Author Topic: G M B Trade Union  (Read 44162 times)  Share 

Offline centurion

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 926
  • Member Karma = +7/-1
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • SamSmiths Status: I'd rather not say!
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #30 on: Mar 5 - 2009 »
He said the brewery had held its beer prices since 1990, mainly by increasing its productivity as the price of beer was crucial to the success of its pubs.

10p on a pint would solve all these problems!!!!!! :-*

Offline 357maddog

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 148
  • Member Karma = +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad dog hot sauce..mmm
    • View Profile
  • SamSmiths Status: Ex Sams Manager
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #31 on: Mar 5 - 2009 »
Here here, 10p on all draughts would solve all of the problems, its all bull--it as usual, trying for sympathy no doubt, hope they show no mercy and teach the tyrant a lesson.
Beware the toes you tread on today are not attached to the leg that supports the arse that you are gonna have to kiss tomorrow.

Offline Max

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 605
  • Member Karma = +26/-0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • SamSmiths
  • SamSmiths Status: I'd rather not say!
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #32 on: Mar 5 - 2009 »
?We were under great pressure from the bank.

?We were having great difficulty renewing our overdraft and this commercial pressure was something we could not avoid,? he said.

He told the hearing all managers had been told to cut staff hours down to 45 per week which he considered reasonable enough.

?We thought 45 hours was perfectly reasonable but they (the managers) refused to compromise,? he added.

He told the tribunal that he had studied the cost structure of other pub chains and considered his own pubs could run efficiently on the same staff working hours system.

Former managers at the company?s Holly Bush pub at Edenthorpe, Doncaster, Frank and Pam Marshall, are leading the action against the company in a test case hearing.

Smith said that at the start of 2008 profits were down 33% at the pub and staff wages accounted for 14% of the business net ?take?.

?This was unsustainable and put the future of the Holly Bush in jeapourdy,? he said.

He said the brewery had held its beer prices since 1990, mainly by increasing its productivity as the price of beer was crucial to the success of its pubs.

He considered cheap prices gave his pubs a good opportunity to maintain their trade.

?We want this business to be around in 200 years time so we want to hold up our barrelage and maintain employment within the brewery,? he explained.

Smith said he wanted his managers to increase their own productivity in difficult trading times but said many shunned new practices and adopted an ?I?m All Right Jack? attitude.


What an absolute load of twaddle 'Smith' talks!

First of all, how can he say the restricted hours are reasonable - when in reality, at some venues it's physically impossible - and how would he know anyway - not ever having run a pub!

He say's he's been looking at the rest of the industry - well not very clearly. It doesn't take much intelligence to realize that each venue is somewhat unique, with regards, to size, layout, location, popularity, management experience, etc.., and thus each venues requirements (staff hours included) will vary from one place to the next.

It would appear that Humphs thinks it's all about the cheap prices - well if that's the only thing you can compete with, then it shows a lack of confidence in the quality of products, and service. Sams could still be competeatively priced, even after a price increase, which would certainly help pay the bills.

Speaking of money - how can humphs moan about their trade turnover - when he has single-handedly been destroying the business. Customers now turn away from Sam Smith's pubs because..

1. Some venues have lost out to the music ban. Not just pub background music, but live entertainment, weddings and birthday party events, etc.

2. Despite Humphs living in 'cloud-cuckoo land', people will only wait so long to be served, before going elsewhere.

3. Some venues thrived on their unique menu's - and have lost nearly all of their food turnover, since the new pie regime - and with it, a lot of wet trade.

4. People are getting fed up with their friendly (and experienced) hosts, being replaced by inexperience, miserable management.

5. After seeing the way in which managers and staff are being illegally/cruelly treated - regulars are now drinking elsewhere on principal alone.

Lets face it - if anyone wants booting out to save the company from financial collapse - then it's Humphrey Smith - and once the banks realize, they may withdraw their facilities, unless Humphrey is removed from pub/retail management. And when that happens, it will be a case of seizing/selling property and other assets, when they are not as valuable as they used to be.

Humphrey says; "the price of beer was crucial to the success of its pubs" - what a complete idiot. People know, that if somethings cheap, it's probably less quality. In this case, it may not be true of the beers, but it is becoming true of the way in which it's presented. I read elsewhere on this site that a change for less experienced managers at a pub in Beverley - is resulting in the loss of custom, simply due to the fact that the place is 'a Forrest of dirty glasses' on a weekend. No doubt Humphs will be losing turnover there, and at other similar venues, in similar circumstances.

"..The price of beer was crucial to the success of its pubs" bollocks!!

The way you are destroying your business Humphs, it wont be around in 20 years, let alone 200. And at this rate, it might not even make 2 years if the banks see you as an increasing, unsustainable risk - no matter what your gross asset value. And there will be only one - ONLY ONE - person to blame. Not the managers, customers or staff - just one 'I live in a dream world, and am so self conceited that I believe that everything I do is right, and everyone else is wrong' - Humphrey Smith.

As you would appear to be a religious man - look at it another way - as things go down the pan, it's the wrath of God punishing you for your inhumane cruelty to all.

And one final note; whilst there may have been a slim minority in the past whom have taken advantage of Sam's previous company leniency - it's a suicidal move to tar all with the same brush - unless of course you are suffering from a delusional paranoia condition.

Humphrey - get a grip man! Find out for yourself what's really going on. Move into one of your pubs, and co-manage it for a week or two - whilst sticking to your prescribed hours, and trying to keep the customers happy. You will find the experience more valuable than you could ever imagine - and you might just learn what is really needed to save your business.
« Last Edit: Mar 6 - 2009 by Admin »
Always in support of the Samuel Smiths Brewery - although very concerned about the current company strategy towards its staff and customers, as exercised by the Directors. We believe in promoting common sense, decency, compassion, fairness and compliance with company, employment and English law.

