Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: Filo on December 05, 2014, 01:41:25 pm
-
This company is a disgrace, advertising jobs at their South Elmsall warehouse in Poland without advertising them in the UK, totally, totally wrong!
-
http://www.fish4.co.uk/job/3698346/warehouse-operative/?TrackID=148&cmpid=Aggregator_Indeed_alljobs#sc=jobfeed&me=feed&cm=Indeed_alljobs (http://www.fish4.co.uk/job/3698346/warehouse-operative/?TrackID=148&cmpid=Aggregator_Indeed_alljobs#sc=jobfeed&me=feed&cm=Indeed_alljobs)
-
http://www.fish4.co.uk/job/3698346/warehouse-operative/?TrackID=148&cmpid=Aggregator_Indeed_alljobs#sc=jobfeed&me=feed&cm=Indeed_alljobs (http://www.fish4.co.uk/job/3698346/warehouse-operative/?TrackID=148&cmpid=Aggregator_Indeed_alljobs#sc=jobfeed&me=feed&cm=Indeed_alljobs)
Posted 28th November, the same Jobs have been advertised in Poland since the beginig of November, ehy weren't they adverised here at the same time?
-
Thats what the rows about the jobs were advertised in Poland weeks before they were advertised here, bang out of order
-
As I understand it the next warehouse and other such warehouses were built near mining towns like elmsall to to help improve employment yet they're rammed with Jonny foreigners
-
It might be worth finding out wheter they received any benefit or tax break etc for building the warehouse there...
-
I like Polish people. They are honest and hard working generally.
-
I wonder if attracting cheap labour is a reason for the company doing this?
-
I wonder how many able and willing applicants they get through the local job centre. I wined how many applicants do the "Spud from Trainspotting" routine to keep hold of their dole without getting the job. One would imagine that if someone is prepared to yomp half way across Europe they're probably quite interested in doing the job they apply for.
-
There was some trumped out excuse from Next tonight on the news that a "Living Wage" means different things to different communities.
However there is a similar instance from Next a couple of years ago "importing" workers from Poland to cover spikes in trade!!!!
Its freely available via google
-
Without having done any research at all, I do wonder if chosing South elmsall, and possibly other similar 'depressed' areas for their warehouses was done solely (!) because such places are indeed sources of cheap labour. If you've not had a job for 3 years or something like cos the pit closed down, imagine how little you would be willing to accept.... Not everyone, I agree. But plenty. Once the areas recovered from the pits disasters, then Poles are an obvious way to replace the no longer available wage slaves. What other rational and credible reason can there be?
Never did like Next anyway. Always has been a purveyor of poncy, expensive crap.
BobG
-
Ffs. It's obvious why Next want Polish workers. It's because they work harder than English people. I know people that are Polish and they have a much better work ethic than the English. Obviously Next can't come out and say what I've said, because the leftie politically correct brigade would have a field day with them. Luckily I am not politically correct and am prepared to say it as it is.
I know people that work at the Amazon distribution centre in Doncaster. The Polish put the English to shame. Especially the English that have come from a trade union dominated background. These English so called workers use every trick in the book to try and get out of putting in a decent days work. Obviously not all English are like this, but there are enough of them to give all the English a bad name.
If I was a business in the UK looking to recruit hard workers, I'd be advertising in Poland not England.
-
If I was a business in the UK looking to recruit hard workers, I'd be advertising in Poland not England.
Says our resident ukipper!
-
Aye best not let Nigel know.
For what it's worth this practice is wrong and needs stopping imo.
-
If I was a business in the UK looking to recruit hard workers, I'd be advertising in Poland not England.
Says our resident ukipper!
I can see that you've fallen for the leftie drivel that UKIP are anti immigration. Nothing could be further from the truth as you can see from my comments about Polish workers. I'll spell it out for the anti UKIP brigade.
UKIP believes in 'controlled' immigration. The key word is 'controlled'. All the other parties believe in 'uncontrolled' immigration. Quite simple really.
Now what you lefties have to realise is that it is a competitive world out there. All Next are trying to do is to have a competitive advantage by bringing in better workers from Poland than they can find in the UK. They are not a charity. Having less productive English people working for them just to shut the leftie PC brigade up could well put them out of business.
No doubt another factor Next are considering is that the bulk of workers available in South Elmsall are from a trade union dominated background. People with this mindset care more about the company looking after them than they do about the success of Next. Industrial relations are much easier with a workforce that does not have this baggage.
It's a no brainer to me that if you want to be a successful company these days you have to avoid leftie trade union types as workers or you will soon find yourself going out of business.
-
So what you are saying then is that when UKIP say they want to have British jobs for British workers, they actually want British jobs for cheap foreign workers and Britains can get stuffed, especially if you want decent wages and working conditions. Yes I can see that.
-
I wonder if Next's decision to locate a site in South Elmsall was inluenced by obtaining grants to regenerate mining areas, I wonder if they were offered attractive rates in an effort to bring employment back to that area?
-
So what you are saying then is that when UKIP say they want to have British jobs for British workers, they actually want British jobs for cheap foreign workers and Britains can get stuffed, especially if you want decent wages and working conditions. Yes I can see that.
No, that's not what I'm saying. I'd be quite happy for Next to give all the jobs to British workers but only if this was a good deal for Next. They are not a charity. Unfortunately British workers are not as flexible and hardworking as the Poles.
As a serial entrepreneur and hard nosed business man it is obvious to me that a non unionised Polish workforce would give me a competitive advantage over a competitor that employed less hardworking unionised British workers. I know which business is going to be more successful.
-
I wonder if Next's decision to locate a site in South Elmsall was inluenced by obtaining grants to regenerate mining areas, I wonder if they were offered attractive rates in an effort to bring employment back to that area?
Of course they were. However it was not a pre condition that they only employed British workers. It would be a lot easier for them to employ British workers on the face of it. What you lefties need to explain is why don't they do so. I've already explained it for you but if you think I'm wrong then please enlighten me.
-
I wonder if Next's decision to locate a site in South Elmsall was inluenced by obtaining grants to regenerate mining areas, I wonder if they were offered attractive rates in an effort to bring employment back to that area?
Of course they were. However it was not a pre condition that they only employed British workers. It would be a lot easier for them to employ British workers on the face of it. What you lefties need to explain is why don't they do so. I've already explained it for you but if you think I'm wrong then please enlighten me.
Maybe those attractive rates should be brought into line with the competative world, and if Next goes to the wall because of it, who cares, it'll only be the Polish unemployment figures that'll be effected
-
One things for sure. By only employing British workers Next would be one step closer to going out of business.
Another reason Next find it difficult to attract hard working British workers is the lavish benefits system. Once you take housing benefit and Tax Credits into account I'd be surprised if it was worth a British worker taking a job at Next.
Its time to slash benefits. Only then will British workers be energised into taking the jobs that companies like Next are offering.
-
If they wish to employ only foreign workers then wouldn't the answer be to build a factory in Poland? Of course they would have to forgo any other government subsidy, but that is the price that Next should pay.
-
It's no coincidence that the CEO OF Next is Conservative life peer and major Conservative donator Simon Wolfson, they like keeping the peasants poorly paid those fat cats!
-
If you lefties are unhappy about the Polish coming and 'nicking' jobs then why on earth do you support Labour who believe in uncontrolled immigration and are culpable in the extreme for the huge number of Poles that are living and working in the UK. You can't have it both ways. Either you believe in uncontrolled immigration as Labour do or you want it controlled. If you want it controlled then we at UKIP offer a very warm welcome.
-
If you lefties are unhappy about the Polish coming and 'nicking' jobs then why on earth do you support Labour who believe in uncontrolled immigration and are culpable in the extreme for the huge number of Poles that are living and working in the UK. You can't have it both ways. Either you believe in uncontrolled immigration as Labour do or you want it controlled. If you want it controlled then we at UKIP offer a very warm welcome.
