City Link goes bust

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Given the article is about how City Link plan on handling Christmas it seems reasonable to think that the staff surrounding these temporary delivery drivers will, likewise, be temporary else the mismanagement runs even deeper than any of us could've imagined. Hiring 1168 agency / subcontractors to handle the Christmas rush and supporting them with a few hundred new permanent warehouse based staff would be very odd.

It may seem "reasonable to think" yes, but it is not exclusively factual.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

What we do know as having happened since then is that according to their news feeds / press articles in January of this year that during the Christmas period of 2013 they as a company performed exceptionally well and were showing signs of turning the company around through better IT systems and and the much lauded Better Capital investment.

No we don't, that's another PR press release and not independant assessment or a record of accounts.

That article means sod all

Indeed one would have to wonder who knew what given the fact that they were up until the appintment of administrators still advertizing "permanent" job posts with a closing date of December 31st 2014 for applications.

What, a job for "self employed" delivery driver....................?

That's not a " permanent" job.

That's basically a contracted out position to a self employed courier.

There's nothing that shows that the company was is any way turning a corner or being anything other than a loss making money pit.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

I appreciate your opinion on the matter but I note that you've introduced a very big "if" into the equation.

The RMT were forced to withdraw the threat of industrial action in Sepember 2013 due to a court ruling. I'm not aware of their having threatened any further industrial action or work to rule since then. I am happy to be corrected if they have.

The RMT actually positively encouraged its membership to sign the new City Link contracts.

What we do know as having happened since then is that according to their news feeds / press articles in January of this year that during the Christmas period of 2013 they as a company performed exceptionally well and were showing signs of turning the company around through better IT systems and and the much lauded Better Capital investment.

Indeed one would have to wonder who knew what given the fact that they were up until the appintment of administrators still advertizing "permanent" job posts with a closing date of December 31st 2014 for applications.

Several financial sites have for the past year cited potential risks and frailties facing the Better Capital investment programme for not only City Link but other acquisitions (hence Better Capital II being launched).

That aside, there is a human tragedy in all of this and petty point scoring serves little purpose other than to expose certain bigotries.

Let's think of those who've lost their livelihoods - particularly at a time of year where there is historically enough financial hardship to be faced.

I can't see where "petty point scoring" has taken place. I've detected and argued against a stance from your statement: “Not only was it the most brutal and callous way to treat nearly 3,000 staff but RMT believes there may have been more cynical motives behind it, which we want the government to investigate."

It's pretty pointless commiserating with "human tragedy" without considering practical ways of avoiding it. To make a profit, enough customers must pay enough money for a well delivered service. An analysis of this aspect would be more beneficial than the RMT's line of "cynical motives".

My analysis is entirely clinical and nothing to do with point scoring. BTW I have worked in the logistics industry and know both Yodel & DHL reasonably well.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I can't see where "petty point scoring" has taken place. I've detected and argued against a stance from your statement: “Not only was it the most brutal and callous way to treat nearly 3,000 staff but RMT believes there may have been more cynical motives behind it, which we want the government to investigate."

It's pretty pointless commiserating with "human tragedy" without considering practical ways of avoiding it. To make a profit, enough customers must pay enough money for a well delivered service. An analysis of this aspect would be more beneficial than the RMT's line of "cynical motives".

My analysis is entirely clinical and nothing to do with point scoring. BTW I have worked in the logistics industry and know both Yodel & DHL reasonably well.

I take your points entirely, sir. And, as I said, I appreciate your opinion.

Best we wait and see what comes out in the wash.

Happy new year to you & yours.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

I take your points entirely, sir. And, as I said, I appreciate your opinion.

Best we wait and see what comes out in the wash.

Happy new year to you & yours.

And the same to you and yours.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

It may seem "reasonable to think" yes, but it is not exclusively factual.

No, but the balance of probabilities would strongly suggest it's the case as anything else would be suicidal. We're splitting hairs a tad here. They don't appear to have been advertising for permanent staff, your advertisement is for self-employed hence employed purely at the company's convenience with about as much job security as the average employee in the USA. The delivery drivers discussed in the PR blurb, at least, were precisely 0% permanent, all agency / subcontracted.

Regardless I don't agree with many that unions were entirely to blame, however it doesn't change that CityLink were loss-making and all indications are that their costs were too high given their market place. Whether unions could have done more to accommodate the demands of management or not is by-the-by.

I'm purely interested in the timing of the announcement. It seems abundantly clear that they were a casualty of an industry engaged in a race to the bottom where self-employed drivers using their own vehicles are increasingly common.

Blame their customers, the retailers, and in turn us for demanding free delivery if we pay over £x and being happy just to whinge when a delivery from a disinterested, self-employed driver goes pearshaped rather than paying more for higher quality service.

---------- Post added at 17:15 ---------- Previous post was at 17:14 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

I take your points entirely, sir. And, as I said, I appreciate your opinion.

Best we wait and see what comes out in the wash.

Happy new year to you & yours.

This indeed - it could quite easily be a part of an accounting scheme to acquire losses for tax purposes.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

No, but the balance of probabilities would strongly suggest it's the case as anything else would be suicidal. We're splitting hairs a tad here. They don't appear to have been advertising for permanent staff, your advertisement is for self-employed hence employed purely at the company's convenience with about as much job security as the average employee in the USA. The delivery drivers discussed in the PR blurb, at least, were precisely 0% permanent, all agency / subcontracted.

