Support the Tesco 1,000

ThisRegard

Some managers have, and have taken it. There's a variety of managers in a store, not just the store manager itself.

drunkmonkey

mansize wrote: »

What's with the obsession with attacking male reproductive organs???

Ass last years, boobs this year, it'll be balls all the way next year.

Arghus

ThisRegard wrote: »

Some managers have, and have taken it. There's a variety of managers in a store, not just the store manager itself.

Mid level management were offered voluntary redundancy about eighteen months or so. That was the first wave of voluntary redundancies. It's not connected to what's happening now; there was no threat of a change to their terms and conditions.

Staff on pre 2005 contracts were offered voluntary redundancies, back during the Autumn, capped at four weeks salary per year worked. There was no talk of people having their contract terms changed if they didn't take the offer, just that the offer was there if people wanted it. This also had nothing to do with the current dispute.

The crux of the issue for people now is that people are being forced to accept new terms and conditions or redundancy; there's no option to stay as you are.

oppenheimer1

Eugene Norman wrote: »

None of this is relevant to the actual contracts the actual workers have now. (I too would leave by the way)

They want to stay on. They want what should be a legally binding contract enforced. They shouldn't even have to strike.

The legality and morality of the situation might be clearer to you if you pretended the workers were rich. Say this was an executive or investor with a legally binding contract with tesco that was, admittedly, costing the company money. Or that tesco had a upwards only rent that the management wanted out off. You'd probably suggest they take a running jump if they wanted to renegotiate unilaterally.

The fact the workers need to strike is the issue.

I'd liken it to the banks trying to unilaterally change people's tracker mortgages.

If Tesco wants to improve its profitability, I suggest they look to their supply chain management, abandoning the bullshit offers and promotions, merry go round pricing and focus on quality rather than strong arming a small subset of their staff.

saralou2011

Strikes back on for this Thursday (26th)

mikeym

MooShop wrote: »

Agree with this. I worked in a Tesco store for 4 years, so have seen this first hand.

The pre-96ers (in my store anyway) were nothing but childish bullies who would throw their toys out of the pram if they didn't get their own way. The majority of them were so lazy and barely covered their duties, if at all, and got paid exorbitant amounts for the privilege.

Also these would never work a Sunday, of course until it was a bank holiday and they were getting triple time! :eek: And then when they were in on those days, did even less and the store was in more of a mess, putting us regular staff under more pressure because there wasn't enough budget to bring in people who would actually work!

They were always a clique onto to themselves, them vs us (regular staff/mgmt vs pre-96), and that divide was solely created by them!

Bit of a rant but had to put up with a lot of their s**t over the years I worked there.

I wouldnt be supporting those on the old contracts if I was on the newer crappy contract because the old contract people wouldnt support me.

The same happened in Dunnes but in reverse, those on newer contracts went on strike and those on older better contracts went to work.

I presume these people were working for Quinnsworth when they joined up?