As usual you totally missed of ignored the point, it's not about the Poles "nicking " the jobs, it's about the fact that these jobs were advertised in Poland nearly a month before they were advertised here in the UK, and also the Polish were transported over here by Next, are they offering the same travel arrangements to UK workers that live off the public transport network? The recruitment policy of Next has been heavily biased towards recruiting Polish workers before workers from the UK!
-
If you lefties are unhappy about the Polish coming and 'nicking' jobs then why on earth do you support Labour who believe in uncontrolled immigration and are culpable in the extreme for the huge number of Poles that are living and working in the UK. You can't have it both ways. Either you believe in uncontrolled immigration as Labour do or you want it controlled. If you want it controlled then we at UKIP offer a very warm welcome.
As usual you totally missed of ignored the point, it's not about the Poles "nicking " the jobs, it's about the fact that these jobs were advertised in Poland nearly a month before they were advertised here in the UK, and also the Polish were transported over here by Next, are they offering the same travel arrangements to UK workers that live off the public transport network? The recruitment policy of Next has been heavily biased towards recruiting Polish workers before workers from the UK!
Why do they do this? As I've explained before, they prefer Polish workers. That says a lot about the quality of the British workers available to them. They'd rather get foreigners to do the work with all the costs associated with this than use the local labour. Does this not tell you that there is a problem with the local labour? The local labour has many advantages over the Poles but due to a poor work ethic they aren't preferred for the jobs.
The problem is not with Next. They obviously feel it is a waste of time and resources interviewing British workers.T hey are just operating as best they can in the labour market. The local labour need to have a good long hard look in the mirror and put right what is obviously wrong. They need to be more flexible and they need to be prepared to work harder.
-
If you lefties are unhappy about the Polish coming and 'nicking' jobs then why on earth do you support Labour who believe in uncontrolled immigration and are culpable in the extreme for the huge number of Poles that are living and working in the UK. You can't have it both ways. Either you believe in uncontrolled immigration as Labour do or you want it controlled. If you want it controlled then we at UKIP offer a very warm welcome.
As usual you totally missed of ignored the point, it's not about the Poles "nicking " the jobs, it's about the fact that these jobs were advertised in Poland nearly a month before they were advertised here in the UK, and also the Polish were transported over here by Next, are they offering the same travel arrangements to UK workers that live off the public transport network? The recruitment policy of Next has been heavily biased towards recruiting Polish workers before workers from the UK!
Why do they do this? As I've explained before, they prefer Polish workers. That says a lot about the quality of the British workers available to them. They'd rather get foreigners to do the work with all the costs associated with this than use the local labour. Does this not tell you that there is a problem with the local labour? The local labour has many advantages over the Poles but due to a poor work ethic they aren't preferred for the jobs.
The problem is not with Next. They obviously feel it is a waste of time and resources interviewing British workers.T hey are just operating as best they can in the labour market. The local labour need to have a good long hard look in the mirror and put right what is obviously wrong. They need to be more flexible and they need to be prepared to work harder.
As I said you choose to ignore the point raised
-
I've answered the point raised. Next obviously think it is a waste of their time and money advertising the jobs in the UK.
-
As a serial entrepreneur and hard nosed business man it is obvious to me that a non unionised Polish workforce would give me a competitive advantage over a competitor that employed less hardworking unionised British workers. I know which business is going to be more successful.
Guitar classes, and a tupperware round make you more of a peg seller than entrepreneur.
-
LIke I said, I disagree, pretty violently tbh, with Voltaire. This contentious, contemptuous drivel is the perfect reason for doing so.
BobG
-
I don't get what the point is here. People are saying it's cheap labour yet forget we have the national minimum wage in this country...
-
I don't get what the point is here. People are saying it's cheap labour yet forget we have the national minimum wage in this country...
The point is the jobs were advertised in Poland weeks before they were advertised in the UK! with Next transporting the Poles to the UK
-
I don't get what the point is here. People are saying it's cheap labour yet forget we have the national minimum wage in this country...
The point is they get highly motivated youngsters.
I wonder how they are going on in places like Poland? They must have lost millions of their young talented people.
-
Is that a fact though? How would Next benefit from this? They can't pay any less than an English person would get. So you can't argue it's for cheap labour.
-
As I understand it Next are recruiting Polish workers for posts that pay the minimum wage, thus undercutting wages in the UK.
-
The statement I heard said Next stated the Poles idea of a living wage was different to a UK idea of a living wage, however a living wage in Poland would no doubt be different to a living wage in the UK (i.e. the minimum wage not the flounted living wage which is above the minimum wage) however this in truth gets away from the facts that these jobs were advertised weeks before in Poland rather than the UK.
Uk's minimum wage would I imagine be above a living wage in Poland include the fact that the company concerned will transport you and help you find accomadation jobs a good un ....cheap labour!!
add into the fact they are probably zero hour contracts, what happens when theres no work or they get a bad un ....................oh yes they claim UK benefits
-
The statement I heard said Next stated the Poles idea of a living wage was different to a UK idea of a living wage, however a living wage in Poland would no doubt be different to a living wage in the UK (i.e. the minimum wage not the flounted living wage which is above the minimum wage) however this in truth gets away from the facts that these jobs were advertised weeks before in Poland rather than the UK.
Uk's minimum wage would I imagine be above a living wage in Poland include the fact that the company concerned will transport you and help you find accomadation jobs a good un ....cheap labour!!
add into the fact they are probably zero hour contracts, what happens when theres no work or they get a bad un ....................oh yes they claim UK benefits
That will happen!
Because after 12 weeks Next will by law have to pay them the same rate as next employee's who are on between £8 and £9 an hour
-
It is a fallacy to claim that the Poles will be claiming benefits. There is obviously a total lack of awareness of what benefits these Next workers will be able to claim if Next got rid of them just weeks after they had employed them.
You've obviously fallen for the Labour and Tory spin that toughening up on benefits will control immigration. You should be aware that a newly arrived Pole will be unable to claim any benefits other than Job Seekers Allowance. Could someone please tell me how they are going to be able to pay their rent and pay all their bills on this pittance.
In the real world, the Poles come here to work. They have to pass the Habitual Residency test to get all the benefits British people are entitled to. This means they have to be resident in the UK for 5 years and have worked in each of these 5 years. Until, this point they can't get housing benefit or Council Tax relief.
Now if you think about it for a minute, there is no way they can survive without working. So they either work or go back to Poland.
So I'd appreciate it if all you that are getting hot under the collar about benefits would take a chill pill and get your facts straight before spouting off. You need to realise that the politicians that are in favour of uncontrolled immigration have conned you into thinking that they are only coming here for benefits. Don't fall for the spin that tightening up on benefits will allow immigration to be controlled. It won't. The vast majority come here to work. Fact. And they will keep on coming until we leave the EU.
-
It is a fallacy to claim that the Poles will be claiming benefits. There is obviously a total lack of awareness of what benefits these Next workers will be able to claim if Next got rid of them just weeks after they had employed them.
You've obviously fallen for the Labour and Tory spin that toughening up on benefits will control immigration. You should be aware that a newly arrived Pole will be unable to claim any benefits other than Job Seekers Allowance. Could someone please tell me how they are going to be able to pay their rent and pay all their bills on this pittance.
In the real world, the Poles come here to work. They have to pass the Habitual Residency test to get all the benefits British people are entitled to. This means they have to be resident in the UK for 5 years and have worked in each of these 5 years. Until, this point they can't get housing benefit or Council Tax relief.
Now if you think about it for a minute, there is no way they can survive without working. So they either work or go back to Poland.
So I'd appreciate it if all you that are getting hot under the collar about benefits would take a chill pill and get your facts straight before spouting off. You need to realise that the politicians that are in favour of uncontrolled immigration have conned you into thinking that they are only coming here for benefits. Don't fall for the spin that tightening up on benefits will allow immigration to be controlled. It won't. The vast majority come here to work. Fact. And they will keep on coming until we leave the EU.
Reason why the poles can pay all Their rent and bills etc etc ,is fact that they live as many as possible into the house.
