We haven't won a PL or CL yet ffs
Club Ownership | INEOS responsible for the football side
- Thread starter Solius
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) was joined by comedian Ali Woods to look back at the best and worst moments of a rollercoaster season with the annual United Hour Awards.
Has Ten Hag been sacked yet? We're not sure and we hope not, but it's looking more likely as the days pass.
Who should replace him and why is it taking so long to make a decision?
So have a party for the ladies and the youth teams. Don’t invite the men’s team. That would send a message
I was about to say that these people have workers protection but they don’t. Brexit, the gift that allows billionaires to treat their staff badly
The problem is that more and more companies are taking this approach, so eventually you'll find a job market where you're not applying for 90% of the jobs available. And it should be really important to everyone. How much I'm going to be paid is the primary reason why I'm looking for a job in the first place.
I agree with @decorativeed. It's a shitty practice and unnecessary.
You can't keep or attract the best people by forcing everyone back into the office.
As for the email traffic thing it's nonsense and a trial WFH Friday in one unnamed company is a much smaller sample size than what we have from Covid. WFH works well in my experience and if people have targets and deadlines which are being hit I don't see the issue. Efficiency and productivity are down to the individual to manage. This just smacks off someone who's out of touch and has decided WFH won't and can't work based on limited data.
It also seems to be unworkable as apparently many of these people were employed on a remote basis in the first place and are on flexible contracts so can't be forced back. They've reconfigured the offices such that there aren't enough desks for everyone and some of the old office space has been converted for hospitality use. The suspicion for me would be that it's an under-handed tactic to reduce headcount without paying people off.
Last edited:
Okay but if every company is doing it then there isn't any alternative, is there? If that's how everyone does it then we can label it a shitty practice, but it won't have any effect.
The way I look at it is if you are looking for a job, then the company has something you want/need so they will make you jump hoops to get it. On the other hand if it's a company that approaches you, then you have the upper hand and dictate the recruiting process. Like everything else it's about supply and demand.
Why do footballers get paid so much for running around and kicking a ball of air? Because the supply of people who can do that well is less than the demand, so they get to dictate the price and market.
Good luck explaining basic economics on Redcafe!
It is entirely ideological, for sure, unless you genuinely believe Ineos think United's on-field woes stem from poor hygiene ratings. Alexis Sanchez flopped because of the flexible working patterns of admin staff? What next? Male staff have to shave whilst Jim grows his beard out?
The dreaded brexiteer mentality of performative nonsense.
There is absolutely no evidence WFH affects the players on the pitch. It's just an ideological purge.
What a simple, uncomplicated world you must live in. Invite me over there sometime, I'm begging you!
Exactly - thank you!
How many people out there are working in a job where salary isn't at least one of their primary concerns?
It isn't just the Caf unfortunately. Most of the internet seems to be full of people complaining about the fact that everything is coming easily or being structured exactly how they'd like it.Good luck explaining basic economics on Redcafe!
On the other hand people you meet in real life seem to be much more realistic about the way the world works. But all forums now just seem to be a platform for people coming together to complain. A few years ago it used to be the opposite.
I do not think that W4H is protected by law anywhere. It is totally at the discretion of the company, pretty much anywhere. Nothing to do with Brexit.
Thing is this isn't "just the way the world works". It's designed like that and doesn't have to be like that. Companies are testing the water now with not giving the salary details up front. If nobody does anything about it, it'll become commonplace as it's in employer's interests. Then there won't really be a choice. It's not in employee's interests to have a job market where you have to go through recruitment processes without even knowing what you'd be paid.It isn't just the Caf unfortunately. Most of the internet seems to be full of people complaining about the fact that everything is coming easily or being structured exactly how they'd like it.
On the other hand people you meet in real life seem to be much more realistic about the way the world works. But all forums now just seem to be a platform for people coming together to complain. A few years ago it used to be the opposite.
Well said. Applying for a job is a pain in the arse, and you need to know whether the effort is justified before you've jumped through all the hoops, not after.
The "way the world works" used to include the following;It isn't just the Caf unfortunately. Most of the internet seems to be full of people complaining about the fact that everything is coming easily or being structured exactly how they'd like it.
On the other hand people you meet in real life seem to be much more realistic about the way the world works. But all forums now just seem to be a platform for people coming together to complain. A few years ago it used to be the opposite.
Six day working weeks as standard
62 hour working weeks as standard
No minimum wage
No equal pay laws
No parental leave
No formal negotiations between employees and employers over pay and conditions
Employers didn't have to abide by contracts they signed with employees
No annual leave/holidays
Loose to zero health and safety rules in the workplace
Fortunately the world was able to look at these things and see them for what @decorativeed has already pointed out; shitty.