Offline yorkie

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 212
  • Member Karma = +1/-0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • SamSmiths Status: A CUSTOMER
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #33 on: Mar 5 - 2009 »
I hope the ex-managers solicitors do not just accept Humphrey's profit & wage percentages without a challenge. He should be asked to produce his accounts to back the figures up. Imagine his reaction to that!

Offline brokefree

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 30
  • Member Karma = +0/-0
    • View Profile
  • SamSmiths Status: Ex Sams Manager
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #34 on: Mar 5 - 2009 »
















What about all the empty propertys hes got cant be that desperate for cash or he could of sold them two next to my past pub were empty for years but were better repaired than my pub they wouldnt even rent them out   
















Offline BlackDog

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 421
  • Member Karma = +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • SamSmiths Status: A CUSTOMER
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #35 on: Mar 5 - 2009 »
The biggest 'banker' around needs an overdraft? Property portfolio is huge! Hope he gets what's coming.

Offline ademapearl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 52
  • Member Karma = +4/-1
    • View Profile
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #36 on: Mar 5 - 2009 »
Did I read the morning advertiser article right - that the brewery needs an OVERDRAFT to keep it going??? This is not an ordinary pubco that needs financing to keep its capital assets. I am sure that every pub and other building is actually owned outright by the brewery, and after years of successful trading, and aquiring assets of all kinds in Tadcaster and beyond, there is no shortage of cash in this business.  Whereas in a normal business, accounts are published to enable investors to see the position of a company, I doubt there are any such readily available figures such as the stock market would require for this brewery. I do hope that solicitors for the dismissed managers put the brewery to strict proof of their dire financial situation before the tribunal accepts the claim tha costs had to be cut so drastically.

Offline moggy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 73
  • Member Karma = +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #37 on: Mar 6 - 2009 »
how can he stand in a court of law and tell blatant lies, all managers WERE NOTASKED to cut their staff hours,  and how could a pub on a take of five grand a week, work on 45 staff hours, take the managers day off for instance, at the very least the bar would have to be covered by for 12 hours and that does not include cleaning or cellar work (obviously it isnt done on a managers day off) so is he trying to say that the other six days can be covered by 33 hrs, the mans a genius.

Financial crisis in the UK dont be silly
VOTE HERE FOR HUMPHREY SMITH TO BE THE NEXT CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER
the mans a bloody genius he really can get 200 pennies in a pound, 30 hrs in a working day and eight days a week

Offline Mr Zak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 62
  • Member Karma = +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #38 on: Mar 6 - 2009 »
I wonder if Humphrey actually believes his own lies?

Wasn't it Goebbels who said, "The bigger the lie, the more people are likely to believe it."?
A pint before the trouble starts.....

Offline Tink

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 39
  • Member Karma = +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #39 on: Mar 7 - 2009 »
When he sacked us .. he said samuel smiths wasn't included in the countries crisis... as we used this as one point to him for the down turn in trade.. he gone la la... oh by the way... we got our bond back... and yep still taking him to court.. heard from frank yesterday... good luck for the outcome mate

Offline moggy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 73
  • Member Karma = +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #40 on: Mar 8 - 2009 »
if the tribunal has been adjourned untill May, what were the reasons is it so that the SS can fabricate the evidence to go with the lies, and did the managers concerned actually get a chance to put there case to the tribunal, there are a lot of managers out there sitting on broken glass at the moment, who just dare not make a move, and are pinning their jobs, homes and futures on this tribunal and are looking for a little bit of hope, lets here it from the horses mouth, what actually happened, and why the adjournment.

Offline Mr Zak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 62
  • Member Karma = +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #41 on: Mar 9 - 2009 »
Because this is a test case, that could determine the outcome of those that follow, I believe the adjournment is to allow the Tribunal to gather witness statements from a range of the other sacked managers.

It looks like Humphrey's on the ropes.....
A pint before the trouble starts.....

Offline Mr Zak

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 62
  • Member Karma = +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #42 on: Mar 12 - 2009 »
P.S. I also understand that the greater part of the two days of the Tribunal hearing (4th-5th March) were taken up by Humphrey, Oliver and FOB spinning their ridiculous lies, and that the applicants, Frank and Pam, did not have the fullest opportunity to present their evidence.

So, classic delaying tactics from Humph and his cronies - but all they are doing is delaying the inevitable and increasing the size of the payout that they will have to make to this large group of ex managers once the precedent is set! And, if and when the Tribunal finds that Sams did not follow the prescribed legal procedures in terms of the statutory dispute resolution legislation, the Tribunal is at liberty to increase any award by up to 50% at their discretion.

It's only a matter of time, and the longer it goes on, the deeper Humphrey will have to dig into his pocket...
A pint before the trouble starts.....

Offline centurion

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 926
  • Member Karma = +7/-1
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • SamSmiths Status: I'd rather not say!
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #43 on: Apr 22 - 2009 »
Dear GMB,

Please see my other post!! :-*

Offline Mike D Williamson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 29
  • Member Karma = +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: G M B Trade Union
« Reply #44 on: Jul 10 - 2009 »
I do wish all those with cases the best of luck but I doubt that any compen will cover the hard work they put in nor the friends they lost because of the companies policies. Given the responses of local authorities Health & Safety departments on the issues that managers face they seam powerless or less inclined to help. Do you really believe that the company will change those policies when the tribunals are won? Given the way H talks to his employees in front of customers, he seams to enjoy belittling people. Bullies will always get away with it unless you stand up & be counted. Their long term plan is to drive out long term managers & bring poor souls in on worse contracts. Then drive them out and so starting the process again. Setting up separate companies is a good way of hiding assets.
Mike Williamson
G M B Union