If the house has say 6 beds in it ,3 poles will work at night time while other 3 poles are asleep in beds A B and C
When nite shift has finished they go home and sleep in beards A B and C as day shift are Now at work
During the weekends they have two choices ,either work over time
II spoon each other at bed time
-
Oslo thinking about Poles spooning there :)
-
It is a fallacy to claim that the Poles will be claiming benefits. There is obviously a total lack of awareness of what benefits these Next workers will be able to claim if Next got rid of them just weeks after they had employed them.
You've obviously fallen for the Labour and Tory spin that toughening up on benefits will control immigration. You should be aware that a newly arrived Pole will be unable to claim any benefits other than Job Seekers Allowance. Could someone please tell me how they are going to be able to pay their rent and pay all their bills on this pittance.
In the real world, the Poles come here to work. They have to pass the Habitual Residency test to get all the benefits British people are entitled to. This means they have to be resident in the UK for 5 years and have worked in each of these 5 years. Until, this point they can't get housing benefit or Council Tax relief.
Now if you think about it for a minute, there is no way they can survive without working. So they either work or go back to Poland.
So I'd appreciate it if all you that are getting hot under the collar about benefits would take a chill pill and get your facts straight before spouting off. You need to realise that the politicians that are in favour of uncontrolled immigration have conned you into thinking that they are only coming here for benefits. Don't fall for the spin that tightening up on benefits will allow immigration to be controlled. It won't. The vast majority come here to work. Fact. And they will keep on coming until we leave the EU.
Reason why the poles can pay all Their rent and bills etc etc ,is fact that they live as many as possible into the house.
If the house has say 6 beds in it ,3 poles will work at night time while other 3 poles are asleep in beds A B and C
When nite shift has finished they go home and sleep in beards A B and C as day shift are Now at work
During the weekends they have two choices ,either work over time
II spoon each other at bed time
This in not my personal experience although I'm sure there are some immigrants that are quite happy to operate in the manner you describe. However you have not answered my question. You are talking about Poles that are working. My question was how would a Pole survive without working, living just off Job Seekers Allowance. There seems to be a widely held misconception that Poles can come to the country and live a comfortable life on benefits. This is totally untrue and is an example of politicians avoiding the real issue of open door immigration and fooling the gullible by pandering to their inherent racist tendencies.
-
And you haven't answered the original question before turning it into your agenda
Is it right that Next advertise jobs in Poland weeks before advertising them in the UK?
-
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/next-christmas-jobs-offered-polish-4709994
I'm guessing this is the real source of this thread. From The Mirror??? Come on, they are hardly a credible source. I think you need to lay out the facts with evidence before jumping on the immigration band wagon.
-
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/next-christmas-jobs-offered-polish-4709994
I'm guessing this is the real source of this thread. From The Mirror??? Come on, they are hardly a credible source. I think you need to lay out the facts with evidence before jumping on the immigration band wagon.
No its been on Calendar, Radio and national news with various interviews and statements from next
-
And you haven't answered the original question before turning it into your agenda
Is it right that Next advertise jobs in Poland weeks before advertising them in the UK?
I'd have thought it was obvious what my answer is to that question. I'll spell it out. The answer is a resounding yes.
Next are not a charity and have a responsibility to shareholders to run the business in the best way they can. Their biggest cost is labour. So given this is the case it makes perfect sense to me that they would want to reduce this cost as much as possible and to employ the best available workers. Sadly for British workers, the Poles are viewed as better workers that are happy to work for the wages on offer.
By advertising for 'inferior' workers, Next would be incurring unnecessary costs thus affecting the profitability of the company. It is madness to advertise for inferior workers just to keep the politically correct brigade happy. Fair play to Next for not pandering to them.
-
So according to you ALL British workers are inferior, Don't you think it would be much more of a responsible attitude from Next to interview prospective British workers first let Nexts HR dept do what its supposed to do and filter out and employ those most suitable and then make any shortfall up from Poland?
-
And you haven't answered the original question before turning it into your agenda
Is it right that Next advertise jobs in Poland weeks before advertising them in the UK?
I'd have thought it was obvious what my answer is to that question. I'll spell it out. The answer is a resounding yes.
Next are not a charity and have a responsibility to shareholders to run the business in the best way they can. Their biggest cost is labour. So given this is the case it makes perfect sense to me that they would want to reduce this cost as much as possible and to employ the best available workers. Sadly for British workers, the Poles are viewed as better workers that are happy to work for the wages on offer.
By advertising for 'inferior' workers, Next would be incurring unnecessary costs thus affecting the profitability of the company. It is madness to advertise for inferior workers just to keep the politically correct brigade happy. Fair play to Next for not pandering to them.
Surely building a factory in the middle of of a country full of 'inferior' workers is the biggest 'unnecessary cost' of the lot?
-
So according to you ALL British workers are inferior, Don't you think it would be much more of a responsible attitude from Next to interview prospective British workers first let Nexts HR dept do what its supposed to do and filter out and employ those most suitable and then make any shortfall up from Poland?
I don't think ALL British workers are inferior. I'm sure there are many that are just as good as the Poles. Unfortunately for British workers, the Poles are viewed as better than the British in general. I don't think Next should interview British workers first. I think they got it the the right way round. They believe that the company has a better chance of profitability by employing Poles over Brits. For them to prioritise Brits over Poles would decrease their profitability. This is no way to run a business. They have experience of employing Brits and Poles. Based on this experience they have decided that the Poles are better workers for a number of reasons.
What you lefties have to understand is that Next are not a charity. They do not exist to pay inferior Brits high wages when a cheaper better alternative is available.
Let me ask a a couple of simple questions.
If a competitor of Next only employed more expensive 'inferior' Brits and Next employed less expensive better Poles, which company would be the most profitable?
Which company is more likely to be around in 5 years? Next or the competitor?
-
And you haven't answered the original question before turning it into your agenda
Is it right that Next advertise jobs in Poland weeks before advertising them in the UK?
I'd have thought it was obvious what my answer is to that question. I'll spell it out. The answer is a resounding yes.
Next are not a charity and have a responsibility to shareholders to run the business in the best way they can. Their biggest cost is labour. So given this is the case it makes perfect sense to me that they would want to reduce this cost as much as possible and to employ the best available workers. Sadly for British workers, the Poles are viewed as better workers that are happy to work for the wages on offer.
By advertising for 'inferior' workers, Next would be incurring unnecessary costs thus affecting the profitability of the company. It is madness to advertise for inferior workers just to keep the politically correct brigade happy. Fair play to Next for not pandering to them.
Surely building a factory in the middle of of a country full of 'inferior' workers is the biggest 'unnecessary cost' of the lot?
No. You are quite wrong. Labour is the biggest cost. You are obviously not a hard nosed business man like what I am.
-
And you haven't answered the original question before turning it into your agenda
Is it right that Next advertise jobs in Poland weeks before advertising them in the UK?
I'd have thought it was obvious what my answer is to that question. I'll spell it out. The answer is a resounding yes.
Next are not a charity and have a responsibility to shareholders to run the business in the best way they can. Their biggest cost is labour. So given this is the case it makes perfect sense to me that they would want to reduce this cost as much as possible and to employ the best available workers. Sadly for British workers, the Poles are viewed as better workers that are happy to work for the wages on offer.
By advertising for 'inferior' workers, Next would be incurring unnecessary costs thus affecting the profitability of the company. It is madness to advertise for inferior workers just to keep the politically correct brigade happy. Fair play to Next for not pandering to them.
Surely building a factory in the middle of of a country full of 'inferior' workers is the biggest 'unnecessary cost' of the lot?
No. You are quite wrong. Labour is the biggest cost. You are obviously not a hard nosed business man like what I am.
I quoted you: unnecessary cost. Duh.
And as you are so quick to point out labour is the biggest cost, which makes it even more ridiculous to unnecessarily build a factory in a different country to the one you want your workforce from. Double duh.
-
I'm afraid you've lost me. I'll try and spell it out so you can understand what I'm saying.
Interviewing Brits before Poles is doing it the wrong way around. The Poles are 'better' workers so should be interviewed first. Only then if there is a shortfall should the 'inferior' Brits be interviewed. By doing it the other way around you would be incurring unnecessary costs just to keep the politically correct lobby happy.
