It appears to me with many SMEs it's a very fine balance between crying wolf and going under. Poor cash flow can often be a hand to mouth situation at the best of times. Payroll can wipe a bank account out in an instant, then you have loads of other considerations; VAT, PAYEE etc. If your cash flow projection is cut by, say 40% over night (the figure Tescos made all their construction related suppliers make recently) do you hold tight and hope, or think about the greater good? Surely reacting quickly may possibly save more jobs in the long run, rather than lumbering along hoping for the best?

My company has reduced it rates to remain competitive in the current market where we complete in a global market economy. As a result they've passed these savings directly onto us i.e. salaries etc. It's to be expected since we are the company's biggest cost (and revenue earner - skills based industry).

Personally I'm not as cynical to assume a company would make cuts for convenience/feathering their nest even if they appear as though they're not in strife.

With regards to the bin men; I suspect it might be a culture issue that is common-place with non-commercial enterprises, like the civil service, where it clearly is considered acceptable to take 30 days sick per year, and get as much out of the system as you can. These benefits are not available to me, and even if they were I doubt I'd use them to these extents. I have some pride and think it would reflect badly on me.

Is it possible that if there wasn't a general p*ss take culture in the first place their whole pay structure may have been left alone?

on now

Are you sure, really really sure that your company didn't ask to defer the payment or to make it in milestones X months apart?

The reality is that it's unlikely that any credible company would shed 1200 of 6000 staff and repay a loan of £300M without having very little alternative. The £100M operating profit figure is a red herring also unless you can tell us the turnover.

Is it possible that the parent company may have needed the £300M to repay a loan that they had taken or could one of the supporting financial institutions called in a debt to reduce thier financial burden? Stories like this are never isolated and are frequently long and complex, but don't let that stop you.

You speak like you expect the shopfloor worker to understand the complex financial structures of the company and parent company that they work for - there is a reason why not many workers co-operatives make it beyond the small business level you know

Quote: McLaren_Field "You speak like you expect the shopfloor worker to understand the complex financial structures of the company and parent company that they work for - there is a reason why not many workers co-operatives make it beyond the small business level you know Not sure if you were being sarcastic or not but what about Suma started in Leeds and £24 Million turnover and the rest just for the record. www.cooperatives-uk.coop/live/im ... view09.pdf

Quote: McLaren_Field "You speak like you expect the shopfloor worker to understand the complex financial structures of the company and parent company that they work for - there is a reason why not many workers co-operatives make it beyond the small business level you know Not sure if you were being sarcastic or not but what about Suma started in Leeds and £24 Million turnover and the rest just for the record. www.cooperatives-uk.coop/live/im ... view09.pdf

You could also include the John Lewis Partnership for good measure.

None of which distracts from the point, your average Co-op or JLP shopfloor worker has the first clue of what goes on in the boardroom and the only entry in the annual accounts that they are interested in is the word "dividend"