exploitation by manpower

Hammyman

RobTang wrote: »

YET... agencies are not in any rush to clarify the system are they?

Why should they? Its none of the workers business. Do you expect Currys to tell you how much they make on an item?

I mean I see a lot of contractors moan about what their agency is possibly taking, which because there is no real transparency I think people have every right to moan about it.

Question: When you go to fill your car up with petrol, how much does the petrol station pay for it? When you go buy a tin of beans at Tesco, what is their markup?

You don't know. You have no clue. You look at the price and decide whether you accept that price and if you do you purchase the goods. So why is it OK with the petrol station and Tesco but not an agency?

Now my contract I know exactly what the agency take is and I pay for all other costs, they send me an itemised bill of everything; payroll cost, employers and employees contributions of tax pension, insurance etc.
Everything is clear an obvious and eveyone is (more or less) happy because all the rules are clear.

It seems to me there would be far less confusion, contempt and there would be better working relationship for everyone, but agencies dont do this for whatever reason.

The way they tend to operate makes people feel they are more leech like rather then offering a sercice.

They are a business. They are in business to make money. It is that simple. If people can't understand this then they must be as thick as pig manure.

RobTang

Hammyman wrote: »

Why should they? Its none of the workers business. Do you expect Currys to tell you how much they make on an item?

because I dont think your little rant about people being outraged because they dont know the rules of the game is entirly vaild.

Just because you are willing to take whatever agencies throw at you, doesn't mean other people are, it is the workers business because they make it their business. According to youe they effectivley fulfilling a contract which is none of their business, I refuse to accept that makes any kind of sense.

The rules of any game are made to be bent and broken (for better or worse).

Hammyman wrote: »

Question: When you go to fill your car up with petrol, how much does the petrol station pay for it? When you go buy a tin of beans at Tesco, what is their markup?

You don't know. You have no clue. You look at the price and decide whether you accept that price and if you do you purchase the goods. So why is it OK with the petrol station and Tesco but not an agency?

The truth is its NOT ok, its just tolerated or people just dont care about it or people have a vested intrest in the situation.

Tesco and other supermakets almost certainly do a lot of bad things regaring their suppliers. Many of our goods are produces in appalling condtions. But accoring to you this is justifiably right beacuse ITS NONE MY BUSINESS.

Why complain about the price of anything, why do we have competition commissions and regulators, business is just business right? if all that matters is your direct contracts with other parties; why is price fixing illegal ?

Lets say the going rate for a job is £100 a day, and a group of agencies and employers say "well gets cut the rate to £50 a day then split the remaining". This is perfectly fine under your assertations because all that matters is the contract between the agency and the contractor.

And you'd be OK with this ???

Conversly every agency would scream blue murder if the contractor when direct with the employer, they would say their business is being "stolen" in a trasaction which is really NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS.

Most people have a feeling of what is "fair" and if both of these situations were perfectly legal these people would still say "well both are still unfair and not right" and this feeling is what people go on not your hard line "these are rules thats it" approach.

Hammyman wrote: »

They are a business. They are in business to make money. It is that simple. If people can't understand this then they must be as thick as pig manure.

But surely according to you its none of my business what their business is (ie making money) My business is moaning about them, the fact they have to make money is immaterial and irrelevant.

patman99

I always wonder why the tight-wads in charge of Asda, Tesco and Sainsburys only manage to pay £6.13 p/h, whilst Aldi start their staff on £8 p/h.

I can see sense in having an in-house agency (or as Mid-Essex NHS Trust call it, a 'Staff Bank') as it allows them to fill gaps left by illness, holiday and maternity leave and to increase cover when needed without having to pay agencies extortionate fees. In the case of a hospital paying a nurse £25k p/a, this will save the trust £50k p/a in not having to pay an agency.

The RM has got it spot-on.
Btw, I speak as an agency worker and am actively campaigning to have the AWR outlawed. It is a flawed piece of Legislation that will lead to a world of short-term (sub-12 week) placements and a rise in unemployment as temps are kicked-out the door just before their 12 weeks are up.

scheming_gypsy

patman99 wrote: »

I always wonder why the tight-wads in charge of Asda, Tesco and Sainsburys only manage to pay £6.13 p/h, whilst Aldi start their staff on £8 p/h.

.

because if i remember correctly; Asda, Tesco and Sainsbury's have barcodes whereas Aldi staff have to memorise prices and manually enter them in the till instead of scanning the barcode.

Emmzi

No, Aldi do have barcode scanners.

They also don't sit at a till all day - typically there are 3 - 4 staff in our local branch max and when there are no queues on the tills they are up cleaning, putting out stock, etc. It is very hard physcial graft compared to other supermarkets. The new guys look exhausted for the first month until they get used to it!

scheming_gypsy

They didn't used to though (and it's been a few years since I've been in Aldi)

anamenottaken

patman99 wrote: »

In the case of a hospital paying a nurse £25k p/a, this will save the trust £50k p/a in not having to pay an agency.

Where are you getting the £50K from? Are you trying to relate it directly to one nurse?

Hammyman

patman99 wrote: »

I always wonder why the tight-wads in charge of Asda, Tesco and Sainsburys only manage to pay £6.13 p/h, whilst Aldi start their staff on £8 p/h.

As a truck driver, when I deliver to a Tesco RDC, they have their own staff who unload it, usually a team to 3 or 4 bays. They then check it straight away and I am on my way. When I deliver to a Aldi RDC I have to unload the vehicle myself, stack it in the appropriate isles and wait half a day for someone to come and check it. I will see nobody apart from the goods in clerk and the checker. The warehouse is almost deserted.

At the Tesco RDC the goods are then made up into store orders to the exact number of individual items by dozens of pickers which are placed in cages, placed on a vehicle, taken to the store, offloaded and then put on the shelves by shelf stackers with items that come in say boxes of 24 having the boxes opened and the individual items put out.

At the Aldi RDC, they don't really pick orders per se but just put pallets as they were delivered on a wagon. That goes to the store, is taken off by the driver and then someone wheels the entire pallet into the store and pops it on the floor. Not much gets put on shelves and what does tends to stay in its original bulk packing.

Easy to pay your staff more when you've got virtually no workforce doing the stock handling and not even 1/5th of the staff that the same sized Tesco store has.

mynameisdave

anamenottaken wrote: »

Where are you getting the £50K from? Are you trying to relate it directly to one nurse?

25k direct employment, 50k overall cost if employed via an agency - cost, not salary received.

I assume this is where the figures come from

scheming_gypsy

I think it was more a case of 'are you really trying to say that they charge double than they pay'