Revealed: a quarter of people working in Bournemouth earning less than the Living Wage

TOUGH TIMES: Lush Spa, Poole

TOUGH TIMES: Lush Spa, Poole

First published in News by

ALMOST a quarter of people working in Bournemouth earn less than the Living Wage, new figures show.

Across Dorset, almost one in four people earn less than the Living Wage of £7.65 an hour.

The figures, based on analysis of official statistics, were released by the TUC to coincide with Fair Pay Fortnight.

Bournemouth has 23.9 per cent of its workforce earning under the Living Wage, Poole 16.4 per cent, East Dorset 23.1 per cent, Christchurch 22 per cent, North Dorset 24.8 per cent and Weymouth and Portland 28.8 per cent.

Neil Duncan-Jordan, chair of the Living Wage for Dorset Campaign, said: “Dorset is a nice place to visit on holiday but people who come should realise that those who live here and work in the hotels or restaurants or bars aren’t necessarily getting paid very well.”

He said it was often big high street names who were the lowest-paying employers.

“Seventy-five per cent of the lowest paid workers are employed by just 18 per cent of businesses in the area,” he said.

He said low wages cost the taxpayer money in tax credits and benefits. “Sixty per cent of all benefits claimants have jobs,” he said.

The legal minimum wage for over-21s is £6.31 an hour but the Living Wage is a figure devised by the Centre for Research in Social Policy and based on the cost of living.

Nigel Costley, regional secretary for the South West TUC, said: “Working families are experiencing the biggest pressure on their living standards since Victorian times. Pay has been squeezed at all levels below the boardroom and it’s costing the South West’s economy dear.”

Ian Girling, chief executive of Dorset Chamber of Commerce and Industry, backed the Living Wage in principle but said the economic recovery was ‘fragile’.

“Wage pressures are still a real issue for many businesses,” he said.

“I support the concept of the Living Wage. I think it’s important for businesses to properly reward and look after their staff. I also think consumers are being massively squeezed and as employees we’ve all faced massive pressures over the last two years..

“Employers that are seen to be paying their staff fairly well see the benefits in terms of reduced turnover of staff, there’s evidence of reduced absenteeism and hopefully increased productivity should follow from that. Businesses have a responsibility to look after the staff but it’s got to be an affordable option for business.”

COSMETICS retailer Lush has defended its decision not to pay the Living Wage in Dorset.

Neil Duncan-Jordan, of the Living Wage for Dorset Campaign, said: “Lush in London pay the living wage. They don’t pay it here. I don’t understand why.”

A statement from Lush’s financial director Kim Coles said the company was committed to increasing pay for its hourly-paid employees “where we can and when profits allow”.

She said committing to the living wage would be a “struggle when the costs of doing business on the UK High Street are so high with rents and business rates in particular being so extreme”.

She said the cost of bridging the gap between the national minimum wage of £6.31 and the £7.65 Living Wage was “massive” for a retail business. Lush’s minimum wage is £6.56.

She added: “We prioritised the pay of our London staff as that was the area where the biggest struggles were taking place and the costs of transport and rents in particular were making it incredibly hard for them to make ends meet.”

Many under-21s working in its shops received “significantly more” than the minimum wage for their ages – with a 17-year-old outside London making £6.56 an hour instead of the minimum £3.72.

Comments (41)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:03am Thu 3 Apr 14

PUZZLED ONE says...

If they are not earning enough to satisfy their desires, they should find a job that does!
If they are not earning enough to satisfy their desires, they should find a job that does! PUZZLED ONE
  • Score: -42

7:38am Thu 3 Apr 14

hooplaa says...

Another made up story by the echo's finest!
Another made up story by the echo's finest! hooplaa
  • Score: -14

8:04am Thu 3 Apr 14

djd says...

Another class report by our local daily. As for Lush, they have to pay top whack in London because that's the only way they can recruit staff there.
Down here is poorly paid Dorset, they can pay what they like because people are glad of a job.
Another class report by our local daily. As for Lush, they have to pay top whack in London because that's the only way they can recruit staff there. Down here is poorly paid Dorset, they can pay what they like because people are glad of a job. djd
  • Score: 20

8:24am Thu 3 Apr 14

Gastines3 says...