Trust me, you'd soon go out of business if you pandered to the politically correct lefties out there.
-
Nice attempt at wriggling out of your own words but you're worse at it than Nigel Farage
-
No wriggling from me. You obviously have great difficulty understanding me but I am always happy to clarify matters.
-
No wriggling from me. You obviously have great difficulty understanding me but I am always happy to clarify matters.
Surely building a factory in the middle of of a country full of 'inferior' workers is the biggest 'unnecessary cost' of the lot?
-
I'll have another go. Building a factory in the UK is not an unnecessary cost. It is an investment taken after lots of research. Next would not build the factory unless they thought it would be a good investment. Part of these calculations would be to do with their biggest cost - labour.
You seem to think they shouldn't build a factory in the UK as the Brits are inferior workers. You may well have a point but Next have decided they will take the risk because they can always get better workers from Poland. It's whats known as contingency planning. Something us serial entrepreneurs fully understand.
-
I'll have another go. Building a factory in the UK is not an unnecessary cost. It is an investment taken after lots of research. Next would not build the factory unless they thought it would be a good investment. Part of these calculations would be to do with their biggest cost - labour.
You seem to think they shouldn't build a factory in the UK as the Brits are inferior workers. You may well have a point but Next have decided they will take the risk because they can always get better workers from Poland. It's whats known as contingency planning. Something us serial entrepreneurs maniacs fully understand.
;)
-
I'll have another go. Building a factory in the UK is not an unnecessary cost. It is an investment taken after lots of research. Next would not build the factory unless they thought it would be a good investment. Part of these calculations would be to do with their biggest cost - labour.
You seem to think they shouldn't build a factory in the UK as the Brits are inferior workers. You may well have a point but Next have decided they will take the risk because they can always get better workers from Poland. It's whats known as contingency planning. Something us serial entrepreneurs fully understand.
No, I'm asking because you're the one saying that that Brits are inferior workers, not me. Which is why I asked in the first place. Given what they're doing, isn't building their factory here instead of Poland an unnecessary cost?
-
As any astute businessman such as myself could tell you, the location of a factory is only one factor to consider. You seem to be of the logic that because labour costs in Poland are lower than in the UK then thats where the factory should be built. Very simplistic in the extreme and shows you have a long way to go if you want to be taken seriously in matters of business.
-
As any astute businessman such as myself could tell you, the location of a factory is only one factor to consider. You seem to be of the logic that because labour costs in Poland are lower than in the UK then thats where the factory should be built. Very simplistic in the extreme and shows you have a long way to go if you want to be taken seriously in matters of business.
No. You are quite wrong. Labour is the biggest cost. You are obviously not a hard nosed business man like what I am.
Surely any right-minded business would try to lower the effects of its biggest cost. So why would anyone who wants to be taken seriously in business build a factory in a location that increases the cost of hiring its desired workforce? Square that circle if you can.
-
As any astute businessman such as myself could tell you, the location of a factory is only one factor to consider. You seem to be of the logic that because labour costs in Poland are lower than in the UK then thats where the factory should be built. Very simplistic in the extreme and shows you have a long way to go if you want to be taken seriously in matters of business.
No. You are quite wrong. Labour is the biggest cost. You are obviously not a hard nosed business man like what I am.
Surely any right-minded business would try to lower the effects of its biggest cost. So why would anyone who wants to be taken seriously in business build a factory in a location that increases the cost of hiring its desired workforce? Square that circle if you can.
You are hard work. According to your logic, factories should always be built where the labour is cheapest. Unbelievably naive and nonsensical. Let me ask you a simple question to see if i can get through to you.
If labour costs are 10% of what they are in the UK in Romania should Next build their next factory there? Bear in mind that the roads are terrible and that distributing the manufactured goods is far more expensive than in the UK where the distribution of goods is much easier due to our modern infrastructure. The higher wages in the UK are more than offset by the exceedingly high distribution costs in Romania.
Still want the factory to be built in Romania?
-
It's cheaper to move goods there than workers.
-
Not a good answer.
You obviously need educating in the basics of business. May I suggest you invest some money in the following book:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Starting-Business-Dummies-Colin-Barrow/dp/0470978104
-
I'd recommend this one
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Applied-Economics-Macmillan-Business-Atkinson/dp/0333673824/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1418060743&sr=1-4&keywords=textbook+of+economics+livesey
-
I'd recommend this one
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Applied-Economics-Macmillan-Business-Atkinson/dp/0333673824/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1418060743&sr=1-4&keywords=textbook+of+economics+livesey
That looks far too advanced for you. Get the basics sorted first.
-
It's the one I used to pass my Economics A-level.
-
Bear in mind that the roads are terrible and that distributing the manufactured goods is far more expensive than in the UK where the distribution of goods is much easier due to our modern infrastructure.
But Nige tells us that our journey times are longer, because the roads are clogged up by Jonny Foriegner!
-
Sports Direct head quarters are at Shirebrook and the majority of the staff there are Polish,but that has something to do with Mike Ashley,s ex wife running an employment agency,it's part of the divorce settlement
-
This whole thread, and quite a few others, is totally bizarre. The drivel that 1967 spouts is unbelievable. I can't be the only one with a few letters after my name surely that knows this crap is simply intellectual masturbation?
Look 1967. when you've done some proper courses and read and understood some proper textbooks, then folk might take you a little bit more seriously. But until that day dawns, it's not even a decent giggle reading your boringly repetitive tripe. oh. And about letters after names. The relevant one right now for you to know is my MBA (Distinction). A decent AMBA uni too before you start carping on. Oh. And I've got plenty of others if you think that's not sufficient.
Your crap is priceless. Get a life. You must spend aeons making up such shedloads of rubbish.
BobG
-
I'll have another go. Building a factory in the UK is not an unnecessary cost. It is an investment taken after lots of research. Next would not build the factory unless they thought it would be a good investment. Part of these calculations would be to do with their biggest cost - labour.
You seem to think they shouldn't build a factory in the UK as the Brits are inferior workers. You may well have a point but Next have decided they will take the risk because they can always get better workers from Poland. It's whats known as contingency planning. Something us serial entrepreneurs fully understand.
I doubt the biggest cost for Next is labour. I work for a huge retailer, our biggest cost isn't labour....
-
I don't know all the ins and outs of Next's costs but can assure you that labour is generally the biggest cost a business faces. Of course it depends on what industry you are in.
-
This whole thread, and quite a few others, is totally bizarre. The drivel that 1967 spouts is unbelievable. I can't be the only one with a few letters after my name surely that knows this crap is simply intellectual masturbation?
Look 1967. when you've done some proper courses and read and understood some proper textbooks, then folk might take you a little bit more seriously. But until that day dawns, it's not even a decent giggle reading your boringly repetitive tripe. oh. And about letters after names. The relevant one right now for you to know is my MBA (Distinction). A decent AMBA uni too before you start carping on. Oh. And I've got plenty of others if you think that's not sufficient.
Your crap is priceless. Get a life. You must spend aeons making up such shedloads of rubbish.
BobG
I've got qualifications coming out of my ears but modesty prevents me from bragging about it. I've found that the best qualification you can have in life is common sense. I've learnt more from the university of life than I ever did reading text books. As a serial entrepreneur I reckon I could teach all those academics in universities that have never had a proper job a thing or two.
-
I don't know all the ins and outs of Next's costs but can assure you that labour is generally the biggest cost a business faces. Of course it depends on what industry you are in.
That's a very fancy way of saying that you've been talking out of your arse as you know nothing about Next.
-
It's Dunning-Kruger again Glyn. Indeed, this fantastic line proves the point - in Spades. Redoubled.
"the best qualification you can have in life is common sense"
That says it all. And him a bloke who reckons he knows enough to lecture us all. He's a charlatan - at best. Having shot holes in his academic qualifications, or lack of them, now he says we don't need them. Plonker.
Dunning-Kruger. He's an absolute classic.
BobG
-
I don't know all the ins and outs of Next's costs but can assure you that labour is generally the biggest cost a business faces. Of course it depends on what industry you are in.
