Living Wage at ECFC?

[C j phill]

And you have totally ignored my question in response !

I'd like everyone to be paid appropriately for their efforts but my preference would be to better support those at the lower end of the earning strata.

 

[BigBanker]

Let's not beat around the bush, the extra cash would probably have to come off of the playing budget. And rightly so. I would be perfectly comfortable with that being the case. Much more comfortable than I am with our club not paying staff the living wage.

 

[BigBanker]

Completely agree with this! I've only been to one Trust Board meeting but the one I went to was when they voted on this before. IIRC the vote was pretty much unanimous against. I was pretty disgusted with this, IMO if your business can't afford to pay people a proper wage that you can live on, either your business isn't viable or you're paying someone else too much.
There's no way we can plead poverty now as they did last time, so this needs addressing straight away.
This needs to be the "Real Living Wage" of currently £9.50 though (which was what was debated at the meeting a few years ago, the Tory version hadn't been dreamt up by their PR dept at that time), not the Tories watered down "National Living Wage" currently £8.91.
I'm happy to put this forward at the next AGM if someone will second me.

Is it possible to 'second' remotely (as I'm unlikely to be in attendance)?

 

[Andy_H]

As this thread was started in 2014 how relevant is it today in 2021? ECFC has moved forward considerably in those intervening 7 years and the employment situation has likewise. So, before we all go rushing off to the Court of Human Rights screaming about 'sweat shop conditions at SJP' and similar, potentially, unfounded accusations does anybody actually know how many people/employees of ECFC this relates to? Are they part time or full time, and in what positions? Although, i seem to remember somewhere reading that a persons wage was private between them and their employer, but hey ho, this is Exeweb where facts are often a short commodity over accusations and emotions.

 

[Egg]

As this thread was started in 2014 how relevant is it today in 2021? ECFC has moved forward considerably in those intervening 7 years and the employment situation has likewise. So, before we all go rushing off to the Court of Human Rights screaming about 'sweat shop conditions at SJP' and similar, potentially, unfounded accusations does anybody actually know how many people/employees of ECFC this relates to? Are they part time or full time, and in what positions? Although, i seem to remember somewhere reading that a persons wage was private between them and their employer, but hey ho, this is Exeweb where facts are often a short commodity over accusations and emotions.

Nobody needs to know how many people this might relate to or how much anyone is earning. Ensuring all employees were paid at least the living wage [or some variation on] would render questions such as this irrelevant.

 

[LOG]

FWIW, the most recent Club accounts (to year ending 30th June 2020) show there was an average of 214 employees in the reporting period.

 

[Andy_H]

Nobody needs to know how many people this might relate to or how much anyone is earning. Ensuring all employees were paid at least the living wage [or some variation on] would render questions such as this irrelevant.

But if it related to nobody at ECFC then it's totally irrelevant - to EXEWEB - surely?

 

[Red Bill]

As this thread was started in 2014 how relevant is it today in 2021? ECFC has moved forward considerably in those intervening 7 years and the employment situation has likewise. So, before we all go rushing off to the Court of Human Rights screaming about 'sweat shop conditions at SJP' and similar, potentially, unfounded accusations does anybody actually know how many people/employees of ECFC this relates to? Are they part time or full time, and in what positions? Although, i seem to remember somewhere reading that a persons wage was private between them and their employer, but hey ho, this is Exeweb where facts are often a short commodity over accusations and

 

[milts]

I suspect the cost difference between paying national minimum wage and national living wage for the club has now reduced, given that the national living wage now applies to all over 23 - well the legal minimum of £8.91 does. For 21-22 year olds this is £8.36, so not a huge difference (for the club).

I am not sure how many under 20s we would employ, but that is where the difference starts to creep in as the minimum wage for this age group is £6.56, dropping to £4.62 for an under 18.

I would have thought as a club we could at least commit to paying the national living wage of £8.91 an hour without a significant impact on finances.

 

[Red Bill]

We'll just file that one in the 'massively missing the point whilst failing to grasp what the discussion is about' folder shall we!
This is about a commitment from the club to pay the living wage. We don't need to know any individual employee's employment details, just that everyone is being paid the "real living wage". An amount calculated to be the minimum necessary to meet basic living expenses. It's clear you find someone not really having enough to live on as less important than the club facing any kind of criticism.
And the band played on eh!