Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

No wonder Poyet turned down Reading...







ferring seagull

Well-known member
Dec 30, 2010
4,607
Looks like Reading FC are addressing Financial Fair Play (FFP) but, whilst cost cutting is one thing, is this 'fair' ?
 


BigGully

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2006
7,139
Rubbish. This is exploitation pure and simple. Either the work Reading are asking this intern to do full-time has a value or it doesn't. If an employer wants someone to do some work for them, they should pay them, simples.

I dont think I commented directly about the Reading FC position, I suspect Readings HR department might be well aware of what they are offering, so we will see.

It was the wider point that at times rather than just demand the terms and conditions, especially whilst commenting on other peoples choices, you might consider unpaid work as a credible effort, especially if it is a role that might otherwise not exist.

We are not talking exploitation here in the true sense, these arent vulnerable children sweeping chimneys or trafficked immigrants picking cockles.

It might be viewed by some as an opportunity to get involved and showcase their skills, who knows.

Any applicants will be relatively, in 'exploitation terms' at least, quite sophisticated and intelligent, pretty soon I am sure they themselves will quickly evaluate the credibility of the role and its future prospects.

As long as they are working within the current employment law, maybe we should leave it to the applicants to decide whats right for their career development and not you.
 


dantheman

Member
Jul 16, 2011
38
Made it onto BBC Sportsday


1812:
FOOTBALL

Reading have been criticised for seeking to appoint a full-time postgraduate performance analyst who will not be paid or receive expenses.

The successful candidate will have to work unsociable hours and attend games. Gus Baker from Intern Aware, which campaigns for paid internships, said the position was "unfair" and "out of reach" and added: "This damages the image of the club."

In a statement, the Royals said the role represented a great opportunity.
 






Originunknown

BINFEST'ING
Aug 30, 2011
3,155
SUSSEX
Disgusting. They're looking for a graduate candidate who has obviously invested in their future yet they won't even pay travel expenses... and they pay their players how much!?
 








SeagullSongs

And it's all gone quiet..
Oct 10, 2011
6,937
Southampton


clapham_gull

Legacy Fan
Aug 20, 2003
25,878
Always have a chuckle at the idiots who defend internship. As far as I'm concerned (and many lawyers agree) it's illegal.

It's simply a case of the law not being applied.

I'm not talking about work experience, I'm talking about paying people nothing to work.

Shocking. Reading hold your heads in shame. You are a disgrace.

Luckily they appear to have been reported to the HMRC too.
 
Last edited:


clapham_gull

Legacy Fan
Aug 20, 2003
25,878
If the Albion did the same, I would be equally appalled.

Quite simply they would lose my support.

It's something I feel very strongly about because it's common in my industry. Although the bigger companies like mine have stopped it they still use suppliers who accept interns.

It's wrong, wrong,wrong.

The only exception I make is work experience as part of a course. I did that, but it has to be said the company threw me a few quid when they could and I was receiving a grant.

I used to work opposite MTV and we did a lot of work for them. I was told at the time they used unpaid internships. Even if they did I see know they have a paid internship programme. The wage is low but at least you are paid and it lasts a fixed period.

I'm quite comfortable with that. The comment about small businesses above is rubbish. If they need work to be done but can't afford to pay it they shouldn't be in business.
 
Last edited:




The Large One

Who's Next?
Jul 7, 2003
52,343
97.2FM
I dont think I commented directly about the Reading FC position, I suspect Readings HR department might be well aware of what they are offering, so we will see.

It was the wider point that at times rather than just demand the terms and conditions, especially whilst commenting on other peoples choices, you might consider unpaid work as a credible effort, especially if it is a role that might otherwise not exist.

We are not talking exploitation here in the true sense, these arent vulnerable children sweeping chimneys or trafficked immigrants picking cockles.

It might be viewed by some as an opportunity to get involved and showcase their skills, who knows.

Any applicants will be relatively, in 'exploitation terms' at least, quite sophisticated and intelligent, pretty soon I am sure they themselves will quickly evaluate the credibility of the role and its future prospects.

Appalling sentiments.

