4th March 2007, 12:41 AM
Obviously the reason for raising this is that we are desperate to line our already fatly-stuffed pockets on the proceeds of the sweat of the indentured workers.
Not angry at all, but concerned to try and point out that there is a potential consequence if this is not done in a structured way which looks at the business environment. The worse outcome of this would be that the RAO requirements become unsustainable to those who have to observe them and the whole fragile edifice comes apart as companies leave the scheme. Then all concerted efforts would be even more difficult.
Again, you misunderstand me - love to put wages up tens, or hundreds of pounds a week, only as long as the company doesn't go out of business in the process. That is also a responsibility, and something we perceive as a moral duty is the need to try to ensure security of employment for our staff. A difficult balance. Not looking for sympathy but some understanding of context.
LG agreement will not be 3.5% - buy me a sombrero and I will eat it if it is!
I see our maths started fom different positions. I now understand you mean an extra £1 per week derived from the difference between 2% and 5%.
As you say, some companies are ahead of the game - I have not said whether we are or not...I was trying to widen the debate
and by the way talking of taking the personal out of this? - "If you have any questions relating to your requirements as an RAO .. ask the IFA." - thanks for the tip. I would never have guessed or indeed done it(now, is that as patronising as your comment,
and non-RAOS don't have to pay full sick, only SSP.
Not angry at all, but concerned to try and point out that there is a potential consequence if this is not done in a structured way which looks at the business environment. The worse outcome of this would be that the RAO requirements become unsustainable to those who have to observe them and the whole fragile edifice comes apart as companies leave the scheme. Then all concerted efforts would be even more difficult.
Again, you misunderstand me - love to put wages up tens, or hundreds of pounds a week, only as long as the company doesn't go out of business in the process. That is also a responsibility, and something we perceive as a moral duty is the need to try to ensure security of employment for our staff. A difficult balance. Not looking for sympathy but some understanding of context.
LG agreement will not be 3.5% - buy me a sombrero and I will eat it if it is!
I see our maths started fom different positions. I now understand you mean an extra £1 per week derived from the difference between 2% and 5%.
As you say, some companies are ahead of the game - I have not said whether we are or not...I was trying to widen the debate
and by the way talking of taking the personal out of this? - "If you have any questions relating to your requirements as an RAO .. ask the IFA." - thanks for the tip. I would never have guessed or indeed done it(now, is that as patronising as your comment,
and non-RAOS don't have to pay full sick, only SSP.