Regardless I don't agree with many that unions were entirely to blame, however it doesn't change that CityLink were loss-making and all indications are that their costs were too high given their market place. Whether unions could have done more to accommodate the demands of management or not is by-the-by.

I'm purely interested in the timing of the announcement. It seems abundantly clear that they were a casualty of an industry engaged in a race to the bottom where self-employed drivers using their own vehicles are increasingly common.

Blame their customers, the retailers, and in turn us for demanding free delivery if we pay over £x and being happy just to whinge when a delivery from a disinterested, self-employed driver goes pearshaped rather than paying more for higher quality service.

---------- Post added at 17:15 ---------- Previous post was at 17:14 ----------



This indeed - it could quite easily be a part of an accounting scheme to acquire losses for tax purposes.

I agree, we are splitting hairs - but they are important hairs.

The supposed permanancy of the advertized posts was particularly why I put the word "permanent" in quotation marks in my reference / link to same.

I couldn't agree more with everything else you've said. "Race to the bottom" pretty much sums it up.

Happy humanist new year to you & yours.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Happy humanist new year to you & yours.

Haha! Thank you, but careful talking like that you'll upset the PM with his sudden new-found devoutness.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

I agree, we are splitting hairs - but they are important hairs.

The supposed permanancy of the advertized posts was particularly why I put the word "permanent" in quotation marks in my reference / link to same.

You can't be permanent if you are a " self employed" driver, as you don't work for city link you work for yourself.

That's obviously an error in the advertisement

[Mr Angry]

A bit of an update from the Guardian.

"Job losses from the collapse of City Link could rise to more than 4,000 after it emerged that the parcel delivery firm partly relied on a 1,000-strong army of self-employed van drivers and agency workers."

"RMT’s general secretary, Mick Cash, called for an official investigation into both the timing of the appointment of administrators and allegations that City Link may have been restructured prior to its collapse, moving “valuable property assets out into a separate company”. The union says the holiday period could hinder a rescue plan."

"Moulton dismissed the RMT’s claims, telling the Guardian: “If this is an asset strip, it is an extremely poor one because we will have lost a lot of money.” Better Capital has already written down its £40m investment in City Link to £20m."

"Last month there was little sign of City Link’s mounting financial problems, with its website saying it had “got all its plans in place to deliver an even more successful peak to last year’s winning performance”. Liam Tucker, its operations director, who joined in September, said: “City Link had one of its most successful peak periods in 2013 and we are looking forward to an even busier and more successful one in 2014.”

"Clearly something does not add up when we consider the phenomenal growth of ecommerce and the demand on UK supply chain, yet an established distributor has gone out of business,” said Patrick Gallagher, chief executive of rival carrier CitySprint."

This could get very interesting.

[Arthurgray50@blu]

Many years ago, l applied for a job,when they had vacancies. There basic wage was 15.000 a year. So l feel sorry for the drivers.

The union are there for a reason to PROTECT the worker. To me some employers treat there staff like carp. Look what's happened here. The must have known weeks ago, this was going to happen. What a day to decide - disgraceful

Originally Posted by Arthurgray50@blu

Many years ago, l applied for a job,when they had vacancies. There basic wage was 15.000 a year. So l feel sorry for the drivers.

The union are there for a reason to PROTECT the worker. To me some employers treat there staff like carp. Look what's happened here. The must have known weeks ago, this was going to happen. What a day to decide - disgraceful

Big high five then Arthur, they did a great job for City Links staff.

Originally Posted by Top banana

Big high five then Arthur, they did a great job for City Links staff.

Bit of a cheap dig..how can any union do anything if the management call in administration during a holiday season?

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Bit of a cheap dig..how can any union do anything if the management call in administration during a holiday season?

Not a cheap dig at all Maggie. I lost my job 20 years ago when the business I was working in went bust. The union at the time told us to join them and we would be ok. So I did, paid my subs, guess what, the business still went bust.

My view changed forever after that, people may put their rose tinted spectacles on but unions are a business, they take your money and promise the world, when actually if a business pulls the plug, the unions can do nothing about it apart from getting their PR department to push out a load of garbage to minimise the impact,on themselves , so people keep on funding,them.

Folks,should google,where union leaders live, says it all really

[Skie]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

From the link provided by Top banana;

"Scott Maynard, the City Link human resources director, said his company had been consulting with front line staff since June to make pay and conditions “fairer and more equitable”

“At the moment we are in the position where colleagues doing the same job in the same depot are getting paid different wages. This is a legacy that the current management team has inherited and is one we believe is fundamentally unfair,” said Maynard.

Ah, that age old tactic. See, what you do is change the terms and conditions for new staff to be worse than the existing staff and after a certain period you then have a lot of staff on the new terms (depends on how high your turnover is) and you then claim that it's 'unfair' that staff are on different terms/pay than others. Conveniently ignoring the fact you made it unfair yourself, you move the blame onto the people with the better T&C's as it's obviously their fault and they are the fat cats with the better pay and pensions.

This then becomes your platform to whittle away at everyone's pay and conditions, all in the name of fairness. If you can make the people with the worse conditions slightly better off while still also reducing the overall cost then the workforce will do the job for you.

City Link had another, rhyming name, but it would breach the forum rules.