- The pub workers are right to unionise and strike
- The pub workers are wrong to unionise and strike
- No strong feelings either way
- Other (please comment)
Not a question of right or wrong. They have the right to take this approach and it’s not a service people depend, so no harm done to anyone else.
Do you think the owners of the Sylvan Post (who created the jobs, with their mutually-agreed contracts) will see this as “no harm done”?
Every bar I ever worked in I never had the luxury of an employment contract. Can’t speak for Antic but I had zero rights or notice and earned nowhere near the living wage. Fair play to them. Progress requires resistance occasionally.
I feel that this is a private issue between the three parties. The pub is not legally bound to open on Christmas Day or New Year’s Eve so the sides can bargain equally.
The first tweet with #anticworkersforlivingwage is a bit disingenuous as that is not what is at issue.
This whole “provide a living wage” is a load of rubbish. It’s up to the individual to afford themselves the opportunity to command a living wage, not highstreet businesses. If you feel/believe that you’re worth more than you’re currently getting go somewhere else. Or start-out in a more challenging and responsible role than that of pulling pints and clearing tables.
This argument falls short of recognising that taxes have to be used to top up any wages which are below guaranteeing an existential minimum to the employee. At that point it becomes effectively a state subsidy to the high street business, which is why minimum wages are not only supported by those interested in people’s welfare, but treasury’s accountants too. There has a balance to be struck, of course, as jobs disappearing as a result of a minimum wage could have the opposite affect. Experience so far has shown that jobs aren’t disappearing though overall. Let’s see how the other big change not to be mentioned here will affect the whole dynamic.
Note to posters: we have a general discussion on the National Living Wage AKA Minimum Wage in the General Politics category.
Note that general discussion on the minimum wage may be moved to General Politics as per our guidelines.
Let’s just call this exactly what it is: a shakedown. Instead of taking responsibility for their own destiny by asking around for a similar job offering more money, they get a widely-known/written about union to turn-up on their employer’s doorstep making a noise about ‘equality’ and ‘corporate greed’ etc. That isn’t how a grown-up goes about conducting themselves.
Here’s a suggestion for disgruntled staff working for Antics: Lee Marley Brickwork Ltd. are looking for hod carriers. Duties include carrying up to and above 1000 bricks and knocking-up around three tons of mortar per day. £140 a day with the opportunity to learn brickwork when you aren’t busy.
They have their choices too. I was concious of the owners when I made that comment, but felt it obviously wouldn’t apply.
I doubt whether their contacts rule out this kind of action (or whether that would even be legal).
My point about contracts was this: assuming the employees have contracts (no one should accept a job without a contract IMO), the contract would have set out their pay and made it clear if they were entitled to extra pay on certain shifts (eg NYE).
If their contract doesn’t promise this extra pay, they have absolutely no basis to kick up a fuss about it latterly.
If they want double pay on NYE, it’s up to them to find an employer that pays this. Using “mob pressure” like this will probably damage the Sylvan Post as a business at a crucial time.
I absolutely support the @Sylvanpost management and hope their business withstands this entitled and unfair attack.
Shouldn’t the poll ask whether the staff should be paid extra at this time of year, when they are giving up their own social/family life?
I feel the fact that ‘Union’ is involved that the OP has raised this as an issue.
What business is it of ours? It’s a privately run business. We’re not employees or employers.
Interesting article in the Croydon Guardian mentions that Antic used to pay time and a half over Christmas but ended that policy. Guess sticking to your contract (if they have them) works both ways.
From the article:
It may be that the policy changed - but has there been an actual breach of contract? If so, that’s a matter that the employees should seek advice on as opposed to waving placards in the street.
Maybe they’re doing both (placards and talking). It would be interesting to hear from employees and the union what discussions have taken place. I’d be really surprised if they hadnt.
You ignore my comment. Your poll refers to the protest being Unionised
Well that’s probably burnt some bridges between management and the staff, customers as well.
Personally, and I may have been shaded by the diabolical unions on the railways, but I’ve never found this sort of action generally beneficial to anyone.
Without knowing the full details of the employment terms, I agree with some in this thread. If you signed a contract, don’t now cry foul of the terms. If the work is more casual and you don’t like it, find something better for yourself - the situation will resolve itself if the pub can’t find any other staff.
Perhaps the rumours of sale/not sale earlier this year shook confidence and hurt the relationship between the owners and staff, but waving placards outside a pub seems a bit silly to me.
Not saying anyone is right or wrong here.
But I think if someone is employed by a big company they should probably get time and a hallf or double time as they would normally on a Sunday for Christmas shifts.
Or what is written in their contract!?
Does anyone know what the contracts state?
Presumably the contract doesn’t say time and a half at Christmas…