And another thing; quit with the pompous "oh, look at these people not living in the real world! Oh, for shame! They're like wittle childwen, not understanding what real life is!" I deal with multi million pound projects every year in a very competitive sector, spending my time outside of work raising four kids. I've worked my arse off to get where I am, and I still work my arse off now I'm there. I'm not immature simply for wanting more transparent business practices, and deriding someone for doing so is arrogant as feck - not to mention it probably comes from someone who really wants the status quo to be maintained because they benefit from it.
As i understood it the salaries at United were (and I believe still are) less than most competitors because its Manchester United, and working for such an esteemed brand brings its own value. That was the common consensus when I was there.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
According to Mitten on the latest Talk of the Devils podcast, the awards dinner was cancelled by INEOS as a cost-cutting measure.
Excellent post
Turns out it was the women’s academy. My mistake. Apologies.
The Caf will try to connect anything to Brexit whether it's true or not. WFH is just a method to do work, that's it. It's not a right or a privilege. Technically, a cornershop can be considered working from home if the owner lives in the same building as the store front.
I know, but especially the caf.It isn't just the Caf unfortunately. Most of the internet seems to be full of people complaining about the fact that everything is coming easily or being structured exactly how they'd like it.
On the other hand people you meet in real life seem to be much more realistic about the way the world works. But all forums now just seem to be a platform for people coming together to complain. A few years ago it used to be the opposite.
The world is not designed to work on supply and demand as if someone invented it. That is literally how humans behave when they want to exchange goods and services, it's natural. Also, what's the salary details got do with anything? Complete non-sequitur. It's also in an employers interests to attract as many people as possible to get the best candidates for a job. Why the hell would they not be upfront about their salary? The most vague they go is to give you a scale, say from 19000 to 23000 a year. That's based on all sorts of things like experience and the role etc.
Mediocrity shouldn't be celebrated, shame for the ladies and the kids who have been a shining light.
They might do, who knows
Okay. Now that you've lectured me about how the world worked and how you're a big shot who works on multi million deals and I'm an arrogant twat who wants to maintain the status quo, let me ask you a question. Did this rant or what the other guy is saying suddenly compel employers to disclose salaries during interview process?
Better working conditions didn't emerge because the world say the previous ones were "shitty". They emerged because with capitalism the number of employers in the market increased ( from an economy solely dependent on monarchs/government/autocrats providing employment). It was in the employers interest to have better conditions to attract more talent than the competition.
It is the same situation now. If you have a skill set that is unique or in demand, you will dictate your employment conditions. If you are doing something that is easily replaceable, your employer will dictate the conditions.
You can call it shitty or whatever and give me as long winded lectures as you want, that is how it goes. Human society has always worked on supply and demand, and for the foreseeable future, it will do the same.
We remain a joke of a club. I’ve been shouting plenty about Radcliffe and Brailsford being clueless in this space. It’ll all be operational and profit based.
The only acceptable thing to do here would be;
“We are moving the end of season celebration to the evening of the final club game of the season.
We hope that this will give our club the chance to celebrate the first time in its history that both our men’s and women’s team won the FA Cup. The women’s team have done their job. All focus is now on the men’s team”
That’s thirty seconds of effort. Who the Fcuk are these people?
I don’t give a shit about our women’s team, beyond wanting us to win things. Not because I’m a dick. They’re talented athletes, I just don’t have time in life to follow another football team. But they’re part of my club, so I wish them every success.
But to just cancel it? With this kind of messaging? It’s so Fcuking stupid and takes the piss out of the women’s team. They wear the same shirt. They won something. The current messaging suggests that the women can only be celebrated in seasons that the men’s team succeeds. Moronic.
That pair are hateful, and - like Nice - we won’t be successful until they’re not involved in day to day operations. They’re clueless to football culture. Utterly clueless.
Employers had to be dragged kicking and screaming by a unionised workforce for every single one of the things I mentioned, but OK.
Don't know how that contradicts what I said but alright.
Surely those working from would have realised that after Covid it was more than likely they'd have to return to working from the office.
I've alluded to that myself. Except that now it's like a stain on your CV when you want to leave.
No idea. A lot of businesses changed and became hybrid/fully remote.
I can only speak for my job, those of others and what I've read online but flexible working environments appear to be here to stay.
Some baffling takes and comments here.