The answer might lie in the fact that our dearly beloved Council seem to do their utmost to deter investment in the area unless it involves in-house grandiose schemes. Nearly all the major employers left the area some time ago.Now relying on poorly paid hotel/cafe' type jobs,call-centres or benefits.Even the quality retailers aren't interested in the town. Perhaps they are waiting for the revamp of Westover Road and the Pavilion,Winter Gardens,Bus Station,Boscombe Sea Front etc .etc, We hear a lot,read a lot and se bu--er all.
The answer might lie in the fact that our dearly beloved Council seem to do their utmost to deter investment in the area unless it involves in-house grandiose schemes. Nearly all the major employers left the area some time ago.Now relying on poorly paid hotel/cafe' type jobs,call-centres or benefits.Even the quality retailers aren't interested in the town. Perhaps they are waiting for the revamp of Westover Road and the Pavilion,Winter Gardens,Bus Station,Boscombe Sea Front etc .etc, We hear a lot,read a lot and se bu--er all. Gastines3
  • Score: 5

8:40am Thu 3 Apr 14

Controversial But True says...

The other three quarters don't work at all!!
The other three quarters don't work at all!! Controversial But True
  • Score: -8

8:58am Thu 3 Apr 14

John T says...

Controversial But True wrote:
The other three quarters don't work at all!!
Oh, come on now. Now you are making up figures to suit your argument.
Lies, dam.n lies and Government propaganda.
[quote][p][bold]Controversial But True[/bold] wrote: The other three quarters don't work at all!![/p][/quote]Oh, come on now. Now you are making up figures to suit your argument. Lies, dam.n lies and Government propaganda. John T
  • Score: 8

9:00am Thu 3 Apr 14

skydriver says...

I bet most are not from our shores
I bet most are not from our shores skydriver
  • Score: -12

9:12am Thu 3 Apr 14

Lucky Rich says...

Businesses that pay their counter staff poorly are not doing themselves any favors, how many shops do you go in to these days & the staff are moaning or bickering about hours or money or similar right in front of customers,,,,,,puts you off going back there....
Businesses that pay their counter staff poorly are not doing themselves any favors, how many shops do you go in to these days & the staff are moaning or bickering about hours or money or similar right in front of customers,,,,,,puts you off going back there.... Lucky Rich
  • Score: 20

9:18am Thu 3 Apr 14

pete woodley says...

Does shop staff getting a low wage entitle them to be rude and unhelpful ?.Lush are known for paying low wages and being slave drivers,but still get a lot of free publicity,in the Echo.
Does shop staff getting a low wage entitle them to be rude and unhelpful ?.Lush are known for paying low wages and being slave drivers,but still get a lot of free publicity,in the Echo. pete woodley
  • Score: 5

9:40am Thu 3 Apr 14

Sir Beachy Head says...

It's the e.u migrants that are driving down wages and creating an over supply of cheap unskilled labour.
That's why I'm voting UKIP.
It's the e.u migrants that are driving down wages and creating an over supply of cheap unskilled labour. That's why I'm voting UKIP. Sir Beachy Head
  • Score: 0

9:47am Thu 3 Apr 14

BournemouthMum says...

Employers who don't pay their staff a living wage deserve to go out of business. Without their staff they couldn't run the business could they? Good companies who value their staff and pay them decently are hard to find in this day and age. And even then it's difficult to get into such companies as their staff turnover is low. Being self employed is difficult these days too, with the competition constantly undercutting and offering shoddy services. The economy in the UK is beyond repair :(
Employers who don't pay their staff a living wage deserve to go out of business. Without their staff they couldn't run the business could they? Good companies who value their staff and pay them decently are hard to find in this day and age. And even then it's difficult to get into such companies as their staff turnover is low. Being self employed is difficult these days too, with the competition constantly undercutting and offering shoddy services. The economy in the UK is beyond repair :( BournemouthMum
  • Score: 23

9:50am Thu 3 Apr 14

BournemouthMum says...

pete woodley wrote:
Does shop staff getting a low wage entitle them to be rude and unhelpful ?.Lush are known for paying low wages and being slave drivers,but still get a lot of free publicity,in the Echo.
No Pete it doesn't 'entitle them' to be rude and unhelpful, but when morale is low it's difficult for them to remain enthusiastic about their jobs I would imagine. Slaving away for almost 40 hours a week for a pittance is not much of an incentive to be bight and cheerful is it?
[quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: Does shop staff getting a low wage entitle them to be rude and unhelpful ?.Lush are known for paying low wages and being slave drivers,but still get a lot of free publicity,in the Echo.[/p][/quote]No Pete it doesn't 'entitle them' to be rude and unhelpful, but when morale is low it's difficult for them to remain enthusiastic about their jobs I would imagine. Slaving away for almost 40 hours a week for a pittance is not much of an incentive to be bight and cheerful is it? BournemouthMum
  • Score: 18

9:55am Thu 3 Apr 14

ifucantbeatemjoinem says...

