We've become the first premier league club to pay the the 'living wage' as opposed to the minimum.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-30414668

Nice

Classy move but that's not actually out of character, despite what other fans might think of us.

Nice!

Also first club to have the LED lights setup, good to be the first, watch them copy!

I wonder how much a decisions like this impacts on FFP?

 

Well done by the club to be the first to commit, for the amount of flack we receive it's nice to read some good news about us from time to time. 

That's weird, I thought we were evil?

A great example to others and I'm sure this is greatly appreciated by the lower-paid staff at the club

I am probably going to be hung out to dry for saying this, but don't you think a club like ours ( and other clubs ) with our ever increasing revenue streams should already be paying a decent living wage to it's employees ?

 

Anyone who thinks £9.15 an hour is a living wage in London is living in dreamland. As for the Cobham staff having to wait until July 2017 to receive anywhere near that.....why ??

 

The income clubs get from the Tv rights for Premier League, Champions League and sponsorship deals in recent years has gone through the roof. How much of that has filtered down to the fans, let alone the everday staff who work at the clubs on a daily basis ?

£20 an hour wouldn't bankrupt us or any other major club if the money was spread a bit more evenly.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/nov/12/premier-league-tv-rights-5-bn

 

That's my rant over.

Disagree entirely! Will keep it concise as I'm too tired to be verbose:

- we aren't turning over huge profits

- we need that money to buy big players .... to try and win stuff

- the club have frozen tickets and subsidised some travel this season

- they don't have to do it

- no other club has done it, at least it's a start

- 20 quid an hour would efectively be paying more than double the low level staff in terms of payment, that's a sh*t load more money for the same amount of work output. Doesn't make any sense.

- the club isn't a charity

Edited December 11, 201411 yr by Zola

 As for the Cobham staff having to wait until July 2017 to receive anywhere near that.....why ??

 

As the article says, those workers don't work for Chelsea itself. They work for external contractors.

I am probably going to be hung out to dry for saying this, but don't you think a club like ours ( and other clubs ) with our ever increasing revenue streams should already be paying a decent living wage to it's employees ?

 

Anyone who thinks £9.15 an hour is a living wage in London is living in dreamland. As for the Cobham staff having to wait until July 2017 to receive anywhere near that.....why ??

 

The income clubs get from the Tv rights for Premier League, Champions League and sponsorship deals in recent years has gone through the roof. How much of that has filtered down to the fans, let alone the everday staff who work at the clubs on a daily basis ?

£20 an hour wouldn't bankrupt us or any other major club if the money was spread a bit more evenly.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/nov/12/premier-league-tv-rights-5-bn

 

That's my rant over.

 

Sorry but £20 and hour is an absolutely ridiculous amount of money for what is, in a lot of cases, completely unskilled labour.

 

Just because Chelsea is a big club does not (and should not, in my opinion) make them obligated to pay more money for the same job.

 

Should say, I do agree with the increase to the living wage. It's not a massive increase but it is massive for the staff that will benefit from it.

Increasing the minimum wage generally creates more unemployment.

I am probably going to be hung out to dry for saying this, but don't you think a club like ours ( and other clubs ) with our ever increasing revenue streams should already be paying a decent living wage to it's employees ?

 

Anyone who thinks £9.15 an hour is a living wage in London is living in dreamland. As for the Cobham staff having to wait until July 2017 to receive anywhere near that.....why ??

 

The income clubs get from the Tv rights for Premier League, Champions League and sponsorship deals in recent years has gone through the roof. How much of that has filtered down to the fans, let alone the everday staff who work at the clubs on a daily basis ?

£20 an hour wouldn't bankrupt us or any other major club if the money was spread a bit more evenly.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/nov/12/premier-league-tv-rights-5-bn

 

That's my rant over.

But the costs of buying players and player wages are rising too, our club also like to secure youth players by paying a bit more.

 

Also £20 an hour is more than £40k a year pro rata lol.

Increasing the minimum wage generally creates more unemployment.

 

But they haven't. They've chosen to increase the wage to the living wage, without reducing employment.

Increasing the minimum wage generally creates more unemployment.

That argument has been debunked so many times it's rather futile to repeat it.

That argument has been debunked so many times it's rather futile to repeat it.

Let's raise the minimum wage to 100 per hour. That should end poverty.

Raising their wage to £20 hour would have a knock on effect, all wages above would also need raising.

Let's raise the minimum wage to 100 per hour. That should end poverty.

 

What a great argument you make.

 

Quite simply, if people's wages are too low to live on then either the state has to make up the difference via various forms of benefits and tax breaks, or we just allow a significant proportion of the population to struggle unable to pay for rent/food and other essentials (not nice for them, and also poverty leads to crime, so not great for the population as a whole).  Neither scenario are desirable.

But the costs of buying players and player wages are rising too, our club also like to secure youth players by paying a bit more.

 

Also £20 an hour is more than £40k a year pro rata lol.

Yeah if they are paying that I'll quit my job and go work 40 hours in the mega store if they'll have me hah

What a great argument you make.

Quite simply, if people's wages are too low to live on then either the state has to make up the difference via various forms of benefits and tax breaks, or we just allow a significant proportion of the population to struggle unable to pay for rent/food and other essentials (not nice for them, and also poverty leads to crime, so not great for the population as a whole). Neither scenario are desirable.

I'm for a basic income in the form of benefits and welfare as an alternative to a minimum wage. A job is valuable especially for teenagers. Look at unpaid internships, they are valuable for people getting their foot in the door and would not exist if you had to pay interns minimum wage.

In my opinion unpaid internships of longer than a week or so should be banned.  It only benefits those whose families are rich enough to support them and who live in London already (usually)

Agreed, unpaid interns can get taken advantage of, get all the donkey work and gaining little realistic experience

I agree that the unpaid internships of longer than a short period of time should be banned. I was going for unpaid and paid internships after studying, and it took me almost a year to find one - luckily a paid one. 

 

I 100% disagree with the concept of an unpaid internship, but for the individual student who's struggling to find work, to have an unpaid internship on your CV is miles better than no internship at all, even if you are only realistically doing the work no-one else wants or just twiddling your thumbs and making coffee.

 

As long as companies continue to make them available, students will definitely continue to apply for them. 

Oh I agree - I don't blame anyone for applying for them but they shouldn't be allowed.  So many of them are "the old boys" network too - it's all word of mouth and who your daddy knows often.

 The income clubs get from the Tv rights for Premier League, Champions League and sponsorship deals in recent years has gone through the roof. How much of that has filtered down to the fans, let alone the everday staff who work at the clubs on a daily basis ?

£20 an hour wouldn't bankrupt us or any other major club if the money was spread a bit more evenly.

McDonalds earn a load of money, does that mean they should start paying their staff £40 an hour? Please don't ever start a business if you think it's a good idea to increase low lever workers pay dramatically based on the companies growth.