Living Wage - be careful what you wish for!

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's not their fault but they're in a business to make money, that's threatened by what the competition does, if they don't work out how to evolve in the light of that they'll die. That's how it works.

But just for example-one of the values of going to the cinema over the home experience is the getting out bit, the human interaction, the exchange yeah? It's more personable and bespoke than just sitting at home in front of the TV. What have they done in the example above? Made the whole experience staffed by a skeleton crew and removed the management who would have been responsible for making sure services run efficiently, which removes much of that unique experience at a stroke. Now you'll get overworked, distressed staff having to do more work and be more focused on their own job survival and just staying above water, to the expense of having the mental space and actual resources to provide a good customer experience.
So one small example? What about all the other customer experience things they have done? The evidence doesn't suggest the cinema is in decline as your alluding to.

Lots of people do.

Lots more people don't though, it would seem. I can't see any other way of joining the dots between the massive fall of cinema audiences and massive increase of Netflix subscriptions and DVD/Blur Ray sales.
???
 


Exactly, then people say introducing a minimum wage in line with the living wage would mean employees wouldn't rely on benefits, except they still often still would, unless the minimum wage was stupidly high.
establishing a lower threshold and returning the onus to the employer in my eyes is an admission of culpability from central government. of course there are market forces at work here like inflation but the government are not providing a viable framework for companies to operate in.
 
Presumably there was a reason the cinema employed a lot more people. I don't run a cinema, so I don't know. What I do know in my line of work is that a lot of money and effort is spent in making things like look simple and straightforward to the people seeing what we put out. That's the art of it really. So I don't assume that if something seems simple it necessarily is.
This threads main gripe was why pay people off? just put the wage up,they staffed at a level where the numbers added up suddenly a large cost ie wages is increased and that has to be offset by a saving.Lets close one till,put one bloke on popcorn and drinks etc
Most just see that as fat cats being greedy,i don't.The numbers have to add up and my interpretation of this cinemas future is service will suffer and it may struggle ongoing,meaning less punters,downward spiral etc

One of the reasons they're 'managing,' if they are, is because thankfully for these companies, the poor wages they pay are often subsidised through the taxpayer, dishing out money in tax-credits. Then people moan about benefits...
I don't i'm more than happy for my taxes to be used in the bigger soceity situation,people begrudge lazy twats who don't do a days work living off the land they don't begrudge top ups ,at least i don't.I do have a problem with how the rest of my tax is spent,and perhaps we need to point our fingers that way instead of companies making a living.
 
Last edited:
This threads main gripe was why pay people off? just put the wage up,they staffed at a level where the numbers added up suddenly a large cost ie wages is increased and that has to be offset by a saving.Lets close one till,put one bloke on popcorn and drinks etc
Most just see that as fat cats being greedy,i don't.The numbers have to add up and my interpretation of this cinemas future is service will suffer and it may struggle ongoing,meaning less punters,downward spiral etc


I don't i'm more than happy for my taxes to be used in the bigger soceity situation,people begrudge lazy twats who don't do a days work living off the land they don't begrudge top ups ,at least i don't.I do have a problem with how the rest of my tax is spent,and perhaps we need to point our fingers that way instead of companies making a living.
yea me too mate. I'd just far prefer that my taxes were spent more constructively on things like infrastructure, education, apprenticeships, health-care, nationalisation, and projects that will enhance the lives of people in this country rather than subsidising private companies who should be paying already low-paid workers a decent wage already, anyway.
 
yea me too mate. I'd just far prefer that my taxes were spent more constructively on things like infrastructure, education, apprenticeships, health-care, nationalisation, and projects that will enhance the lives of people in this country rather than subsidising private companies who should be paying already low-paid workers a decent wage already, anyway.
Yeah all noble cause but those same companies paying a small fortune into the pot as well and there has to be a carrot for them to bother at all,i work in a medium size privately owned business and due to the markets our turnover has dropped 20% in 4 years yet we've maintained staff levels and seen all costs rise in that period so its not all about greed
 
Yeah all noble cause but those same companies paying a small fortune into the pot as well and there has to be a carrot for them to bother at all,i work in a medium size privately owned business and due to the markets our turnover has dropped 20% in 4 years yet we've maintained staff levels and seen all costs rise in that period so its not all about greed
That's the unfortunate reality of private companies having such a stranglehold on democracy in this country. It'll likely get worse in parliament through career politicians who are mostly only interested in feathering their own nest.

I don't like to tar all companies with the same brush. There are still major companies which are progressive and are more than happy to invest strongly in their workforce, pay good wages and benefits with good opportunities and so on. It would just seem that sadly there isn't enough of them.
 
I didn't know that shares came with guaranteed returns.
Keeping the ordinary working mans wages low is counter productive. Its these people who are the backbone of our economy, without them many businesses would go under. The rich, who you are in favour or making richer, tend to salt most of their money away. We need workers on liveable wages not the profiteering poverty level that many big companies pay.

I'm a shareholder. I'm not rich.

My little boy is a shareholder in a Child Trust Fund. He's not rich.

I have a pension (do you?) which invests in shares. I'm not rich.

Hell of a lot of people just like me who want and need shares to provide a return or capital growth.
 
Ultimately, you're a gambler. No problem with that, we all are thanks to successive businesses and governments putting our savings onto the stock market.
I don't think that's true. you have money put aside and this money is invested in return for a future cash flow. I don't see that as gambling.
 
I don't think that's true. you have money put aside and this money is invested in return for a future cash flow. I don't see that as gambling.

If the stake is at (tiny) risk then it's a gamble, more of a calculated one, especially with very low risk portfolios.
 
Ultimately, you're a gambler. No problem with that, we all are thanks to successive businesses and governments putting our savings onto the stock market.

My gambling provides a far worse return than my share investing...... But yes I know its effectively a gamble.

So many thing s are a gamble in life though. I went for a job interview 8 years ago & when asked my current salary I told them a lower figure than reality. I took a gamble on getting my foot in the door long term I would show them I was worth more. It worked. My salary shot up significantly in about 18 months.

Sometimes the short term clouds the long term.
 
when you invest in blue chips it's rarely for the capital appreciation, it's simply for the yield/divs. Like bonds.

I think I got the wrong end of the stick, I was thinking people with managed pension funds. There's always a (small) risk they make no money, so it's a gamble.
 
I think I got the wrong end of the stick, I was thinking people with managed pension funds. There's always a (small) risk they make no money, so it's a gamble.
yes I take your point but it's more like lending money than sticking it all on black. you'd expect to see a) your mmoney back and b) a risk-weighted return on the money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top