An organization gets better primarily by getting the people that is better at their jobs to work for them. For that you have to A) lure them in and B) don't push them out. Removing benefits usually tied to the employee's way of life (since most of them have families, already arranged living plans, kids that need to attend school etc.), as legal as it could be, isn't persuing the former and is working actively against the latter.
The typical result of this measures in organizations are that A) the most valuable employees look for the door -and usually go straight to the competition-; B) the ones left are unhappier, overdemanded and understaffed and that obviously takes a toll on their motivation; and C) they start looking for jobs anyway and when they get them, replacing their functions can be a long and costly process. All of this causing the organization to end up worse than before. The canary app (that has its own thread) is a good example on the matter.
Of course, this applies only if the main goal is to get a better organization long term. If the idea is to be the most profitable, then that's a different story. But fans of a football club that want their club to be the most profitable instead of better are IMO, very weird football club fans.
An organization gets better primarily by getting the people that is better at their jobs to work for them. For that you have to A) lure them in and B) don't push them out. Removing benefits usually tied to the employee's way of life (since most of them have families, already arranged living plans, kids that need to attend school etc.), as legal as it could be, isn't persuing the former and is working actively against the latter.
The typical result of this measures in organizations are that A) the most valuable employees look for the door -and usually go straight to the competition-; B) the ones left are unhappier, overdemanded and understaffed and that obviously takes a toll on their motivation; and C) they start looking for jobs anyway and when they get them, replacing their functions can be a long and costly process. All of this causing the organization to end up worse than before. The canary app (that has its own thread) is a good example on the matter.
Of course, this applies only if the main goal is to get a better organization long term. If the idea is to be the most profitable, then that's a different story. But fans of a football club that want their club to be the most profitable instead of better are IMO, very weird football club fans.
Not when the club told them they'd be moving to hybrid working in some cases and guaranteeing WFH to employees who'd been hired on that basis.
Also, it meant the club could allow leases to lapse on the office spaces they'd been occupying for years for workers who didn't have desk space within the stadium. There is actually very little office space there.
Omar Berrarda went straight to the competition so I'm happy with that.
He said it was about financial fair play and I found that really weird. There is no way an awards dinner counts towards to FFP calculations.
IMO, very weird football club fans are fans that start on the new owners when they come in and change a few things at the side of the club no one knows even existed. They have no idea their intentions or what the job entails yet still want to use it as a stick to bash the new ownership because their views don’t align.
Where's this narrative that the clubs been shambles off the field come from?
Literally, the only things that have generally been functioning have been the things that have nothing to do with the first team. Our marketing dept has kept bringing record breaking deals for us year after year, even when the on-field performances have been shite.
Even the youth team has been constantly churning out talent year after year. The club for the most part has functioned fine - the mens first team has been awfully ran, and the infrastructure has been left behind due to a lack of investment.
Literally, the only things that have generally been functioning have been the things that have nothing to do with the first team. Our marketing dept has kept bringing record breaking deals for us year after year, even when the on-field performances have been shite.
Even the youth team has been constantly churning out talent year after year. The club for the most part has functioned fine - the mens first team has been awfully ran, and the infrastructure has been left behind due to a lack of investment.
We've a little past the ye oldey natural times of exchanging berries for meat. We're talking about designed societies where we have laws and such to stop employers from doing whatever they want. That's why we have a minimum wage for example. If your logic is taken to the extreme, then scrap minimum wage and let the natural exchange take place. Only, the exchangers aren't on anywhere near an even footing, one often has much more wealth or means to wealth, and the other needs a job to survive, so the lowest paid people end up screwed. It's important to fight back against moves like not disclosing wages up front because employees are already at a disadvantage compared to employers.
The rest you said about disclosing wages isn't true. Apparently only about 12% of global companies disclose even their wage range before the interview, so it's already worse than I thought. This is due to a variety of reasons such as companies not wanting to pay people equally for the same job in order to save money, and to limit employees from moving to a better paid job elsewhere since it's easier to poach when wages are visible. It's already the law in a bunch of places to have wages be transparent to protect workers.
https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20210921-why-companies-dont-post-salaries-in-job-adverts
Do you suggest that we all turn a blind eye to shitty practices just because they are shitty practices put in place by a new owner?
And how long a grace period do you think they should they get before we should start to treat them to the same criticism as if it had been the Glazers?
We all want this new arrangement to benefit and improve the club. But I don't think treating the average members of staff like this is going to achieve that. It'll rightly put people's backs up. There's already a toxic culture at United as a workplace and this isn't a good start to improving it.
Every cost counts to your profitability, which would count towards your FFP calculations? Would imagine something like that cost north of 200k, so to completely can it would be a relatively big saving.
Objectively wrong.