This is a job we're talking about. A JOB.

Every job can be viewed as 'employment experience', even if you've been in it for 20 years. Would you do your job for nothing? Or, in this instance, at a financial cost to yourself? Because that's exactly what we're talking about here.


As long as they are working within the current employment law, maybe we should leave it to the applicants to decide whats right for their career development and not you.

From the myraid posts on this subject, it's highly possible they're not.
 




clapham_gull

Legacy Fan
Aug 20, 2003
25,878
Appalling sentiments.

This is a job we're talking about. A JOB.

Every job can be viewed as 'employment experience', even if you've been in it for 20 years. Would you do your job for nothing? Or, in this instance, at a financial cost to yourself? Because that's exactly what we're talking about here.




From the myraid posts on this subject, it's highly possible they're not.

Totally agree.

Appalling attitude defending the indefensible. Those who defend if are obviously quite happy for the state to make up the short full in benefit payments or quite happy for those from a particularly class to take the benefit.

How indefinsible, how very anti Thatcherite.
 
Last edited:




clapham_gull

Legacy Fan
Aug 20, 2003
25,878
I dont think I commented directly about the Reading FC position, I suspect Readings HR department might be well aware of what they are offering, so we will see.

It was the wider point that at times rather than just demand the terms and conditions, especially whilst commenting on other peoples choices, you might consider unpaid work as a credible effort, especially if it is a role that might otherwise not exist.

We are not talking exploitation here in the true sense, these arent vulnerable children sweeping chimneys or trafficked immigrants picking cockles.

It might be viewed by some as an opportunity to get involved and showcase their skills, who knows.

Any applicants will be relatively, in 'exploitation terms' at least, quite sophisticated and intelligent, pretty soon I am sure they themselves will quickly evaluate the credibility of the role and its future prospects.

As long as they are working within the current employment law, maybe we should leave it to the applicants to decide whats right for their career development and not you.

Maybe you should brush up on your law. If they are subject to a contract and working fixed hours its illegal. I can only only imagine you'd be more comfortable working under a communist regime or even North Korea.

Chilling.
 


Doc Lynam

I hate the Daily Mail
Jun 19, 2011
7,354
This response from BBC site pretty much covered it for me.

82. matti76
19 MINUTES AGO
Given that some staff at Reading FC are likely to earn £1 million per year (for complete failure - see league table) this is doubly insulting.

But their chairman this week demanded tribute to his idol, who applauded this kind of immorality as 'competitive', so what do you expect?

Reading FC - villains of the week.
 


Questions

Habitual User
Oct 18, 2006
25,517
Worthing
I could do that job from home.......... Reading / saw the time play -------- analysis : crap.
 


BigGully

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2006
7,139
Maybe you should brush up on your law. If they are subject to a contract and working fixed hours its illegal. I can only only imagine you'd be more comfortable working under a communist regime or even North Korea.

Chilling.

Which law have I quoted, I mentioned as long as it works within the law, then maybe we should leave it to any prospective applicants to decide if it might be a position they wish to consider.

If it is illegal then it shouldn't of been offered and appropriate sanctions should prevail.
 




BigGully

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2006
7,139
Appalling sentiments.

This is a job we're talking about. A JOB.

Every job can be viewed as 'employment experience', even if you've been in it for 20 years. Would you do your job for nothing? Or, in this instance, at a financial cost to yourself? Because that's exactly what we're talking about here.

From the myraid posts on this subject, it's highly possible they're not.

I am not necessarily advocating that it is something reasonably offered by Reading FC, I would even go as far as I wouldnt be surprised if it is a mistake, it seems an unlikely job prospective.

But some are far too busy bleating 'exploitation' disgusting' and 'appalling' about a position not yet even filled.

The dynamics of seeking employment takes on many guises, sometimes those that are willing to offer their efforts beyond their initial terms and conditions can sometimes prosper.

I counter this with an understanding that it needs to monitored closely and the law implied when its broken.

I cannot help feeling that for some posters their view is driven by their own political dogma and their dislike for business especially BIG business, its kinda predictable.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here