people

‘Sacrifice People to save numbers’

Jane JamesLeave a comment

I came across this quote whilst reading work by Simon Sinek – the renowned motivational speaker – check him out on YouTube.

 

We’ve all seen companies downsize their staff in turbulent financial times with no thought about the impact on those individuals, their families nor the overall drop in moral on the staff they keep.

 

Even when there isn’t a financial downturn, companies will often shred staff to reduce their payroll bill and thus increase their profits – more palatable for the shareholders – or is it?

 

I worked for a company for over 12 years.  Just before the financial reporting, a round of redundancies would be announced to ensure the company retained it’s double digit growth.  In reality, they haven’t grown at all.  All they had done was culled their staff.

 

Simon’s point was what would happen if companies did the reverse? ‘Sacrificed the numbers to save the people’ – what a thought.  The example he gave was of Bob Chapman Chair of Barry-Wehmiller in USA.  This company was a £1bn plus turnover and made big machinery.  In the 2008 financial crash he decided to ‘sacrifice the numbers to save the people’.   With 30% written of the company’s value in one fail swoop – it was time to try something new.

 

He suggested everyone – from himself downwards, would take four weeks unpaid holiday.  They didn’t have to take it consecutively and they could take it when they wanted but everyone would keep their jobs.  The response was huge.  Those senior people who could afford to take more unpaid leave traded with those that couldn’t.  Everyone worked as a family, pulling together.  They were involved in the decision, given the support to do it and felt safe and happy.  The company prospered.  It enjoys 20% year on year growth compared with the average 6%.

 

When you believe in why you are doing something, everything else falls into place.  People support you because they believe in the same thing.

 

Wouldn’t it be refreshing if all companies ‘Sacrificed the numbers for the people’?

 

How much more would their profits grow?  What do you think?

Gig Economy – here to stay?

Jane JamesLeave a comment

During 2017, there has been a growing concern on the status of those working in the ‘gig’ economy.

 

On paper, the flexibility to work when you want with no responsibility sounds good – especially for students/those who aren’t the key breadwinner. Not so good for those people who are the key breadwinner or this is their only source of income.  ACAS and many other employment organisations have been struggling on flexibility vs protection of workers for sometime.

 

The gig economy includes courier drivers, fast food delivery cyclists,  even those working for large national courier companies.  These people have to be ‘self-employed’ sometimes provide their own transport/clothes and provide cover if they are sick and can’t do their shift.  They work on an ‘as and when required’ basis but this can sometimes mean companies won’t give them any work for a considerable amount of time.

 

How can people pay rent/mortgage, feed and clothe themselves if they never know how much money they will have at the end of the month?

 

There was a huge surge of negative public opinion over zero hours contracts and again when the Chancellor of the Exchequer tried to bring in raised taxes for the self-employed.  It seems as though the ‘gig economy’ is just a more palatable term for ‘zero hours contract.   Is it right in a country that prides itself on inclusion that people have to work without protection/commitment?

Read more………………….

Workers confused and concerned about employment status, claims Acas

 

 

 

 

Who started this awful trend?

Jane JamesLeave a comment

It seems mad that a petition has to be raised to get our Government to move on bringing in legislation to prevent anyone over 18 buying corrosive products.

 

This worrying trend doesn’t seem to be given the same focus in our media that knife crime etc does.  London has seen a worrying rise in the use of corrosive products in crime, especially throwing acid in peoples’ faces to steal their mobile/handbag etc.

 

If caught, the short sentence given for causing grievous bodily harm doesn’t equate to the lifetime sentence the victims receive.

 

This can happen to anyone at anytime.  How can it be that the establishment doesn’t think this behaviour warrants urgent action?

 

The mental anguish caused to the victims is the hidden injury, just as painful and long lasting as the disfiguring surface injuries.

 

The perpetrators can move on with their lives not so their victims.

 

Take the time to read the letter one such victim has written – you will be shocked by the stats involved……..

 

Copy and paste the link below into your browser and see for yourself……

 

 

https://www.change.org/p/uk-parliament-prohibit-the-purchase-of-acid-to-those-without-a-licence recruiter=746729227&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=share_petition