.
Heavier workloads better suited to males? Who said that? It's harder work more difficult to  attract and retain staff too, so rates are enhanced.

If a comparison is proven and rates levelled, then the more physical role will lose staff to the less physical ones. Rate setting has nothing to do with Gender it's about the role and how difficult and inflexible it is for a work life balance.

Distribution "Shifts" a dictated rota with weekend shifts. Very little choice other than nights or days, no giving your availability and your contract encompassing that availability.
If you can't do the hours you don't get the job.
No SUNDAY optout either.

Distribution is a more dictatorial contract with little if any flexibility it's heavier work, with physically handling and moving 2000kg of stock per shift just to retain a job. It's more difficult to attract staff to a distribution role, hence a better payment.

It simply has no bearing on Gender.

The insults to DC's workers are quite humorous, it shows the ineptitude of some to reason the case for the claim, I wonder if the legal team share the same ineptitude and or can actually put an equal value case together.



I don't begrudge anyone legal redress and supporting a rational reasoned claim, this one is not. The Asda case is slightly different because of the evidence, they have clear evidence to show that Asda had concerns about parity claims, and they made decisions and acted directly to avoid a comparison being made. It's this point that seems little known with the Asda case that makes it different and not necessarily the president that people believe it to be.

Take it to Court, and if the claim is successful and the law finds in favour of such a simplistic view to conclude such a complicated case then take the money, because in their madness at doing so they will turn labour markets in this country on their head.

My belief is the equal value will not be scrutinised that much because that is not the foundation of the claim, the foundation of the claim is simplistic gender discrimination based on an hypothesis that is discriminatory in its own right.
In this day an age discrimination can't be proven by a hypothetical discriminatory belief.

The judge might just simplistically Answer to the simplistic Claim, men and women get the same when they are expected to do the same, and neither are denied access to any area that pays enhanced pay and therefore treated the same with equal opportunity.

You may find that Asda staff were simply granted the right to compare because The court was presented with evidence that clearly showed Asda deliberately took action to make it difficult or avoid the comparison being made.
My Opinion is exactly that, Mine.  Based on my view of what I know , see and what I would do.
"Being a rep doesn't make a person right anymore than not being a rep makes a person wrong " 

Duracell.

optout

are the holidays in DC better than stores?
I AM NOT A REP, BUT......


optout

I AM NOT A REP, BUT......

Duracell

The holiday entitlement seems consistent.

Table one the majority are on annualised hours so don't have a holiday entitlement, and those that do carry 2 entitlements with the table showing holiday only with bank hols on top.
The second table the majority are not on annualised hours, do have holiday entitlement but not in two separate elements as other DC's and stores of hols and bank hols  but one element that is a total of both, signified by the *'s
My Opinion is exactly that, Mine.  Based on my view of what I know , see and what I would do.
"Being a rep doesn't make a person right anymore than not being a rep makes a person wrong " 

Duracell.

lordadmiral

Quote from: Duracell on 12-02-18, 04:02PM
Ironically the Gender reference comes from claim supporters.
Heavier workloads better suited to males? Who said that? It's harder work more difficult to  attract and retain staff too, so rates are enhanced.

If a comparison is proven and rates levelled, then the more physical role will lose staff to the less physical ones. Rate setting has nothing to do with Gender it's about the role and how difficult and inflexible it is for a work life balance.

Distribution "Shifts" a dictated rota with weekend shifts. Very little choice other than nights or days, no giving your availability and your contract encompassing that availability.
If you can't do the hours you don't get the job.
No SUNDAY optout either.

Distribution is a more dictatorial contract with little if any flexibility it's heavier work, with physically handling and moving 2000kg of stock per shift just to retain a job. It's more difficult to attract staff to a distribution role, hence a better payment.

It simply has no bearing on Gender.

The insults to DC's workers are quite humorous, it shows the ineptitude of some to reason the case for the claim, I wonder if the legal team share the same ineptitude and or can actually put an equal value case together.



I don't begrudge anyone legal redress and supporting a rational reasoned claim, this one is not. The Asda case is slightly different because of the evidence, they have clear evidence to show that Asda had concerns about parity claims, and they made decisions and acted directly to avoid a comparison being made. It's this point that seems little known with the Asda case that makes it different and not necessarily the president that people believe it to be.

Take it to Court, and if the claim is successful and the law finds in favour of such a simplistic view to conclude such a complicated case then take the money, because in their madness at doing so they will turn labour markets in this country on their head.

My belief is the equal value will not be scrutinised that much because that is not the foundation of the claim, the foundation of the claim is simplistic gender discrimination based on an hypothesis that is discriminatory in its own right.
In this day an age discrimination can't be proven by a hypothetical discriminatory belief.

The judge might just simplistically Answer to the simplistic Claim, men and women get the same when they are expected to do the same, and neither are denied access to any area that pays enhanced pay and therefore treated the same with equal opportunity.

You may find that Asda staff were simply granted the right to compare because The court was presented with evidence that clearly showed Asda deliberately took action to make it difficult or avoid the comparison being made.
Its true what u r saying but i must say something about example you made about amout of stock shifting /handling. You gave example of 2 tones , but me or other guy in my store shift more than that all the time filling produce. Other example is BWS and drinks done by me again or another guy. Second bests are unable to do half of the work we do but pay is the same and much lower than in DC. 26 aisles and 13 people at work. Now we just wait for redundancy if night operation will be scrapped.
In my opinion company should introduce better pay. Too many workers are extremly underpayed compared to the amount of work they do.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk