Ghozer Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Sounds fun, i'd have done it, even knowing the conditions beforehand... I question how much is true (such as them originally being told it was paid) or not.. but like the article says, some of the time it's part of the job, some times you get a really nice gig with a warm hotel, others you end up sleeping in the cold, I know lots of people who do stewarding and security and they all say it's swings and roundabouts, it can be fun, but can be really hard at times too.. and, it was a requirement towards thier qualification, (a voluntary one what's more) - atleast they got the equipment out of it too (didn't get paid?, £100+ worth of equipment isn't payment?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 That the BBC are not reporting they would have lost their benefits doesn't mean to say that if they 'walked away' from the situation (admittedly very difficult since many of the people in London were from Bristol or Portsmouth) they would have lost their benefits. There seems to be confusion about this workfare scheme and benefits. I'm not against training unemployed people for work, but very clearly what has happened is that the unemployed here were expected to do the job of the stewards at little or no pay. That cannot be right surely to God? reading that as I think you meant to write it ... but what proof is there that they would? The bbc also didn't report some of them were murdered by the bus driver, that doesn't suggest they were:huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirmisher Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 reading that as I think you meant to write it ... but what proof is there that they would? The bbc also didn't report some of them were murdered by the bus driver, that doesn't suggest they were:huh: :hihi::hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirmisher Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 No it doesn't sound half as dramatic if you miss out the bits about *People being dropped off at 2am from all over UK and told told sleep under a bridge in the freezing cold and rain with no toileting facilities. And had to change into their uniform in these conditions. *Fearing that if they spoke out they could lose their poxy benefits. *30 of the staff were unpaid, 50 'apprentices' were paid £2:80 per hour. *At least 2 of the 'volunteers' were initially told that they would be paid, then when they got to the bridge they were told that they would in fact be unpaid. And if they did not accept they wouldn't be considered for stewarding the Olympics. *The firm Close Protection UK laid off fully trained security personnel after they had secured unpaid / lower paid people. *Taxpayers have forked out at least £1.5 million for the stewarding - it certainly didn't go into the pockets of the serfs used by CPUK. *The Charity Tommorow's people which linked the serfs to CPUK is headed by a Tory baroness. Little wonder that Cameron dismissed any criticism. *This whole charade was done so the people of this country can wave flags and cheer an incredibly rich family. Perhaps some of the trolls on here think nothing of sleeping under a bridge (the normal residence of a troll) and expected to defecate in bushes like some animal, but I wouldn't like to be treated in this ****ty way. Especially not by a cheapskate exploiter like CPUK. P.S. If anybody would like to leave feedback to CPUK, please do: http://www.close-protectionuk.co.uk/ Read my post *223 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Read my post *223 Yes of course, and if they'd have stayed in bed no doubt this forum would be full to the brim of the santimonious condemning lazy doleys dossing around all day. Have you no anger towards the people that exploited them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Why didn't they just go home then like anyone with an ounce of common sense would? Shows how much you know about the situation.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirmisher Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 Shows how much you know about the situation.... No, it shows that I don't believe most of it one bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutch Posted June 7, 2012 Share Posted June 7, 2012 (personal message) How are you doing cyclone? If you keep rubbing two pieces of wood you get fire. Britain is expert at rubbing the rich and poor as close to the point of ignition as possible just not hard enough to light but as close as possible to it. This situation with people forced to suffer even more to be unemployed is increasing more and more tensions. In england it wil always be right on the edge of how much you can get away with until people explode in riots. If there are two people and there is only work for one then each should work 6 months and be 6 months unemployed equaly. no excuse for selfish employed people unprepared to share their job equaly among everybody. They should pay double taxes when not prepared to share all work equaly. Those people in londen are a typical example of forced slavelabour. They cannot get work because other selfish people work too many hours. Then they are accused of being lazy and treated like animals while forced to be there under threat of reduced minimal assistance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted June 8, 2012 Share Posted June 8, 2012 There's every excuse to be honest, if there's just one job then the company should hire whichever person appears to be the better at it. 6 months later unless the job is extremely basic the knowledge that the employee will have built up means that replacing them with someone else would be a stupid thing to do. Job share is applicable for some jobs, but not all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.