…and JFK was shot by a man on a grassy knoll.

Conspiracy theorists will always believe what they want to fit their own agenda.

If you honestly believe that, in this current economic climate, your company plan on reducing it’s workforce by 1200 (at some considerable cost) because they feel that they can hide behind the clock or recession and “they just want an excuse to get rid of a few bed eggs and trouble causers” then you are seriously deluded.

Just sit back for a second and think, really think, would my company pay off over a sixth of its employees just to make a point or to of the union?

Your company is making 1200 redundancies because they need to cut their overheads to survive – it aint rocket science.

Seriously, are the bin men actually going to be on £12K a year ?

How much are they getting at the moment, on average ?

Can someone confirm / deny the story I heard the other week that they were actully getting something like £20 - 25K per annum and the current change is merely to bring them in to line with what refuse workers for other local authorities get paid. On top of that there were several perks like full pay for 'job & knock' etc, that have already been mentioned.

I've not specific axe to grind as I don't live in the Leeds Local Authority area and think yourself lucky people of Leeds that you don't get the bi-monthly collection that I have to deal with.

Luxury – we used to dream of bi-monthly collections. There wo 38 of us in shoe box at side ov t’ road…

Even though no business will admit to it, the "recession" has been good news for some of the "Blue Chips", I am currently running one such "Fit For the Future strategy" aimed at trimming the fat, its a very easy line to throw and many are using it.

I expect the said company to save approximately 90-100m in salaries, bonuses and the susequent streamlining of process which will include a recommendation to outsource Sales Activity which is a real lever in the current climate.

Having said that you seem to know what you re talking about so hey
what do I know.

Depends who you are talking about, the workforce consists of several grades, from street cleaners to bin collectors to drivers, I've heard £20-25K mentioned for drivers at Biffa (see Sin Bin thread) but I doubt that your city centre chewing-gum picker-up is going to be on that.

Anyway, my bins out tonight, we've only missed two collections out of four and could probably manage quite well with a fortnightly collection - last week they even emptied the green bins which was a bonus.

They emptied the green bins into the same truck as the normal waste though

Regardless of the justice or otherwise of their case, I suspect the bin men will have zero sympathy from those who have taken pay cuts, whose jobs are at risk, or who have already lost their jobs. ATEOTD if they feel so badly treated that they feel they have to resign, I'm sure there are loads of people - who face losing THEIR houses and heaven knows what else - who currently would jump at the chance of their jobs even at the new rates.

One suspects the new reality has not yet dawned on some people.

I think you have, inadvertently, reinforced my point.

Companies need to ‘trim the fat’ to make themselves competitive against ever expanding competition.

They don’t make cut-backs to simply to annoy the unions now do they or am I missing something here. Maybe the Blue Chips you work with spend time, money and resources trying to -off it’s staff and there is no fiscal reasoning behind their decision making process at all?

Do you know the company I work for?? Have you seen any of its financial figures??

Our parent company has just paid off several hundred million pounds worth of debt and also raised hundred of millions by selling some shares it had in another company.

My company has paid £300million in cash back to the parent company and we have an order book somwhere in the region of several hundred million and prior to any announcement on redundancies had a forecast profit in excess of £100million.

Does that sound like a company in trouble?

Now perhaps you can stop putting words in my mouth and stop your petty insults.

Ok admittedly I took a leap of assumption (and honestly wasn't trying to insult you) but can you answer me this then?

Why would a financially stable company axe over a sixth of its workforce if it wasn't for fiscal reasons?

Never vote in a tory goverment again.

For what it's worth, our financial analysts see the reduction of salary by percentile as a reasonable way to save enough money to pay redundancies without damaging CAPEX or OPEX figures.

They also believe that the current incremental growth is hiding a real rpoblem insofar as many companies are still trading with massive overstaffing and duplication of roles but have no capital to make redundancies. As soon as the upturn begins to kick in these companies shall use capital so gained to shed the excess weight.

Expect a lot more redundancies before serious economic growth becomes even a pipe dream let alone reality.

I gather then that you believe that shoring up a failing loss making industry using the public purse was the right way to go then?

Any company that loses money eventually fails, why were the mines any different?

i don't think they were but thatcher wanted revenge on the miners for the threat of strike action in 1981, and after she took us into conflict in 1982 to win a general election in 1983 she had her chance to crush them, if the deputy's hadn't have gone back to work and got paid weather they did or not she'd have lost that battle aswell. i lived through the miner's strike 84-85 my dad was a miner, there are things the government of the day did to bribe the lad's back to work that never came to fruition i'm just glad my dad had enough pride not to be bribed and stay put. but it's a long time ago. but i'd never vote tory