I have had a change of circumstances recently meaning that I needed financial help as I didn't know how long I would be out of work for. Part of that "help" was a reduction in council tax - I have lived and worked in Bournemouth all my working life - over 50 years - and always paid my council tax as a single owner - I was grateful for the help I received - and fortunately managed to get another job - just on the minimum wage within 8 weeks. Guess what - our wonderful council claimed back EVERY penny that they had helped me with - meaning that in the end I lost out by claiming. So to me a wage and being able to support myself means a roof over my head - if I have to go without other comforts so be it - I am just grateful to have a job here. My jobs have never been high paying jobs - I just live within my means. end of rant !!
I have had a change of circumstances recently meaning that I needed financial help as I didn't know how long I would be out of work for. Part of that "help" was a reduction in council tax - I have lived and worked in Bournemouth all my working life - over 50 years - and always paid my council tax as a single owner - I was grateful for the help I received - and fortunately managed to get another job - just on the minimum wage within 8 weeks. Guess what - our wonderful council claimed back EVERY penny that they had helped me with - meaning that in the end I lost out by claiming. So to me a wage and being able to support myself means a roof over my head - if I have to go without other comforts so be it - I am just grateful to have a job here. My jobs have never been high paying jobs - I just live within my means. end of rant !! ifucantbeatemjoinem
  • Score: 11

10:28am Thu 3 Apr 14

Dave2207 says...

These people are not suffering from a shortage of earnings - but an excess of spending. Charles Dickens wrote about this, many years ago. The message is, "SPEND LESS THAN YOU EARN"
The so-called 'living wage' is a lefty, liberal concept that diverts attention from the problems of excessive spending, and encourages people to blame somebody else for their situation.
These people are not suffering from a shortage of earnings - but an excess of spending. Charles Dickens wrote about this, many years ago. The message is, "SPEND LESS THAN YOU EARN" The so-called 'living wage' is a lefty, liberal concept that diverts attention from the problems of excessive spending, and encourages people to blame somebody else for their situation. Dave2207
  • Score: -6

10:38am Thu 3 Apr 14

MrPitiful says...

Dave2207 wrote:
These people are not suffering from a shortage of earnings - but an excess of spending. Charles Dickens wrote about this, many years ago. The message is, "SPEND LESS THAN YOU EARN"
The so-called 'living wage' is a lefty, liberal concept that diverts attention from the problems of excessive spending, and encourages people to blame somebody else for their situation.
Charles Dickens wrote that many years ago - yes exactly - when for some people doing just that may have been possible.

Unfortunately, in this day and age for some, it is easier said than done.

The accusation of excessive spending, people living beyond their means, having "Sky TV but no food" is a Tory-media driven, ill-informed concept that diverts attention away from the millions of hard-working, genuine people and families who are underpaid, over-taxed and struggling to make ends meet due to high fuel costs, high food costs and high rent/mortgage costs. There is no-one else to blame for THEIR situation apart from an out-of-touch Governement who despite the "All in it together" mantra, are out to look after their own and two fingers to everybody else.
[quote][p][bold]Dave2207[/bold] wrote: These people are not suffering from a shortage of earnings - but an excess of spending. Charles Dickens wrote about this, many years ago. The message is, "SPEND LESS THAN YOU EARN" The so-called 'living wage' is a lefty, liberal concept that diverts attention from the problems of excessive spending, and encourages people to blame somebody else for their situation.[/p][/quote]Charles Dickens wrote that many years ago - yes exactly - when for some people doing just that may have been possible. Unfortunately, in this day and age for some, it is easier said than done. The accusation of excessive spending, people living beyond their means, having "Sky TV but no food" is a Tory-media driven, ill-informed concept that diverts attention away from the millions of hard-working, genuine people and families who are underpaid, over-taxed and struggling to make ends meet due to high fuel costs, high food costs and high rent/mortgage costs. There is no-one else to blame for THEIR situation apart from an out-of-touch Governement who despite the "All in it together" mantra, are out to look after their own and two fingers to everybody else. MrPitiful
  • Score: 9

10:44am Thu 3 Apr 14

pete woodley says...

BournemouthMum wrote:
pete woodley wrote:
Does shop staff getting a low wage entitle them to be rude and unhelpful ?.Lush are known for paying low wages and being slave drivers,but still get a lot of free publicity,in the Echo.
No Pete it doesn't 'entitle them' to be rude and unhelpful, but when morale is low it's difficult for them to remain enthusiastic about their jobs I would imagine. Slaving away for almost 40 hours a week for a pittance is not much of an incentive to be bight and cheerful is it?
My son agrees with you.
[quote][p][bold]BournemouthMum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: Does shop staff getting a low wage entitle them to be rude and unhelpful ?.Lush are known for paying low wages and being slave drivers,but still get a lot of free publicity,in the Echo.[/p][/quote]No Pete it doesn't 'entitle them' to be rude and unhelpful, but when morale is low it's difficult for them to remain enthusiastic about their jobs I would imagine. Slaving away for almost 40 hours a week for a pittance is not much of an incentive to be bight and cheerful is it?[/p][/quote]My son agrees with you. pete woodley
  • Score: 2

10:44am Thu 3 Apr 14

pete woodley says...

