Jump to content

Recommended Posts

No one is singling picture house out


To be sure, many many businesses pay far less than living wage


BUT


the staff have grouped and called a strike. That's not a small feat. And that's what deserves support. It just so happens picture house are the employers in this case

I've worked in the Retail and hospitality industries since the age of 15. Until you get to a more senior management level the pay is poor and the majority of Retailers currently operating in London don't pay the LLW, is this right? No, however the flip side is that businesses in London also pay much higher overheads (in particular rent) than out of London so to increase wages by on average 20-30% would potentially see the closure of many small businesses and equate to jobs being lost. To slowly implement the increase over 18months as the Picturehouse was intending to do seems he most sensible strategy to ensure they could achieve this for their staff but plan their budget so it wouldn't be at the sacrifice of jobs. I completely appreciate how the team feel, I've been there but we need to look at the bigger picture.

I have already expressed my support on this thread for the concept of the Living Wage. However, I would be glad if someone would answer the following questions:


(a) Assuming that the ED cinema get planning permission, if, at the time that it is due to open, Picture House is not paying its staff the Living Wage, would you prefer that the cinema stay shut?


(b) If you would prefer this, are you prepared to ask all other shops in ED who do not pay the Living Wage to close their doors?


I have already asked whether anyone knows what percentage of ED businesses do not pay the Living Wage. Any answers on this? If people ARE concerned about the Living Wage issue, they should be pursuing this issue as well. Or are they just playing gesture politics as far as Picture House are concerned?

Paying living wage would ultimately lead to less jobs.


Leading to harder work for those lucky enough to keep their jobs.


I want people to be paid a good wage, I really do (having done my time working for minimum wage), but the reality is that it would benefit some and mean less jobs for others because businesses are unlikely to take the hit out of their profits.

Since almost no-one in London pays the LLW, you can fairly assume that almost no-one in ED does. My main point was that, given Picturehouse is clearly a progressive employer in saying they'll phase in a rise to LLW over 1.5 years (something practically no-one else is proposing) the strike is unwarranted. If everyone went on strike because they wanted the LLW overnight, London would cease to function at all. LLW is something that has to be achieved over time and Picturehouse stand among precious few employers who seem to have committed to this. Their employees don't know how lucky they are to have the prospect of soon being paid better than anyone working a comparable job in London.


In answer to ZT, I'd prefer the legal creation of paid jobs to no new jobs. So if they're only going to pay 7.24, that'll still be better than most other equivalent employment nearby or elsewhere. So let them open. As for the rest of ED, hopefully employers will progress towards the LLW but vocal lefties do need at least to accept that businesses run the risk of swift collapse if they move far away from their competition. And that surely serves nobody's interests. The LLW is very easy to support but far harder to put into practice.

No, Otta. When the minimum wage was introduced it did not lead to lots of jobs being lost. It led to poor people having a little more money which they spent on local services creating more jobs. This is why even the Tory party now support the minimum wage having previously predicted huge job losses. The Living Wage is a logical extension of the minimum wage. I hope that the minimum wage will ASAP be raised to Living Wage rates. It is crazy that we all pay more taxes to pay for benefits to subsidise low wages. I'd sooner pay sensible honest prices to employ people on sensible wages.


Back to cinemas. Can't wait for the Picturehouse to submit its planning application and open before Christmas.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Paying living wage would ultimately lead to less

> jobs.

>

> Leading to harder work for those lucky enough to

> keep their jobs.

>

> I want people to be paid a good wage, I really do

> (having done my time working for minimum wage),

> but the reality is that it would benefit some and

> mean less jobs for others because businesses are

> unlikely to take the hit out of their profits.


Outdated and discredited argument ... thank god!

And ... back to the thread????

unlurked Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> unlike Waitrose who don't even

> recognise TUs. . .


Bit confused by this, though I realise a digression from OP - thought Waitrose staff were all partners in the business with full voting rights on all major decisions, so maybe that's why?

Hi unlurked,

The planning application has been submitted but it hasn't yet been accepted and 'registered' by planning officers. This step can take anything from a day to months or never. Until its 'registered' no planning officers will be assigned and no public consultation is started and the planning application clock doesn't start ticking.

When it has been accepted and 'registered' then East Dulwich councillors will encourage residents to respond to the public consultation.

  • 2 weeks later...

Zebedee Tring Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Is there any news yet on the progress of the

> planning application for the cinema?


Don't you know how to use the Southwark website? It's quite easy really. But, ooh just can't wait, beyond nirvana.

The planning application has been accepted into the planning application system to be considered. You can see all the planning application details and drawing etc here:http://planningonline.southwark.gov.uk/AcolNetCGI.exe?ACTION=UNWRAP&RIPNAME=Root.PgeResultDetail&TheSystemkey=9554210


VERY EXCITING another step has been taken towards an East Dulwich cinema.


If you support or object ot this planning application please email [email protected] and copy me. Subject line would ideally state 14/AP/1101

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 5 weeks later...
Horray! Planning has passed and a new EAST DULWICH CINEMA will definitely be opening soon. Build it and they will come. This has been a true dream come true and I'm sure it will benefit the whole community at large. What a great amenity we now have in Dulwich for all of us to enjoy!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • We don’t even need Victorian values. Many of theses monstrosities are made by Japanese companies but would never be sold in Japan because in Japan the dimensions of cars are strictly regulated due to their narrow street layout. I grew up in terraced streets in the 1970s, playing football and even cricket among the then relatively few parked cars. To walk through ED and see every square inch of every street taken up by a parked car and not a child playing is like a Silent Spring.
    • Word to the wise: please be careful if you’re around Dulwich Village during the school run.  While walking on the pavement down Carlton Avenue this morning c. 8.45am, I was hit from behind by a child riding a bicycle. When I raised this with his father, he (the father) behaved inappropriately. I highlight the following tactics deployed against me, so if you choose to say anything, you may come off better in any exchange than I. The father chose to make it more about how I reacted, rather than what had happened, namely that his son was riding on a pavement, seemingly without supervision, out of his father’s line of sight. The father claimed I was over-reacting, said that his son was 4-years old and didn’t do it deliberately. He didn’t ask me if I was alright. And apologised with a ‘but’: “I’m sorry if he hit your leg, but your reaction is over the top.”  He took no responsibility for his child’s action or his lack of parental supervision. As I walked away, I heard him and two other adults talking and laughing about my reaction – yes, laughing.  I don’t think he or his son learned anything useful from the incident about keeping themselves and others safe, such that it would change their behaviour. I did and share it here as to place, time, nature of incident, minimising tactics etc. as a heads-up to others. I didn’t sustain any injuries or damage to my clothing or property. Others who are older/younger, have mobility issues, walk with buggies, children, pets etc. may fare differently. Forewarned is forearmed, guys.
    • Found on Goodrich Rd
    • Very good news! The Palmerston flourished under Jamie, so Franklins will be in safe hands, I'm sure
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...