That's a very fancy way of saying that you've been talking out of your arse as you know nothing about Next.
I may know next to nothing about the company but I do know this. Their HR department prefers Polish workers to British ones despite all the downsides of recruiting workers from a foreign country. That tells me all I need to know about the quality of potential British workers. They are perceived by Next to be inferior. They have experience of employing Brits and Poles so have good solid evidence to base their opinion on.
No wonder they advertised in Poland before Britain. It is the logical common sense thing to do and they should not be vilified for it.
-
You're dodging the issue again - should the coalition you think are doing such a wonderful job be vilified for allowing it to happen?
-
I don't know all the ins and outs of Next's costs but can assure you that labour is generally the biggest cost a business faces. Of course it depends on what industry you are in.
Yes which in retail in this area it isn't. I'd imagine Jenny with the numbers in front of her in that industry knows more about it than you do...
You're also wrong that location isn't important. The costs of logistics, transport and wages for those staff are much greater than cheaper imported labour. Location is vital aswell in keeping sales higher. The market has changed and the demand is for quick supply, so that has to come in aswell. It's pointless having your distribution centre so far away that you can't get the goods there in day.
The issue isn't cheap labour, the issue is that it should be advertised in this country first. Remember which parties favour making rules like this more common and which don't Glyn ;)
-
You're dodging the issue again - should the coalition you think are doing such a wonderful job be vilified for allowing it to happen?
Of course not. No issue dodged by me whatsoever. The less government interferes with business the better for the economy. Next were just doing what was best for the company, as they should.
Are you seriously advocating that Next should be employing 'inferior' Brits over 'superior' Poles? When running a company you have to do the best you can to ensure it's profitability. Many people rely on the success of the business where they work for their livelihood. A successful Next is good for Britain. It would be very remiss of Next to employ 'inferior' workers and potentially jeopardise the long term success of the company just to keep the leftie pc brigade happy.
Anyway, once again the main point in all this is totally missed. You're all banging on about Next being wrong to advertise in Poland first. Well, I've conclusively won that debate. The main subject for debate should be as follows:
Why, despite all the obvious downsides to recruiting foreign workers do Next prefer to do that when there is a plentiful supply of Brits on their doorstep?
-
I don't know all the ins and outs of Next's costs but can assure you that labour is generally the biggest cost a business faces. Of course it depends on what industry you are in.
Yes which in retail in this area it isn't. I'd imagine Jenny with the numbers in front of her in that industry knows more about it than you do...
You're also wrong that location isn't important. The costs of logistics, transport and wages for those staff are much greater than cheaper imported labour. Location is vital aswell in keeping sales higher. The market has changed and the demand is for quick supply, so that has to come in aswell. It's pointless having your distribution centre so far away that you can't get the goods there in day.
The issue isn't cheap labour, the issue is that it should be advertised in this country first. Remember which parties favour making rules like this more common and which don't Glyn ;)
I'm quite happy to bow to Jenny's superior knowledge on this one. I am nothing if not magnanimous.
For the avoidance of any doubt I would just like the other readers to know that the second paragraph above is aimed at Mr Wigley not me. BFYP has inadvertently posted in such a way that this was not obvious to the more gullible of you out there.
-
You're dodging the issue again - should the coalition you think are doing such a wonderful job be vilified for allowing it to happen?
Of course not. No issue dodged by me whatsoever. The less government interferes with business the better for the economy. Next were just doing what was best for the company, as they should.
It would be more beneficial to the economy for the government to stop Next doing this but instead taking UK workers off benefits and making them into taxpayers.
-
I don't know all the ins and outs of Next's costs but can assure you that labour is generally the biggest cost a business faces. Of course it depends on what industry you are in.
Yes which in retail in this area it isn't. I'd imagine Jenny with the numbers in front of her in that industry knows more about it than you do...
You're also wrong that location isn't important. The costs of logistics, transport and wages for those staff are much greater than cheaper imported labour. Location is vital aswell in keeping sales higher. The market has changed and the demand is for quick supply, so that has to come in aswell. It's pointless having your distribution centre so far away that you can't get the goods there in day.
The issue isn't cheap labour, the issue is that it should be advertised in this country first. Remember which parties favour making rules like this more common and which don't Glyn ;)
I'm quite happy to bow to Jenny's superior knowledge on this one. I am nothing if not magnanimous.
For the avoidance of any doubt I would just like the other readers to know that the second paragraph above is aimed at Mr Wigley not me. BFYP has inadvertently posted in such a way that this was not obvious to the more gullible of you out there.
It was because you were maintaining that labour costs were the most important thing I was questioning the location of the business. But then, I was stupid to actually contemplate believing anything you say.
-
You're dodging the issue again - should the coalition you think are doing such a wonderful job be vilified for allowing it to happen?
Of course not. No issue dodged by me whatsoever. The less government interferes with business the better for the economy. Next were just doing what was best for the company, as they should.
It would be more beneficial to the economy for the government to stop Next doing this but instead taking UK workers off benefits and making them into taxpayers.
I can see your point and it would be great if what you said was realistic. Unfortunately it is fantasy land and if companies were forced to operate in the manner you want they'd soon go out of business. this would be very bad for the economy. Companies have to do all they can to be profitable. What you are advocating would make them less profitable. A cardinal sin in running a business.
-
No doubt you're happy for hordes of profitable companies to cheat this country by tax-dodging the way they do as well.
-
I don't know all the ins and outs of Next's costs but can assure you that labour is generally the biggest cost a business faces. Of course it depends on what industry you are in.
Yes which in retail in this area it isn't. I'd imagine Jenny with the numbers in front of her in that industry knows more about it than you do...
You're also wrong that location isn't important. The costs of logistics, transport and wages for those staff are much greater than cheaper imported labour. Location is vital aswell in keeping sales higher. The market has changed and the demand is for quick supply, so that has to come in aswell. It's pointless having your distribution centre so far away that you can't get the goods there in day.
The issue isn't cheap labour, the issue is that it should be advertised in this country first. Remember which parties favour making rules like this more common and which don't Glyn ;)
I'm quite happy to bow to Jenny's superior knowledge on this one. I am nothing if not magnanimous.
For the avoidance of any doubt I would just like the other readers to know that the second paragraph above is aimed at Mr Wigley not me. BFYP has inadvertently posted in such a way that this was not obvious to the more gullible of you out there.
For the avoidance of doubt for other more intelligent readers, it was aimed at you also. You spouted about infrastructure in this country which is actually still very expensive. It is also only any good for this country. Not many retailers have European bases here, just UK bases. The reason - cost and infrastructure.
Thus you're wrong again there.
-
I don't know all the ins and outs of Next's costs but can assure you that labour is generally the biggest cost a business faces. Of course it depends on what industry you are in.
Yes which in retail in this area it isn't. I'd imagine Jenny with the numbers in front of her in that industry knows more about it than you do...
You're also wrong that location isn't important. The costs of logistics, transport and wages for those staff are much greater than cheaper imported labour. Location is vital aswell in keeping sales higher. The market has changed and the demand is for quick supply, so that has to come in aswell. It's pointless having your distribution centre so far away that you can't get the goods there in day.
The issue isn't cheap labour, the issue is that it should be advertised in this country first. Remember which parties favour making rules like this more common and which don't Glyn ;)
I'm quite happy to bow to Jenny's superior knowledge on this one. I am nothing if not magnanimous.
For the avoidance of any doubt I would just like the other readers to know that the second paragraph above is aimed at Mr Wigley not me. BFYP has inadvertently posted in such a way that this was not obvious to the more gullible of you out there.
For the avoidance of doubt for other more intelligent readers, it was aimed at you also. You spouted about infrastructure in this country which is actually still very expensive. It is also only any good for this country. Not many retailers have European bases here, just UK bases. The reason - cost and infrastructure.
Thus you're wrong again there.
I think you must have misinterpreted what I've said. I totally agree with your comments except the one where you said I was wrong again. I'd be grateful if you would point out where I said location isn't important.
-
Do you know anything about footy 1967?