BournemouthMum wrote:
pete woodley wrote:
Does shop staff getting a low wage entitle them to be rude and unhelpful ?.Lush are known for paying low wages and being slave drivers,but still get a lot of free publicity,in the Echo.
No Pete it doesn't 'entitle them' to be rude and unhelpful, but when morale is low it's difficult for them to remain enthusiastic about their jobs I would imagine. Slaving away for almost 40 hours a week for a pittance is not much of an incentive to be bight and cheerful is it?
My son agrees with you.
[quote][p][bold]BournemouthMum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: Does shop staff getting a low wage entitle them to be rude and unhelpful ?.Lush are known for paying low wages and being slave drivers,but still get a lot of free publicity,in the Echo.[/p][/quote]No Pete it doesn't 'entitle them' to be rude and unhelpful, but when morale is low it's difficult for them to remain enthusiastic about their jobs I would imagine. Slaving away for almost 40 hours a week for a pittance is not much of an incentive to be bight and cheerful is it?[/p][/quote]My son agrees with you. pete woodley
  • Score: 1

10:47am Thu 3 Apr 14

elite50 says...

If people are not earning a "living wage" they die.
Or does a "living wage" actually mean that a person below that figure has to do without booze, cigs, large screen t.v.s, and off-shore holidays?
If people are not earning a "living wage" they die. Or does a "living wage" actually mean that a person below that figure has to do without booze, cigs, large screen t.v.s, and off-shore holidays? elite50
  • Score: -5

11:19am Thu 3 Apr 14

Dibbles2 says...

elite50 wrote:
If people are not earning a "living wage" they die.
Or does a "living wage" actually mean that a person below that figure has to do without booze, cigs, large screen t.v.s, and off-shore holidays?
Is it the case now that even working people are not allowed to have small luxuries in life then? Lets be honest without them nobody would want to go to work and make a better life for themselves and yet not only do benefits receivers get the flack and quite rightly so in SOME cases but now working people are too? Com eon there has to be a difference between working and benefits receivers surely?
[quote][p][bold]elite50[/bold] wrote: If people are not earning a "living wage" they die. Or does a "living wage" actually mean that a person below that figure has to do without booze, cigs, large screen t.v.s, and off-shore holidays?[/p][/quote]Is it the case now that even working people are not allowed to have small luxuries in life then? Lets be honest without them nobody would want to go to work and make a better life for themselves and yet not only do benefits receivers get the flack and quite rightly so in SOME cases but now working people are too? Com eon there has to be a difference between working and benefits receivers surely? Dibbles2
  • Score: 1

11:21am Thu 3 Apr 14

Dibbles2 says...

PUZZLED ONE wrote:
If they are not earning enough to satisfy their desires, they should find a job that does!
Well we cant all have well paid jobs can we. Somebody has to do the lower paid work and please bear in mind that in some cases this is public servants.
[quote][p][bold]PUZZLED ONE[/bold] wrote: If they are not earning enough to satisfy their desires, they should find a job that does![/p][/quote]Well we cant all have well paid jobs can we. Somebody has to do the lower paid work and please bear in mind that in some cases this is public servants. Dibbles2
  • Score: 3

11:49am Thu 3 Apr 14

Kiki1973 says...

Lush.... I worked for them, they are salve drivers and yes, they pay appallingly. It's a crying shame that a company that started here in Dorset with such loft ideals of egalitarianism and community spirit has turned out this way, turning their back on the very community they started in and live in.

As for comments about a 'living wage', check it out and tell me if you could live on such a small amount. You will struggle in Dorset. We have London costs but not London wages. Lush and national companies like it need to assess their salary bands based on the cost of living in the areas they are functioning, not just London. £20'000 pa, for example, will leave you on the bread line in London, scraping in Dorset, but living the life of Riley in Derbyshire. Companies really need to start to address this issue.
Lush.... I worked for them, they are salve drivers and yes, they pay appallingly. It's a crying shame that a company that started here in Dorset with such loft ideals of egalitarianism and community spirit has turned out this way, turning their back on the very community they started in and live in. As for comments about a 'living wage', check it out and tell me if you could live on such a small amount. You will struggle in Dorset. We have London costs but not London wages. Lush and national companies like it need to assess their salary bands based on the cost of living in the areas they are functioning, not just London. £20'000 pa, for example, will leave you on the bread line in London, scraping in Dorset, but living the life of Riley in Derbyshire. Companies really need to start to address this issue. Kiki1973
  • Score: 8

11:58am Thu 3 Apr 14

elite50 says...

Dibbles2 wrote:
elite50 wrote:
If people are not earning a "living wage" they die.
Or does a "living wage" actually mean that a person below that figure has to do without booze, cigs, large screen t.v.s, and off-shore holidays?
Is it the case now that even working people are not allowed to have small luxuries in life then? Lets be honest without them nobody would want to go to work and make a better life for themselves and yet not only do benefits receivers get the flack and quite rightly so in SOME cases but now working people are too? Com eon there has to be a difference between working and benefits receivers surely?
Simple, the words "living wage" are not accurate.
I was raised on a "living wage", I did not die (but spent a lot of time hungry) and it was a lot worse than is described here!
[quote][p][bold]Dibbles2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elite50[/bold] wrote: If people are not earning a "living wage" they die. Or does a "living wage" actually mean that a person below that figure has to do without booze, cigs, large screen t.v.s, and off-shore holidays?[/p][/quote]Is it the case now that even working people are not allowed to have small luxuries in life then? Lets be honest without them nobody would want to go to work and make a better life for themselves and yet not only do benefits receivers get the flack and quite rightly so in SOME cases but now working people are too? Com eon there has to be a difference between working and benefits receivers surely?[/p][/quote]Simple, the words "living wage" are not accurate. I was raised on a "living wage", I did not die (but spent a lot of time hungry) and it was a lot worse than is described here! elite50
  • Score: -1

11:58am Thu 3 Apr 14

elite50 says...

Dibbles2 wrote:
elite50 wrote:
If people are not earning a "living wage" they die.
Or does a "living wage" actually mean that a person below that figure has to do without booze, cigs, large screen t.v.s, and off-shore holidays?
Is it the case now that even working people are not allowed to have small luxuries in life then? Lets be honest without them nobody would want to go to work and make a better life for themselves and yet not only do benefits receivers get the flack and quite rightly so in SOME cases but now working people are too? Com eon there has to be a difference between working and benefits receivers surely?
Simple, the words "living wage" are not accurate.
I was raised on a "living wage", I did not die (but spent a lot of time hungry) and it was a lot worse than is described here!
[quote][p][bold]Dibbles2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elite50[/bold] wrote: If people are not earning a "living wage" they die. Or does a "living wage" actually mean that a person below that figure has to do without booze, cigs, large screen t.v.s, and off-shore holidays?[/p][/quote]Is it the case now that even working people are not allowed to have small luxuries in life then? Lets be honest without them nobody would want to go to work and make a better life for themselves and yet not only do benefits receivers get the flack and quite rightly so in SOME cases but now working people are too? Com eon there has to be a difference between working and benefits receivers surely?[/p][/quote]Simple, the words "living wage" are not accurate. I was raised on a "living wage", I did not die (but spent a lot of time hungry) and it was a lot worse than is described here! elite50
  • Score: 0

12:19pm Thu 3 Apr 14

smileysue says...

BournemouthMum wrote:
pete woodley wrote:
Does shop staff getting a low wage entitle them to be rude and unhelpful ?.Lush are known for paying low wages and being slave drivers,but still get a lot of free publicity,in the Echo.
No Pete it doesn't 'entitle them' to be rude and unhelpful, but when morale is low it's difficult for them to remain enthusiastic about their jobs I would imagine. Slaving away for almost 40 hours a week for a pittance is not much of an incentive to be bight and cheerful is it?
What about the very rude customers that shop staff have to put up with while doing their job for low paid wages?
[quote][p][bold]BournemouthMum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pete woodley[/bold] wrote: Does shop staff getting a low wage entitle them to be rude and unhelpful ?.Lush are known for paying low wages and being slave drivers,but still get a lot of free publicity,in the Echo.[/p][/quote]No Pete it doesn't 'entitle them' to be rude and unhelpful, but when morale is low it's difficult for them to remain enthusiastic about their jobs I would imagine. Slaving away for almost 40 hours a week for a pittance is not much of an incentive to be bight and cheerful is it?[/p][/quote]What about the very rude customers that shop staff have to put up with while doing their job for low paid wages? smileysue
  • Score: 8

12:32pm Thu 3 Apr 14

beachcomber1 says...

is that £7.65 per hour for a 30 hour week? many aren't getting to work that much.
is that £7.65 per hour for a 30 hour week? many aren't getting to work that much. beachcomber1
  • Score: -2

12:41pm Thu 3 Apr 14

BmthNewshound says...