BobG
-
Do you know anything about footy 1967?
BobG
:lol: I would suggest no, however he/she does seem to appear more on matchdays but doesn't appear on the football related threads ;)
-
Do you know anything about footy 1967?
BobG
I consider myself to be an expert on footy. I don't post much on the footy forum apart from stoutly defending our excellent manager now and then. I prefer a statistical approach when analysing a game but this seems to be frowned upon by the mods so has put me off contributing as there's always a good chance that my posts will get deleted. I can take a hint. It's a shame as I feel I'd have a lot to contribute. I feel the team would be doing better if I was allowed to post freely as Mr Dickov would be able to read my excellent advice and improve team performance.
-
frigging brilliant :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
-
That's a simply splendid answer 1967. It tells every single one of us, plain and simple, exactly what you are. Well done.
Good question btw Bob!
Cheers
BobG
-
frigging brilliant :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
-
I wonder if Next's decision to locate a site in South Elmsall was inluenced by obtaining grants to regenerate mining areas, I wonder if they were offered attractive rates in an effort to bring employment back to that area?
Yes it was Filo! Worked at Elmsall a few years back as a Duty Manager
-
I wonder if Next's decision to locate a site in South Elmsall was inluenced by obtaining grants to regenerate mining areas, I wonder if they were offered attractive rates in an effort to bring employment back to that area?
Yes it was Filo! Worked at Elmsall a few years back as a Duty Manager
Therefore Next have a moral obligation to employ residents of the former mining areas that they obtained the grants for, or repay the grants back that were obtained dishonestly
-
Morals and business aren't that close though are they Filo?
-
The greater moral imperative is to employ the best staff so the business has a better chance of a successful future. I'm sure they do employ people from the surrounding area anyway.
-
The greater moral imperative is to employ the best staff so the business has a better chance of a successful future. I'm sure they do employ people from the surrounding area anyway.
I never thought I would see the day but I agree with Mick here...
-
The greater moral imperative is to employ the best staff so the business has a better chance of a successful future. I'm sure they do employ people from the surrounding area anyway.
I never thought I would see the day but I agree with Mick here...
I don't think anybodys saying they shouldn't employ the best available, but they should not advertise in another country weeks before advertising here, advertise locally first take the best qualified if theres still vacancies then start advertising further afield and then theres no arguments.
-
Do you know anything about footy 1967?
BobG
I consider myself to be an expert on footy. I don't post much on the footy forum apart from stoutly defending our excellent manager now and then. I prefer a statistical approach when analysing a game but this seems to be frowned upon by the mods so has put me off contributing as there's always a good chance that my posts will get deleted. I can take a hint. It's a shame as I feel I'd have a lot to contribute. I feel the team would be doing better if I was allowed to post freely as Mr Dickov would be able to read my excellent advice and improve team performance.
Sorry Bob but I am shocked by the question!! Surely you have not forgotten Mad Mick's amazing stats posts showing why Dean Saunders was a poor manager and would get us relegated? This was the season we won the league and had the long sequence of being unbeaten away from home. Or his demonstration of why we should all stop supporting Rovers and join him as Leeds' fans? I am suprised.
-
I wonder if Next's decision to locate a site in South Elmsall was inluenced by obtaining grants to regenerate mining areas, I wonder if they were offered attractive rates in an effort to bring employment back to that area?
Yes it was Filo! Worked at Elmsall a few years back as a Duty Manager
Therefore Next have a moral obligation to employ residents of the former mining areas that they obtained the grants for, or repay the grants back that were obtained dishonestly
Not sure about them obtaining them dis-honestly, seem to recall at the time they were given the rate free exemptions from the local authorities, the area was on its arse. The company is still the major employer in the area but the reason they require agency labour is more to do with the working practices that they currently employ which are pre-historic in my view!
-
The thing is that the local area can only supply a limited source of staff therefore they have to go further afield.
The Elmsall sites alone employ upwards of 3000 people.
Just to say Mick is talking a load of crap about most of the things he has said and Filo you way over estimated the wages paid to the staff.
I totally agree but theres places a lot closer to the site than Poland
-
Morals and business aren't that close though are they Filo?
No, but they used to be enforced through Govt regulation. And funnily enough, our economy did better in those days than it has done for the past 30 years.
Draw your own conclusions...
-
Like I say the reason that a blue chip company like Next are struggling to recruit sufficent staff in this country is down to the job design and procedures. They operate a bonus system for staff involved in production which, as I stated at the time I worked there, the person responsible for introducing it should have been lined up against a wall and shot!!
-
Lol Wilts :)
I asked the question specifically to point out both the ignorance of the bloke and his stupidity in posting political dogma for months and months and months on a football forum. We all make the odd political comment - but very few on here open even one thread as an expression of politics. Mick does at least 5 a week. There's something seriously wrong with the bloke. How else can you exxplain the fatuousness of starting political debates on a football forum? Unless, I suppose, he thinks he is more likely to impress people with his sleight of hand on here than in a genuine forum for such blinkered opinion.
BobG
-
Lol Wilts :)
I asked the question specifically to point out both the ignorance of the bloke and his stupidity in posting political dogma for months and months and months on a football forum. We all make the odd political comment - but very few on here open even one thread as an expression of politics. Mick does at least 5 a week. There's something seriously wrong with the bloke. How else can you exxplain the fatuousness of starting political debates on a football forum? Unless, I suppose, he thinks he is more likely to impress people with his sleight of hand on here than in a genuine forum for such blinkered opinion.
BobG
;) ;)
-
Savvy
Let me guess. Bonus system based on numbers and no allowance for quality?
-
I wrote about 'Forum statesmen' about three or four years ago, and I wonder if IC1967 has similar views that gives him a compulsion to wind up certain posters on this forum.
As I said in my previous post, I do wonder what stimulus people get from a football forum if it is intellectual chat they are seeking. Surely there are more suitable forums available where their intellect will be more appreciated, and better understood.
It could be that they are happier as big fish in a small pond, not least because much of the gobbledegook they write camouflages a lot of b*llocks, and goes undetected by us simple footy fans who can’t be arsed to decipher it!
-
I find life a lot simpler since I put Mick on the ignore poster list.
I don't waste anywhere near as much time reading rubbish. :)
-
It's a tough one isn't it BB?
How about you chill out, stop worrying yourself with amateur psychology and just either join in discussions or ignore them?
-
The greater moral imperative is to employ the best staff so the business has a better chance of a successful future. I'm sure they do employ people from the surrounding area anyway.
I never thought I would see the day but I agree with Mick here...
You are starting to see the light and the voice of reason is finally getting through. You are becoming a very sensible young lady. I salute your courage in agreeing with me in this den of leftie vipers.
-
It's a tough one isn't it BB?
How about you chill out, stop worrying yourself with amateur psychology and just either join in discussions or ignore them?
It's not really me who should be worrying mate.
-
Do you know anything about footy 1967?
BobG
I consider myself to be an expert on footy. I don't post much on the footy forum apart from stoutly defending our excellent manager now and then. I prefer a statistical approach when analysing a game but this seems to be frowned upon by the mods so has put me off contributing as there's always a good chance that my posts will get deleted. I can take a hint. It's a shame as I feel I'd have a lot to contribute. I feel the team would be doing better if I was allowed to post freely as Mr Dickov would be able to read my excellent advice and improve team performance.
Sorry Bob but I am shocked by the question!! Surely you have not forgotten Mad Mick's amazing stats posts showing why Dean Saunders was a poor manager and would get us relegated? This was the season we won the league and had the long sequence of being unbeaten away from home. Or his demonstration of why we should all stop supporting Rovers and join him as Leeds' fans? I am suprised.
I think you'll find it was due to madmick pointing out the errors of Saunders ways by his excellent use of statistics and his eloquent advice on team building that Saunders turned it around. Fair play to Saunders. He read the posts and took on the advice and the rest is history as they say. Madmick's predictions would have come to pass if Saunders had ignored his advice. It's just a shame that the mods won't allow me to help Dickov.