People blame immigration for driving down wages but I think we all need to look closer to home.
.
Consumer behaviours are forcing companies to drive down prices which means that business has less to spend on wages. How many customers would be prepared to pay more to help fund the living wage ? How many people would pay more in tax to enable care workers to be paid a living wage ?
.
I think that there should be scheme similar to fairtrade for employers who pay a living wage to enable consumers to make informed choices when making a purchase.
.
Lush demonstrates complete hypocrisy in their approach - paying a living wage in London but not in Dorset is nothing short of discriminatory and is particular unacceptable from a company which portrays itself as being ethical. They are basically saying that they value their employees in London more than those in Dorset.
People blame immigration for driving down wages but I think we all need to look closer to home. . Consumer behaviours are forcing companies to drive down prices which means that business has less to spend on wages. How many customers would be prepared to pay more to help fund the living wage ? How many people would pay more in tax to enable care workers to be paid a living wage ? . I think that there should be scheme similar to fairtrade for employers who pay a living wage to enable consumers to make informed choices when making a purchase. . Lush demonstrates complete hypocrisy in their approach - paying a living wage in London but not in Dorset is nothing short of discriminatory and is particular unacceptable from a company which portrays itself as being ethical. They are basically saying that they value their employees in London more than those in Dorset. BmthNewshound
  • Score: 3

1:09pm Thu 3 Apr 14

pauls55 says...

Dave2207 wrote:
These people are not suffering from a shortage of earnings - but an excess of spending. Charles Dickens wrote about this, many years ago. The message is, "SPEND LESS THAN YOU EARN" The so-called 'living wage' is a lefty, liberal concept that diverts attention from the problems of excessive spending, and encourages people to blame somebody else for their situation.
Absolute twaddle. A statutory living wage, would save billions spent on social security each year by reducing subsidies to low-paying bosses, as well as stimulating the economy, creating jobs because of higher demand, stopping pay being undercut by cheap labour, and tackling the scandal of most of Britain’s poor being in work. An honest days’ pay for an honest days’ work would finally be enshrined in law.
[quote][p][bold]Dave2207[/bold] wrote: These people are not suffering from a shortage of earnings - but an excess of spending. Charles Dickens wrote about this, many years ago. The message is, "SPEND LESS THAN YOU EARN" The so-called 'living wage' is a lefty, liberal concept that diverts attention from the problems of excessive spending, and encourages people to blame somebody else for their situation.[/p][/quote]Absolute twaddle. A statutory living wage, would save billions spent on social security each year by reducing subsidies to low-paying bosses, as well as stimulating the economy, creating jobs because of higher demand, stopping pay being undercut by cheap labour, and tackling the scandal of most of Britain’s poor being in work. An honest days’ pay for an honest days’ work would finally be enshrined in law. pauls55
  • Score: 6

1:13pm Thu 3 Apr 14

muscliffman says...

In comparison to past remuneration standards it is easy to see why UK wages are falling below 'living' levels and in general depressed.

Our UK borders are wide open to all comers from EU Countries including many for whom our minimum wage and (working) benefits system is akin to winning the lottery. This UK pay situation can only worsen until all EU member Countries share the super state projects ideal of having more common levels of national wealth and the same minimum wage - so at this time we UK working people have an awful lot further to fall.

We have to regain control of our own Country's fortunes and our own affordable wage levels, UKIP seem to be offering the only way to do this.
In comparison to past remuneration standards it is easy to see why UK wages are falling below 'living' levels and in general depressed. Our UK borders are wide open to all comers from EU Countries including many for whom our minimum wage and (working) benefits system is akin to winning the lottery. This UK pay situation can only worsen until all EU member Countries share the super state projects ideal of having more common levels of national wealth and the same minimum wage - so at this time we UK working people have an awful lot further to fall. We have to regain control of our own Country's fortunes and our own affordable wage levels, UKIP seem to be offering the only way to do this. muscliffman
  • Score: 0

1:15pm Thu 3 Apr 14

trolley says...

Uneducated nonsense n here by the bucketload.the rich get richer,the poor get poorer.companies who pay low wages and can afford to pay better are a disgrace.there are many of them because of the idiotic me me attitudes on here
Uneducated nonsense n here by the bucketload.the rich get richer,the poor get poorer.companies who pay low wages and can afford to pay better are a disgrace.there are many of them because of the idiotic me me attitudes on here trolley
  • Score: -2

1:17pm Thu 3 Apr 14

trolley says...

Vote ukip to increase wages? Stupidity at its finest.congratulatio
ns
Vote ukip to increase wages? Stupidity at its finest.congratulatio ns trolley
  • Score: 4

1:40pm Thu 3 Apr 14

Lush No More says...

Its all very well of Kim Coles to blame Lush's poor pay in Dorset on the retail side of Lush but there are only 2 Retail shops in Dorset - the rest is the manufacturing side of the company in the many factories they have here. So they clearly pay less than the living wage to staff making the products too, even though the manufacturing side of Lush is the most profitable part of the company.

Rents and food in and around Poole are almost as expensive as London so it would be ethical to pay a living wage across the whole country.

I bet the bosses in their posh Dorset homes couldn't afford to live on what they pay their staff.
Its all very well of Kim Coles to blame Lush's poor pay in Dorset on the retail side of Lush but there are only 2 Retail shops in Dorset - the rest is the manufacturing side of the company in the many factories they have here. So they clearly pay less than the living wage to staff making the products too, even though the manufacturing side of Lush is the most profitable part of the company. Rents and food in and around Poole are almost as expensive as London so it would be ethical to pay a living wage across the whole country. I bet the bosses in their posh Dorset homes couldn't afford to live on what they pay their staff. Lush No More
  • Score: 8

1:46pm Thu 3 Apr 14

spooki says...

I want to know where this national average comes from! When I worked full time I was lucky to bring home £12,000 a year and that's a mainstream retail store. There's no way I could afford to buy a house or whatever on that.
I do agree though on the spend less than you earn. The amount of people out there up to their ears in debt is amazing. Even those on benefits seem to have phone and tv contracts.
I want to know where this national average comes from! When I worked full time I was lucky to bring home £12,000 a year and that's a mainstream retail store. There's no way I could afford to buy a house or whatever on that. I do agree though on the spend less than you earn. The amount of people out there up to their ears in debt is amazing. Even those on benefits seem to have phone and tv contracts. spooki
  • Score: 3

2:52pm Thu 3 Apr 14

fireflier says...

So, if so many people are 'scratching a living' who or what manages to keep pushing the cost of housing upwards?
Is it the slush of London money that comes down here because they can't stand living in the City any more ....and want to put effort into changing our community to match the one they have run away from?
Londoner's should pay a property-grabbing-ta
x before they are allowed into Dorset.
So, if so many people are 'scratching a living' who or what manages to keep pushing the cost of housing upwards? Is it the slush of London money that comes down here because they can't stand living in the City any more ....and want to put effort into changing our community to match the one they have run away from? Londoner's should pay a property-grabbing-ta x before they are allowed into Dorset. fireflier
  • Score: 3

4:45pm Thu 3 Apr 14

skydriver says...

trolley wrote:
Uneducated nonsense n here by the bucketload.the rich get richer,the poor get poorer.companies who pay low wages and can afford to pay better are a disgrace.there are many of them because of the idiotic me me attitudes on here
If that's the case get a job that pays more if you all want more don't expect the tax payer to subsidise you , the other answer get a better education then you would be better equipped to handle a more challenging roll that pays more.
Now I know that statement will cause a stir.
[quote][p][bold]trolley[/bold] wrote: Uneducated nonsense n here by the bucketload.the rich get richer,the poor get poorer.companies who pay low wages and can afford to pay better are a disgrace.there are many of them because of the idiotic me me attitudes on here[/p][/quote]If that's the case get a job that pays more if you all want more don't expect the tax payer to subsidise you , the other answer get a better education then you would be better equipped to handle a more challenging roll that pays more. Now I know that statement will cause a stir. skydriver
  • Score: -1

4:53pm Thu 3 Apr 14

live-and-let-live says...

labour introduced the minimum wage. when they got booted out, they decided it wasn't enough to live on and blamed the present government. (rolls eyes in despair)
labour introduced the minimum wage. when they got booted out, they decided it wasn't enough to live on and blamed the present government. (rolls eyes in despair) live-and-let-live
  • Score: -2

5:36pm Thu 3 Apr 14

trolley says...