-
Savvy
Let me guess. Bonus system based on numbers and no allowance for quality?
Correct Billy!
Having had various arguements with the "O &M" department (time and motion to most of us!) I managed to establish that the performance level per shift for each employee was set at 85%. Here's me wanting 100% of all the staff working in my department and indeed was employed on the understanding that it was my raison d'etre! So when I asked why 85% I was told that it was gleened from studies which revealed that the average performance per day was 85%. So that told me straight away that 50% of the people working there could achieve more than the 85% required, but more importantly there were 50% of the people who worked there that couldn't achieve more than 85%!!!!
It gets better, those who don't achieve 85% over the week, are to be "councilled" the following week and ultimately if performance didn't improve, taken down the disciplinary route.
Turning to those who could achieve more than the minimum 85% could earn an extra £3 per hour based on the following performance levels for the week (I've been left awhile so bear with me if the exact percentage isnt right but it's near as!!!) 85%- 100% extra pound an hour, 100%-110% extra two pound an hour, 110% to 125% (yes feel free to start laughing!!!) an extra three pounds per hour!!!
Sounds great doesn't it? Reward people for what they do, no need to manage people, just manage outcomes!!!!
Here are a few of the little nuances thrown up by this scheme that affect operational efficency,
Filling in bonus forms incorrectly could be construed as fraud resulting in dismissal for gross mis-conduct! Nothing special about that you say, until you see what little time is spent on training a new employee to fill them out (and the loss of productive time each day to fill them in!)
An individual's performance could be directly affected by work they were given, for example someone may have to walk the length of the warehouse to pick 100 items whilst someone walks the same distance for 300 items, which would distort actual performance levels.
Also and probably most importantly, the work area and type of items picked had a significant impact on performance. For example all shoes at the time were picked at Dale lane where the O and M timings meant that people were working through their breaks just to hit 85% and other areas such has stadium 2 with the highbay Warehouse were achieving 125% easily due to the amount of mechanisation involved!! The best way of explaining this came from a mate of mine whilst travelling back from an away game and putting the world to rights as you do! He worked at Bentley pit, and he told me the lads on the face were working with picks and shovels to get next to nothing in bonus whilst the lads at Selby were churning it out onto the conveyeors and making a fortune in bonus!!!
Another issue that was thrown up by this excellent bonus scheme was that on a Friday we always seemed to struggle to pick the days required target. The lads on the floor explained to me that they were that smart that they had worked out how to calculate when they had worked to the maximum bonus performance for that week, and usually by Thursday, they had it cracked so that they could just go through the motions on a Friday!!!!!!
Also, something that happened rarely, but still created an issue in respect of bonus payments were sending personnel to another Warehouse (still in the same industrial estate) if they got too far behind with the picking orders. From picking garments, my staff would then be sent over to work with equipment and materials that they were unfamiliar with and in an environment that was alien to them. They were given a "Training allowance" in respect of their bonus performance, but that still didn't allow them to achieve what they would have achieved in their own department. You can imagine how the news to go across the road to Elmsall Way was greeted!!! Remember how I said it was a weekly calculated bonus, and most of the lads would get around £100 a week, or £400 a month, or at least enough to pay the mortgage, by sending them to another warehouse for a day/week could have a significant impact on their take home pay for the month!!!!
The bonus system also threw up other issues, but I think most of you will get the gist of how the system was far from satisfactory and led to sub-optimisation of your most important resource!!!
Hope that this explains my line about the person who introduced it being lined up against a wall and being shot!!!! Don't even get me started on Supervisors and Managers bonuses!!!
As for the solution..........scrap the scheme, put £1.50 per hour on the rates (the average amount of bonus that could be earned) and then get the supervisors/managers to do what they should be doing, namely manage people and not outcomes!!!!
-
Savvy
Many, many thanks for that depressing read.
Your final sentence sums it up. We are in a tyranny of management by accountancy. Set metrics and determine success or failure by those and those alone.
It's a facile approach that wilfully ignores the complexities of the real world. But it means that management systems can be streamlined and simplified. Because no authority is given to middle managers to actually manage.
-
Unfortunately knowledge sounds foolish to fools Bill! The seminal work in this area was done by William Edwards Deming in 1984 in a book called "out of the crisis". I my opinion should be read by anyone entering management or wishing to call themselves a manager.
Take a look at this as an example for starters!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeWTD-0BRS4
-
I can vouch for Savvy's post about targets. I worked for B&Q years ago and they used 75% as their target. The topic of conversation on Fridays was always "have you done your minutes?" Folk who took the piss during the week were often seen rushing about trying to attain that magic 75% mark! The management there were clueless.
-
I can vouch for Savvy's post about targets. I worked for B&Q years ago and they used 75% as their target. The topic of conversation on Fridays was always "have you done your minutes?" Folk who took the piss during the week were often seen rushing about trying to attain that magic 75% mark! The management there were clueless.
In my experience in industry and as a union rep, the vast majority of management are clueless
-
I can vouch for Savvy's post about targets. I worked for B&Q years ago and they used 75% as their target. The topic of conversation on Fridays was always "have you done your minutes?" Folk who took the piss during the week were often seen rushing about trying to attain that magic 75% mark! The management there were clueless.
In my experience in industry and as a union rep, the vast majority of management are clueless
Its that old adage "shite bus driver so they promoted him to Inspector"
-
I can vouch for Savvy's post about targets. I worked for B&Q years ago and they used 75% as their target. The topic of conversation on Fridays was always "have you done your minutes?" Folk who took the piss during the week were often seen rushing about trying to attain that magic 75% mark! The management there were clueless.
In my experience in industry and as a union rep, the vast majority of management are clueless
Its that old adage "shite bus driver so they promoted him to Inspector"
Most managers are selfish t**ts, that don't care about their workforce, our manager at Pilks called us all in for a meeting to announce the closure of the Doncaster site, he started the meeting by telling us he was leaving Doncaster to take position at another site, throwing us all on the dole while celebrating that he had still got a job, the t**t!
-
Savvy
Many, many thanks for that depressing read.
Your final sentence sums it up. We are in a tyranny of management by accountancy. Set metrics and determine success or failure by those and those alone.
It's a facile approach that wilfully ignores the complexities of the real world. But it means that management systems can be streamlined and simplified. Because no authority is given to middle managers to actually manage.
Reminds me of everything Mick comes out with. Are you sure it wasn't him that came up with this one for Next?
-
The last few posts may be very interesting in how the bonus scheme works but the main issue is still being ignored. Why do Next prefer Polish workers to Brits?
-
Better work ethic, better educated are just two reasons that spring to mind! Prepared to work overtime at a moments notice, and more reliable would be others!
-
Better work ethic, better educated are just two reasons that spring to mind! Prepared to work overtime at a moments notice, and more reliable would be others!
Thank you Savvy. It's as I said. The Polish workers are 'superior' to the 'inferior' Brits. It makes complete sense that Next would want to get workers from Poland before getting them from Britain.
I refer you all to my previous posts on the matter, especially on page 1. I was the only one saying it as it is. All you lefties were bothered about was having a go at me when what I said was total utter common sense. You lefties need to come into the real world.
So all you that say Next should prioritise Brits over Poles need to get an abject apology sorted. It will be accepted with good grace and I'll say no more about it.
-
It's well known, and has been for decades, that there are a lot of jobs that Brits won't willingly do. That's why no matter how much smoke and flame there is about immigration, beneath the propaganda and hyperbole, it will continue. Business needs it. And its business that calls the shots. Of course, that also means that there is an institutionalised underclass without a job who will rely on the dole for most of their life. Why can't folk see that, given the culture and values we now have, this is an inevitable neccesity? Have you noticed? All the politics isn't about 'getting people back to work'. It's about demonising them as scroungers and cutting their cost. In other words, this country is in the process of abandoning a substantial minority of its population. Who was it said 'There is no such thing as society..."? Well, she's delivered it alright. Poor buggers.
BobG
-
I don't call that an abject apology. Blaming Maggie for the situation is laughable.
The dependency culture has been created by Labour. Maggie wanted people to stand on their own two feet. The complete opposite of what Labour wanted. Gordon brown took it to a new level by giving nearly the whole population Tax Credits. This was a blatant misuse of borrowed money to buy votes.
Labour have made life too easy for people. They created a situation where you could get more by not working than working. That's the real problem.
-
I really cannot understand how you can be so blind to events in relatively recent history that have a direct influence upon how we are today. It's not very much of an exaggeration to say that that woman, along with Hayek and a few others, defined, laid out and created the entire culture, values and philosophy establsihed throught western society today. Have you ever wondered just what role that set of values has had, continues to have, in creating the circumstances we see today in the Middle East, parts of Africa and indeed the streets of London today?
BobG
-
Better work ethic, better educated are just two reasons that spring to mind! Prepared to work overtime at a moments notice, and more reliable would be others!
Thank you Savvy. It's as I said. The Polish workers are 'superior' to the 'inferior' Brits. It makes complete sense that Next would want to get workers from Poland before getting them from Britain.
I refer you all to my previous posts on the matter, especially on page 1. I was the only one saying it as it is. All you lefties were bothered about was having a go at me when what I said was total utter common sense. You lefties need to come into the real world.
So all you that say Next should prioritise Brits over Poles need to get an abject apology sorted. It will be accepted with good grace and I'll say no more about it.
Hold your horses fella! No one said anything about superior, the idea since the 90's has been to work smarter, not harder. Problem is the people who have got the ability to bring the change in mindset about haven't got a clue of where to start. Their too busy carrying out that wonderful feat of management by cost cutting here and cost cutting there!!! To support my thinking, I ask you what are the first two departments that get raped when cost "effiencies" have to be made? Answer, research and development and training!!!! Two of the very departments that have led to way in countries such as Japan and Taiwan etc in capturing markets that used to be ours!!!!
-
I think it is fair say that overall the Poles are 'superior' workers. Better educated, harder working, more flexible etc. sounds like the word superior fits the bill.
I agree that the quality of management leaves a lot to be desired. There is far too much short term thinking for my liking. There is hope on the horizon though. Give it a few years and the superior foreign workers will be in management positions and things will improve. We have a lot to thank our Polish friends for.
-
I really cannot understand how you can be so blind to events in relatively recent history that have a direct influence upon how we are today. It's not very much of an exaggeration to say that that woman, along with Hayek and a few others, defined, laid out and created the entire culture, values and philosophy establsihed throught western society today. Have you ever wondered just what role that set of values has had, continues to have, in creating the circumstances we see today in the Middle East, parts of Africa and indeed the streets of London today?
BobG
I think you'll find politicians favoured the Keynesian approach to that of Hayek. That's why the national debt is now so large in many Western countries. Unfortunately the politicians only took on-board the spending part of his theories and ignored the mending the roof while the sun is shining part of his philosophy. Typical politicians, especially Labour ones.
I for one think that Western culture (although not perfect) has improved as time has gone on. For example there is far less racism and homophobia about today than there was in the golden age you hark back to. Women's rights have also improved a lot in this time. I could go on, but hopefully by now you are getting my drift.
-
I really can't think what it is that drives all his short termism you decry so much 1967..... Oh. wait a minute. The profit motive - as exemplified by the business moguls at politics ever since 1979 - colloquially known as the Tory party. oh. And if you don't think Hayek and his pals have set the western agenda for the last 30 odd years you need your bumps feeling.
BobG
-
I think the focus on short term profits has done for this country from an economic output point of view! Awarding contracts/outscourcing based on lowest cost is one concept that particularly tickles me. As Dr Deming would say "Its not what you pay, its what you get for your money that counts, price, without some measure of quality means nothing!"
I've used a simple example to demonstrate before, If you need a set of spark plugs for your car, and they cost £3 and last six months, but there is another set that costs £5 but last twelve months which one would you buy?
Another classic is measuring outcomes, like road traffic accidents, or school league tables, they tell you what has happened, where they happened and how they happened, but not a f***ing word on how to improve or prevent them!!!! Ofsted is just a counting house!!!
Would take a massive paradigm shift to get us back on track Bob!!
-
Savvy/Bob
I suggest reading The State We're In by Will Hutton. Written 20 odd years ago, he contrasts the UK economic system (based on shareholder value and liquidity of companies, meaning that Directors have to provide constant immediate profits and dividends or risk having funds pulled by shareholders) with more long-term views held in Japan or Germany.
The comparison with Japan was sound on a corporate funding and governance level, but if course Japan has collapsed economically for other reasons, predominantly getting itself into a permanent deflationary spiral due to the mad Austerity policies of the late 1990s.
But the comparison with Germany is illuminating. Their approach is to tie workers, funders, shareholders and managers into a long-term mutually beneficial relationship. Loom what that has done for BMW, VAG, Siemens, etc,etc. Compare and contrast with our approach which has destroyed our manufacturing base.
Hutton gives examples from the early 90s of UK companies voraciously hoovering up weaker rivals, asset stripping them to provide dividends for shareholders, then throwing the husks away.
A mad way to run an economy. And what we're left with is the low productivity economy that we now have.
Well worth a read.
-
Savvy/Bob
I suggest reading The State We're In by Will Hutton. Written 20 odd years ago, he contrasts the UK economic system (based on shareholder value and liquidity of companies, meaning that Directors have to provide constant immediate profits and dividends or risk having funds pulled by shareholders) with more long-term views held in Japan or Germany.
The comparison with Japan was sound on a corporate funding and governance level, but if course Japan has collapsed economically for other reasons, predominantly getting itself into a permanent deflationary spiral due to the mad Austerity policies of the late 1990s.
But the comparison with Germany is illuminating. Their approach is to tie workers, funders, shareholders and managers into a long-term mutually beneficial relationship. Loom what that has done for BMW, VAG, Siemens, etc,etc. Compare and contrast with our approach which has destroyed our manufacturing base.
Hutton gives examples from the early 90s of UK companies voraciously hoovering up weaker rivals, asset stripping them to provide dividends for shareholders, then throwing the husks away.
A mad way to run an economy. And what we're left with is the low productivity economy that we now have.
Well worth a read.
I worked for Siemens mid 90's to 2004 a very good firm to work for certainly in those days, excellent benefits, discounts across the whole range of their companies with extra employee warranties on white goods purchased by you, salaries at the better end of the industry standards, however they expected you to perform which was absolutely fair enough.
and before anybody says owt I only left because I was head hunted by the biggest manufacturer in my field and I'm still there!
-
I think it is fair say that overall the Poles are 'superior' workers. Better educated, harder working, more flexible etc. sounds like the word superior fits the bill.
I agree that the quality of management leaves a lot to be desired. There is far too much short term thinking for my liking. There is hope on the horizon though. Give it a few years and the superior foreign workers will be in management positions and things will improve. We have a lot to thank our Polish friends for.
You really talk shite!!! I could say a few things on here but for contractual reasons I cannot but I could blow your argument out of the water!!
And yes Savvy can confirm by pm to yourself who I am and what I do for living for the st 10 years.
I would even go as far as to say I am willing to meet you so I could get my point across to you.
-
I think it is fair say that overall the Poles are 'superior' workers. Better educated, harder working, more flexible etc. sounds like the word superior fits the bill.
I agree that the quality of management leaves a lot to be desired. There is far too much short term thinking for my liking. There is hope on the horizon though. Give it a few years and the superior foreign workers will be in management positions and things will improve. We have a lot to thank our Polish friends for.
You really talk shite!!! I could say a few things on here but for contractual reasons I cannot but I could blow your argument out of the water!!
And yes Savvy can confirm by pm to yourself who I am and what I do for living for the st 10 years.
I would even go as far as to say I am willing to meet you so I could get my point across to you.
Look it's very simple. I am the voice of reason and Savvy has backed up what I've said about Poles being superior workers to the Brits. I'm not saying they are superior to all Brits but in general they are. Of course there are some Brits that are just as good but unfortunately not nearly enough.
Therefore Next are totally justified in trying to recruit Poles before having to take on inferior Brits. It makes perfect commercial sense.