skydriver wrote:
trolley wrote:
Uneducated nonsense n here by the bucketload.the rich get richer,the poor get poorer.companies who pay low wages and can afford to pay better are a disgrace.there are many of them because of the idiotic me me attitudes on here
If that's the case get a job that pays more if you all want more don't expect the tax payer to subsidise you , the other answer get a better education then you would be better equipped to handle a more challenging roll that pays more.
Now I know that statement will cause a stir.
Firstly i would suggest you perhaps should have got a better education .roll???? So anybody who works at a job serving the public deserves to be exploited?i care about a fair and equal society. You????exploitation of employees is as bad as it has ever been,you would expect a thriving economy not a world recession.
[quote][p][bold]skydriver[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]trolley[/bold] wrote: Uneducated nonsense n here by the bucketload.the rich get richer,the poor get poorer.companies who pay low wages and can afford to pay better are a disgrace.there are many of them because of the idiotic me me attitudes on here[/p][/quote]If that's the case get a job that pays more if you all want more don't expect the tax payer to subsidise you , the other answer get a better education then you would be better equipped to handle a more challenging roll that pays more. Now I know that statement will cause a stir.[/p][/quote]Firstly i would suggest you perhaps should have got a better education .roll???? So anybody who works at a job serving the public deserves to be exploited?i care about a fair and equal society. You????exploitation of employees is as bad as it has ever been,you would expect a thriving economy not a world recession. trolley
  • Score: 4

9:32pm Thu 3 Apr 14

nickynoodah says...

I have checked out a sat nav with ‘points of interest’ features for the benefit of nobath george
entered two postcodes and three addresses so nobath can avoid the soap shops
if he takes a wrong turn this sat nav will direct him straight back to his bedsit.
I have checked out a sat nav with ‘points of interest’ features for the benefit of nobath george entered two postcodes and three addresses so nobath can avoid the soap shops if he takes a wrong turn this sat nav will direct him straight back to his bedsit. nickynoodah
  • Score: -2

10:54pm Thu 3 Apr 14

breamoreboy says...

BournemouthMum wrote:
Employers who don't pay their staff a living wage deserve to go out of business. Without their staff they couldn't run the business could they? Good companies who value their staff and pay them decently are hard to find in this day and age. And even then it's difficult to get into such companies as their staff turnover is low. Being self employed is difficult these days too, with the competition constantly undercutting and offering shoddy services. The economy in the UK is beyond repair :(
I suspect that the good local businesses would like to pay more, but in doing so they clobber their employees and themselves with additional taxation and/or national insurance payments. They then read about the multinationals who are making profits running into the billions put don't pay UK tax because of the numerous loopholes that are available. You know it makes sense :(
[quote][p][bold]BournemouthMum[/bold] wrote: Employers who don't pay their staff a living wage deserve to go out of business. Without their staff they couldn't run the business could they? Good companies who value their staff and pay them decently are hard to find in this day and age. And even then it's difficult to get into such companies as their staff turnover is low. Being self employed is difficult these days too, with the competition constantly undercutting and offering shoddy services. The economy in the UK is beyond repair :([/p][/quote]I suspect that the good local businesses would like to pay more, but in doing so they clobber their employees and themselves with additional taxation and/or national insurance payments. They then read about the multinationals who are making profits running into the billions put don't pay UK tax because of the numerous loopholes that are available. You know it makes sense :( breamoreboy
  • Score: 1

11:13pm Thu 3 Apr 14

breamoreboy says...

live-and-let-live wrote:
labour introduced the minimum wage. when they got booted out, they decided it wasn't enough to live on and blamed the present government. (rolls eyes in despair)
I really am getting fed up with the Labour did this, Conservative did that, UKIP will do this line. When will people start to realise that the only thing politicians of all parties and at all levels care about is their salary and their expenses claim forms?
[quote][p][bold]live-and-let-live[/bold] wrote: labour introduced the minimum wage. when they got booted out, they decided it wasn't enough to live on and blamed the present government. (rolls eyes in despair)[/p][/quote]I really am getting fed up with the Labour did this, Conservative did that, UKIP will do this line. When will people start to realise that the only thing politicians of all parties and at all levels care about is their salary and their expenses claim forms? breamoreboy
  • Score: 4

9:28am Fri 4 Apr 14

nickynoodah says...

There's more work in one illegal polish worker than there is in half a dozen Xchurch chavs you know
I feel a shame for the fighting dogs they got.
There's more work in one illegal polish worker than there is in half a dozen Xchurch chavs you know I feel a shame for the fighting dogs they got. nickynoodah
  • Score: 1

12:03am Sat 5 Apr 14

Wageslave says...

Lucky Rich wrote:
Businesses that pay their counter staff poorly are not doing themselves any favors, how many shops do you go in to these days & the staff are moaning or bickering about hours or money or similar right in front of customers,,,,,,puts you off going back there....
If you can find a staff member at all when you want one
[quote][p][bold]Lucky Rich[/bold] wrote: Businesses that pay their counter staff poorly are not doing themselves any favors, how many shops do you go in to these days & the staff are moaning or bickering about hours or money or similar right in front of customers,,,,,,puts you off going back there....[/p][/quote]If you can find a staff member at all when you want one Wageslave
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree