Bulgarian workers/Keelings - read OP (threadbans listed)

STB.

maestroamado wrote: »

I am assuming that the living quarters on property owned by keelings.
That is the impression i got when the 2 week isolation was mentioned.
How could Keeling's organize in rented acc in swords.
So you think they are staying around Swords the local will love that...

Yes. Some of the units are out BY the fields, in barracks style portacabins (per Ogle's interview with former worker).

Keelings demanded that Fingal County Council change the acceptable ratio of beds from 10 to 25 in a submission to the County Development Plan or otherwise they'd have to go elsewhere. Stuff you would rather not know, especially so if there was a outbreak.

Living quarters are all part of the business plan...... Don't know where the workers get their food.

STB.

Graham wrote: »

I understand the R0 of Coronavirus is inversely proportional to the weekly rates for accommodation multiplied by the average hourly rate for fruit pickers divided by the number of union reps making videos.

Either that or none of it is particularly relevant to the initial outrage-a-thon.

The bare faced cheek of big businessmen profiteering off immigrants who describe them as skilled horticultural workers, workers who have paid for their own flights to be treated like dirt during a pandemic is directly proportional to those warriors who defend these disgusting practices.

maestroamado

STB. wrote: »

Yes. Some of the units are out BY the fields, in barracks style portacabins (per Ogle's interview with former worker).

Keelings demanded that Fingal County Council change the acceptable ratio of beds from 10 to 25 in a submission to the County Development Plan or otherwise they'd have to go elsewhere. Stuff you would rather not know, especially so if there was a outbreak.

Living quarters are all part of the business plan......

That's what i thought until daft.ie mentioned.
How many are there? the 180 on plane...

Rows Grower

STB. wrote: »

The bare faced cheek of big businessmen profiteering off immigrants who describe them as skilled horticultural workers, workers who have paid for their own flights to be treated like dirt during a pandemic is directly proportional to those warriors who defend these disgusting practices.

Disgusting is a fair description.

I thought we had better standards than that here but everyday is a school day.

We live and learn.

Scotty #

STB. wrote: »

They put in 30-45 hours a week getting 1200 per month.

30 minutes break if they worked over 6 hours. So effectively €200 for a weeks back breaking work.

Bull****!! If you watch the video you'll see his payslip. €467 take home! Where are you getting €200/week?

I'll refer you to my earlier post...

Scotty # wrote: »

This is a grossly misleading statement.

The Unite rep shows his payslip, which clearly shows his wage was €486.98 gross. He then had €19.48 PRSI deducted. No PAYE deduction as he's not liable for any. So his actual take home was €467.50.

This includes a min wage adjustment of almost €90 because he didn't pick nearly enough to bring him up to min wage per hour for the hours he worked. This is also undoubtedly the reason he was shown the gate after 8 weeks.

The Unite goes on to say "but you had to pay €95 accommodation, and some other expenses' and you're left with about €200. So you're basically working for €200?" WTF!?!?! NO! This is not how it works!

Someone should really be telling the Unite guy how employment works in this country. When people in this country, and every other country get paid, they THEN have to go and pay their living expenses! It's not the other way round.

An absolute disgracefully misleading attempt by Unite to put words in the guys mouth and totally misrepresent the situation. Shame on them!

If that's his avg wage he's on €2100/month gross. A far cry from the €1200 you claim.

Tarf2020

STB. wrote: »

Yes. Some of the units are out BY the fields, in barracks style portacabins (per Ogle's interview with former worker).

Keelings demanded that Fingal County Council change the acceptable ratio of beds from 10 to 25 in a submission to the County Development Plan or otherwise they'd have to go elsewhere. Stuff you would rather not know, especially so if there was a outbreak.

Living quarters are all part of the business plan...... Don't know where the workers get their food.

All the layouts and drawings are here... not sure why the media and posters have to ask Keelings to confirm what the living conditions are like when all of these new seasonal workers buildings (built mid 2019/ finished Q1 2020) layouts and drawings are drawn out and available on the planning site...
Max 184 seasonal workers allowed under approved planning ref F18A/0313 and historical planning suggests that that the overall number includes any children that may also be residing on site with same seasonal workers.
Max 23 bedspaces within each of the 8 new accommodation units(a total of 184 beds paces). - - - The units are built in an area called Brasil Nusery

F18A/0313 Keeling’s Softfruits Unlimited company at Brazil Lands Nursery,
Brackenstown Road, Swords, Co. Dublin
Register Ref: F18A/0313
Development: The development will consist of (i) The removal of two number existing single storey accommodation
buildings, (ii) the construction of 8 number new single storey accommodation buildings, (iii) the change of use and alterations to
an existing domestic building to new ancillary amenity building, (iv) the provision of a new public footpath along the southern
boundary of the site, (v) all associated site works, services and landscaping.
Location: Brazil Lands Nursery, Brackenstown Road, Swords, Co. Dublin.
Applicant: Keelings Softfruits Unlimited company
App. Type: Permission
Date Recd.: 06-Jun-2018

Rows Grower

Tarf2020 wrote: »

All the layouts and drawings are here... not sure why the media and posters have to ask Keelings to confirm what the living conditions are like when all of these new seasonal workers buildings (built mid 2019/ finished Q1 2020) layouts and drawings are drawn out and available on the planning site...
Max 184 seasonal workers allowed under approved planning ref F18A/0313 and historical planning suggests that that the overall number includes any children that may also be residing on site with same seasonal workers.
Max 23 bedspaces within each of the 8 new accommodation units(a total of 184 beds paces). - - - The units are built in an area called Brasil Nusery

F18A/0313 Keeling’s Softfruits Unlimited company at Brazil Lands Nursery,
Brackenstown Road, Swords, Co. Dublin
Register Ref: F18A/0313
Development: The development will consist of (i) The removal of two number existing single storey accommodation
buildings, (ii) the construction of 8 number new single storey accommodation buildings, (iii) the change of use and alterations to
an existing domestic building to new ancillary amenity building, (iv) the provision of a new public footpath along the southern
boundary of the site, (v) all associated site works, services and landscaping.
Location: Brazil Lands Nursery, Brackenstown Road, Swords, Co. Dublin.
Applicant: Keelings Softfruits Unlimited company
App. Type: Permission
Date Recd.: 06-Jun-2018

Welcome to boards.ie Tarf2020, very interesting first ever post here.

2u2me

Thanks Tarf, I had no idea such information exists.

I was just reading some of the planning permission request, Keeling were asking to have less then 1 toilets per 2 bedrooms because not all bedrooms are filled for between 4-6 months a year.

Either the planning permission is wrong or the Bulgarians account is wrong, just how many bathrooms are in the place?

http://documents.fingalcoco.ie/NorthgatePublicDocs/00621761.pdf

I never knew just how many allowances we make for 'seasonal workers' in this country. We basically treat them like second class citizens.
Instead of 40 hours its 48 hours.
Instead of 1 toilet per room, 1 toilet per 2 rooms.
No recourse, they hardly speak the language.
They are in debt before they begin.

blinding

2u2me wrote: »

Thanks Tarf, I had no idea such information exists.

I was just reading some of the planning permission request, Keeling were asking to have less then 1 toilets per 2 bedrooms because not all bedrooms are filled for between 4-6 months a year.

Either the planning permission is wrong or the Bulgarians account is wrong, just how many bathrooms are in the place?

http://documents.fingalcoco.ie/NorthgatePublicDocs/00621761.pdf

I never knew just how many allowances we make for 'seasonal workers' in this country. We basically treat them like second class citizens.
Instead of 40 hours its 48 hours.
Instead of 1 toilet per room, 1 toilet per 2 rooms.
No recourse, they hardly speak the language.
They are in debt before they begin.

Having to Pay Agencies to get work is also a NO NO and / or it certainly should be.

Lying to People as to whether there is 8 weeks or 12 weeks work should also not be allowed.

Of course we know what Ireland is like about Lying about and Lying to itself about Irelands dirty little Secrets.

When a country Lies to itself about Child Abuse for Years then Lying to itself about the abuse of Migrant workers is a Doddle.

You’d think this would be a big deal in Brussels and Strasbourg ! ! They certainly seem to treat their MEP Migrant Workers in a Completely Different Manner :eek::eek:

Bass Reeves

2u2me wrote: »

Thanks Tarf, I had no idea such information exists.

I was just reading some of the planning permission request, Keeling were asking to have less then 1 toilets per 2 bedrooms because not all bedrooms are filled for between 4-6 months a year.

Either the planning permission is wrong or the Bulgarians account is wrong, just how many bathrooms are in the place?

http://documents.fingalcoco.ie/NorthgatePublicDocs/00621761.pdf

I never knew just how many allowances we make for 'seasonal workers' in this country. We basically treat them like second class citizens.
Instead of 40 hours its 48 hours.
Instead of 1 toilet per room, 1 toilet per 2 rooms.
No recourse, they hardly speak the language.
They are in debt before they begin.

Is it such a crime that two rooms would share a bathroom. Students sharing digs would be doing that. I imagine if workers still find digs this is still happening. It just shows you the sheltered lives some live or think they live.

Any employer can expect you to work a 48 hour week. Most do not but they can. In a minimum wage job migrant workers in general are there to make money. My son drew silage ti NZ for 8 weeks around Christmas. The average working week was 80+ hours. There was weeks he worked 100+ hours. pay. He was disdusted if he got less than 70 hours. He was on the NZ minimum wage. There was shock and horror a deduction for food and lodgings.

There is no legal requirement to pay overtime. What many may not know that even in the PS where some workers work sub 40 hour weeks the divisor for OT is 44.

blinding wrote: »

Having to Pay Agencies to get work is also a NO NO and / or it certainly should be.

Lying to People as to whether there is 8 weeks or 12 weeks work should also not be allowed.

Of course we know what Ireland is like about Lying about and Lying to itself about Irelands dirty little Secrets.

When a country Lies to itself about Child Abuse for Years then Lying to itself about the abuse of Migrant workers is a Doddle.

You’d think this would be a big deal in Brussels and Strasbourg ! ! They certainly seem to treat their MEP Migrant Workers in a Completely Different Manner :eek::eek:

I agree that workers should not have to pay agencies. However that is outside Ireland control with migrant workers. On flights or travel expenses the vast majority of employer will not pay employees to relocate to start a new job.

Bringing up child abuse in this senario is disgusting

Scotty #

2u2me wrote: »

Instead of 40 hours its 48 hours.

They work a 6 day week. 6 x 8 = 48. They're paid a minimum of €10.10 per hour for each of these hours. (€484.80)

2u2me wrote: »

Instead of 1 toilet per room, 1 toilet per 2 rooms.

1st world problems eh? The planning regulations allow for one toilet per three occupants in this type of building. Keelings proposed ammendment was one toilet per four occupants. They have two to a room so one toilet for four occupants makes sense. I don't see it as excessive.

Incidentally, restaurant requiprments are two toilet per twenty five occupants. 1 male, 1 female. At your place of work, the requirment is one toilet per 20 staff.

2u2me wrote: »

I never knew just how many allowances we make for 'seasonal workers' in this country. We basically treat them like second class citizens.

What allowances do we make. They're covered by Irish employment laws and by all Irish laws, as are Keelings.

Alrigghtythen

How many sharing a bathroom in the private houses you rather they rent themselve? If it was a 4 bedroom house there may be 4 sharing and if a couple live there too that's 5. What sort of inhumane conditions is that to be living in?

And they'ed expected to pay for it too. OMG

maestroamado

I did not think this type of development be allowed in this country.
If people are sharing rooms and just one toilet/shower for 4 people €95 pw is excessive in my view.
If this is the accepted standard of accomodation on farm work the cost of same should be much much lower.
It also seems that the shower and toilet in same room.

I shared house with 3 others some years ago, we had separate shower and toilet and it was tricky in the morning.
We had to assign time for shower in the morning.

I was happy that things were reasonably ok once miinimum wage payment was confirmed.
The living area and cost of same have changed my view, maybe they will review and reduce cost of same...

Graham

maestroamado wrote: »

I was happy that things were reasonably ok once miinimum wage payment was confirmed.

The payslip posted earlier looks like it's a couple of years old. The same payslip this year would be

• €2,230 / month gross.

• €574 above the monthly minimum wage

• 7.1 times the Bulgarian minimum wage

• €160 more than a newly qualified staff nurse

*Above ignores bonuses for exceeding minimum targets.

krissovo

maestroamado wrote: »

I did not think this type of development be allowed in this country.
If people are sharing rooms and just one toilet/shower for 4 people €95 pw is excessive in my view.
If this is the accepted standard of accomodation on farm work the cost of same should be much much lower.
It also seems that the shower and toilet in same room.

I shared house with 3 others some years ago, we had separate shower and toilet and it was tricky in the morning.
We had to assign time for shower in the morning.

I was happy that things were reasonably ok once miinimum wage payment was confirmed.
The living area and cost of same have changed my view, maybe they will review and reduce cost of same...

Last time I was in Bulgaria (7 years ago) the majority of toilets are outside in the suburbs, by choice I will add. On a couple of occasions I went to dinner at work colleagues houses and the toilets were outside or the muslim hole in the floor type. In one house they even had an area allocated outside for doing your business "Au naturel" or as nature intended if you prefered so I would guess for the majority of workers the arrangements are fine.

13 euro a day for a roof over your head also seams reasonable to me, better than hostel rates and better living conditions.

maestroamado

Graham wrote: »

The payslip posted earlier looks like it's a couple of years old. The same payslip this year would be

• €2,230 / month gross.

• €574 above the monthly minimum wage

• 7.1 times the Bulgarian minimum wage

• €160 more than a newly qualified staff nurse

*Above ignores bonuses for exceeding minimum targets.

You just pick out the line that suits your agenda.
My post was about the excessive coat of their rooms.




This is Ireland...You expect them to pay Irish rents for shared rooms.
Your the accommodation person and you think this is ok.
I await with interest how you can justify this cost.
I am sure someone will come up with room dimensions.


I wonder where do they cook and eat...

maestroamado

krissovo wrote: »

Last time I was in Bulgaria (7 years ago) the majority of toilets are outside in the suburbs, by choice I will add. On a couple of occasions I went to dinner at work colleagues houses and the toilets were outside or the muslim hole in the floor type. In one house they even had an area allocated outside for doing your business "Au naturel" or as nature intended if you prefered so I would guess for the majority of workers the arrangements are fine.

13 euro a day for a roof over your head also seams reasonable to me, better than hostel rates and better living conditions.

Yes that's fine in Bulgaria and i have being there years ago.
€95 pw is more than what people who have their own room in houses around the country.
You have typical Irish attitude, its good enough for them and we will get as much as we can out of the.
I think the accommodation is fine as they happy to be there. The cost is excessive and cannot be justified in my opinion.


Can you tell me anyone in this country who spends 25% of their wages on a shared room?

Alrigghtythen

Graham wrote: »

The payslip posted earlier looks like it's a couple of years old. The same payslip this year would be

• €2,230 / month gross.

• €574 above the monthly minimum wage

• 7.1 times the Bulgarian minimum wage

• €160 more than a newly qualified staff nurse

*Above ignores bonuses for exceeding minimum targets.

They earn more than a newly qualified nurse!

Scotty #

maestroamado wrote: »

This is Ireland...You expect them to pay Irish rents for shared rooms.
Your the accommodation person and you think this is ok.
I await with interest how you can justify this cost.

The €95 seems to also cover utilities and travel expenses (company bus).

Just with a quick look on datf, the cheapest I can find is a two bed appartment in Ballymun for €1500/month. That's about €93/person/week based on 4 sharing. But then you have all utilities and travel on top of that.

All in all, €95/week doesn't appear that excessive.

If you add 900 people to the local rent market all of a sudden, you're going to see a pretty hefty spike in rates.

krissovo

maestroamado wrote: »

You have typical Irish attitude, its good enough for them and we will get as much as we can out of the.

Thats certainly not the attitude I have, the attitude I have is that I have been in their position and picked fruit across Europe. They appear to have quite a good deal from what I know.

I have picked grapes in France and stayed in a barn and slept on a 3 high bunk bed and had access to a porta potty toilet. Portugal was similar, Germany was better and I stayed in student blocks but was shared rooms. At the end of the days hard work all we were interested in was a good feed, a beer and then somewhere to sleep. I paid about about 40% of the wage I earnt for that privilege but it was my choice to do it.

2u2me

I don't know where everyone is getting 1 toilet per 4 people. Aren't the rooms up to 4 people each and 1 toilet per 2 rooms is 1 toilet per 8 people.

Here's the PDFs for the planning permissions http://documents.fingalcoco.ie/NorthgateIM.WebSearch/Results.aspx

Scotty #

2u2me wrote: »

I don't know where everyone is getting 1 toilet per 4 people. Aren't the rooms up to 4 people each and 1 toilet per 2 rooms is 1 toilet per 8 people.

The pdfs about the planning permission have been taken down since last night.. what the hell?

I believe the 'four to a room' is only in their current lodgings while in quarantine. It's normally two to a room.

2u2me

Scotty # wrote: »

The €95 seems to also cover utilities and travel expenses (company bus).

Just with a quick look on datf, the cheapest I can find is a two bed appartment in Ballymun for €1500/month. That's about €93/person/week based on 4 sharing. But then you have all utilities and travel on top of that.

All in all, €95/week doesn't appear that excessive.

If you add 900 people to the local rent market all of a sudden, you're going to see a pretty hefty spike in rates.

There is no planning permission for the 'bedspaces' to be rented to the public. They only have permission to be used by farm hands.
Shouldn't this make it a whole lot cheaper?

Scotty #

2u2me wrote: »

There is no planning permission for the 'bedspaces' to be rented to the public. They only have permission to be used by farm hands.
Shouldn't this make it a whole lot cheaper?

I have no idea what the workers will be charged for the 'on site' accommodation. The €95 is for off site accomodation. Both the Unite guy and the Reddit guy were staying in Hazelwood Village where incidentally, all rooms are ensuite.

2u2me

Scotty # wrote: »

I have no idea what the workers will be charged for the 'on site' accommodation. The €95 is for off site accomodation. Both the Unite guy and the Reddit guy were staying in Hazelwood Village where incidentally, all rooms are ensuite.

Why would the planning authorities make this condition? (That the bedspaces can not be rented out to the public, only to farm workers)

Scotty #

2u2me wrote: »

Why would the planning authorities make this condition? (That the bedspaces can not be rented out to the public, only to farm workers)

They just put it in for clarity. The planning permission is for accomodation for staff, not for commercial accommodation.

2u2me

Scotty # wrote: »

They just put it in for clarity. The planning permission is for accomodation for staff, not for commercial accommodation.

Yes; but why? Isn't clear to me

STB.

Scotty # wrote: »

I have no idea what the workers will be charged for the 'on site' accommodation. The €95 is for off site accomodation. Both the Unite guy and the Reddit guy were staying in Hazelwood Village where incidentally, all rooms are ensuite.

So they were not staying at the on site accommodation at the Brazil complex ?

Graham

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

They earn more than a newly qualified nurse!

That's the MINIMUM.

I doubt the unions will be showing payslips for any of the workers that pick above the minimums.

I see we've now moved onto being outraged at €13 a day for accommodation/transport and the lack of en-suite facilities. :rolleyes:

STB.

Graham wrote: »

The payslip posted earlier looks like it's a couple of years old. The same payslip this year would be

• €2,230 / month gross.

• €574 above the monthly minimum wage

• 7.1 times the Bulgarian minimum wage

• €160 more than a newly qualified staff nurse

*Above ignores bonuses for exceeding minimum targets.

It's from last year. The min wage rate is stated by Ogle as €9.55 per hour at the time.

That lads payslip has 48 hours BASIC worked at €381.33 THAT equates to €7.94 per hour. So his basic is set below the minimum wage. WHY ?

He then has an additional 2.25 hours Overtime for €23.70.

There is then an Min Wage Adjustment of 82 (Why ?)

All in all €480 odd BEFORE tax/prsi for a 50 hour week. Minus Tax@20% and PRSI and Minus €95 for accom. What does that leave ?

Their hours vary from 30 -45 hours according to the video. Exceeds what minimum targets. They are paid by the hour. Stop stating what isn't there.

Scotty # wrote: »

They work a 6 day week. 6 x 8 = 48. They're paid a minimum of €10.10 per hour for each of these hours. (€484.80)

WRONG. Their hours vary according to Ogle video.

Scotty # wrote: »

This is a grossly misleading statement.

The Unite rep shows his payslip, which clearly shows his wage was €486.98 gross. He then had €19.48 PRSI deducted. No PAYE deduction as he's not liable for any. So his actual take home was €467.50.

WRONG. How would he not be liable for Tax ?? How ?

Scotty # wrote: »

This includes a min wage adjustment of almost €90 because he didn't pick nearly enough to bring him up to min wage per hour for the hours he worked. This is also undoubtedly the reason he was shown the gate after 8 weeks.

WRONG. They are paid by the hour not by weight (I had to correct you earlier on this in this thread where you linked an article but didn't bother reading it). Stop making stuff up. His basic is working out at €7.94 per hour for the number of hours he worked, that's why there is a minimum wage adjustment !

He was let go under the guise of there not being enough work as stated in the video (despite fresh staff being flown in after that). Nothing else like your personal commentary. Again stop making stuff up.

Bass Reeves

STB. wrote: »

It's from last year. The min wage rate is stated by Ogle as €9.55 per hour at the time.

That lads payslip has 48 hours BASIC worked at €381.33 THAT equates to €7.94 per hour. So his basic is set below the minimum wage. WHY ?

He then has an additional 2.25 hours Overtime for €23.70.

There is then an Min Wage Adjustment of 82 (Why ?)

All in all €480 odd BEFORE tax/prsi for a 50 hour week. Minus Tax@20% and PRSI and Minus €95 for accom. What does that leave ?

Their hours vary from 30 -45 hours according to the video. Exceeds what minimum targets. They are paid by the hour. Stop stating what isn't there.

You are paid a picking rate. If you fail to meet the minimum picking rate you pay is bought up to the minimum rate of pay. This lad was only hitting the mid 70s% wise of the picking rate. I think Keeling's stated that 70-80% hit the picking rate.

This lad was not so his pay was adjusted up to the minimum rate. Fir the first 13 weeks an employer can dismiss you without notice. Keeling's guarantee a minimum of 8weeks they got rid of him then and kept the workers hitting targets. If you look at the date on the payslip 9is the month or September he seemed to have been recruited late in the season so would have had a limited season anyway

STB.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

You are laid a picking rate. If you fail to meet the minimum picking rate you pay is bought up to the minimum rate of pay. This lad was only hitting the mid 70s% wise of the picking rate. I think Keeling's stated that 70-80% hit the picking rate.

This lad was not so his pay was adjusted up to the minimum rate. Fir the first 13 weeks an employer can dismiss you without notice. Keeling's guarantee a minimum of 8weeks they got rid of him then and kept the workers hitting targets. If you look at the date on the payslip 9is the month or September he seemed to have been recruited late in the season so would have had a limited season anyway

I perused the contract Ogle showed. I couldn't see anything about a picking rate. A picking rate ??

I also don't see anything in Irish employment law that states that you can pay anything other than the minimum hourly rate!

You can roughly tell by his PRSI contributions how many weeks he has been there. I cannot see a tax deduction.

He stated that there was not enough work after the 8th week and he was offered a job by the same agency in Scotland at his own air expense. Meanwhile more pickers were arriving from Bulgaria at that time (according to the interview).

That these workers in this industry are ponying up between €500 to €750 to the agency to work 12 week contracts (8 of which are on probation) with uncertainty of what happens after 8 weeks, seems all very sharp to me. Sure you would be afraid to challenge anything.

STB.

Scotty # wrote: »

They just put it in for clarity. The planning permission is for accomodation for staff, not for commercial accommodation.

No because they have an exemption because the standards fall outside what is commercially acceptable.

Graham wrote: »

That's the MINIMUM.

I doubt the unions will be showing payslips for any of the workers that pick above the minimums.

I see we've now moved onto being outraged at €13 a day for accommodation/transport and the lack of en-suite facilities.

Why don't you divide the number of hours worked into the total earned AFTER tax and do that comparison. Are you stating that qualified nurses are getting only the minimum wage. I'd stick to the accomodation forum Graham. Maths are not your strong point.

Bass Reeves

STB. wrote: »

I perused the contract Ogle showed. I couldn't see anything about a picking rate. A picking rate ??

I also don't see anything in Irish employment law that states that you can pay anything other than the minimum hourly rate!

You can roughly tell by his PRSI contributions how many weeks he has been there. I cannot see a tax deduction.

He stated that there was not enough work after the 8th week and he was offered a job by the same agency in Scotland at his own air expense. Meanwhile more pickers were arriving from Bulgaria at that time (according to the interview).

That these workers in this industry are ponying up between €500 to €750 to the agency to work 12 week contracts (8 of which are on probation) with uncertainty of what happens after 8 weeks, seems all very sharp to me. Sure you would be afraid to challenge anything.

Keeling's stated that workers are paid by a picking rate with some workers hitting 15/hour and I think 80% hitting the picking rate. If you fail to achieve the picking rate you wage is bought up to the minimum rate of pay. The play slip confirms that he was not hitting the pick rate and his wages were adjusted for that.

He was probably lucky to last 8 weeks if all his pick rates were like that. He was only hitting the mid 70 if the pick rate.

weldoninhio

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Keeling's stated that workers are paid by a picking rate with some workers hitting 15/hour and I think 80% hitting the picking rate. If you fail to achieve the picking rate you wage is bought up to the minimum rate of pay. The play slip confirms that he was not hitting the pick rate and his wages were adjusted for that.

He was probably lucky to last 8 weeks if all his pick rates were like that. He was only hitting the mid 70 if the pick rate.

Wrong, some farmer in Kildare I think it was said this, others then presumed that this was the industry standard and started using this farmers wages as Keelings. Keelings have not been forthcoming whatsoever about what they pay.

Scotty #

STB. wrote: »

No because they have an exemption because the standards fall outside what is commercially acceptable.

Exemption for what? What are you talking about?

Bass Reeves

STB. wrote: »

It states a basic hourly pay rate on that payslip . And that basic is below the minimum wage set. He also worked overtime. So are these conclusions real ?

I'd love to hear the commentary from an expert in employment law scenarios whereby the basic wage can be separated from the minimum wage set by employment law.

He is paid the minimum wage, his wages are ADJUSTED to reflect that he failed to reach the picking target. Do you think Brendan Ogle is thick as well. If Keeling's were not paying the MW he h e them before the employment rights authority if the wages were in any way wrong.

Another fact you got wrong is that the tax credit is a yearly credit. It is for a calendar year. It is equivalent to slightly over 16k taxable income. On strict terms employee then pay tax in there country of origin.

Scotty #

STB. wrote: »

He is paid by the hour as stated on his payslip.

Your Punch & Judy style of debate is quite comical. He is paid per kilo. If you want to refute that then please provide a source or at least a shred of evidence.

His payslip says nothing about him being paid per hour.

Regardless, he does not get paid less than minimum wage. His wage was over €480 despite what Brendan Ogle would have you believe.

STB. wrote: »

He was there on a 12 week contract he does not get an annual tax credit.

Please stop making stuff up or purporting to know about things when you clearly don't.

If you receive income that is taxable, then you are entitled to tax credits. You can read all about it here..

STB. wrote: »

The minmum wage adjustment IS NOT what you think it is.

It's exactly what I think it is. What other explanation could there be?

STB. wrote: »

After 20% tax/prsi and €95 accommodation paid he would not have a whole lot more for a 50 HOUR WEEK.

As has already clearly been explained to you. He is not liable for income tax as his tax liability falls below his tax credits.

Accomodation costs are completely irrelevant as to what he earns.

Scotty #

2u2me wrote: »

How do you know the quotas are fair quotas? That is a ridiculous statement to make unless you know if the quoatas are being met by others.
A second hand 'I heard from Keelings 70% meet their quotas' just doesn't cut it.

Unachievable targets are pointless and actually have a negative impact on production. No employer sets unachievable targets, including Keelings.

On the week in question, the guy was around €90 worth of work short on his target. I'm no Einstein, but I would say that's why he was let go at the end of the probation period. You think Keelings want to go and spend another four days training someone else to replace him?

Bass Reeves

Scotty # wrote: »

Unachievable targets are pointless and actually have a negative impact on production. No employer sets unachievable targets, including Keelings.

On the week in question, the guy was around €90 worth of work short on his target. I'm no Einstein, but I would say that's why he was let go at the end of the probation period. You think Keelings want to go and spend another four days training someone else to replace him?

Too many believe in the big bad wolf. As you stated if targets are not achieveable by the vast majority lads will not opt to achieve them. This lad being 70ish% if the target tells it own story. Employers are no angels but neither are they the big bad wolf

STB.

Scotty # wrote: »

Your Punch & Judy style of debate is quite comical. He is paid per kilo. If you want to refute that then please provide a source or at least a shred of evidence.

His payslip says nothing about him being paid per hour.

His payslip outlines that he worked 48 HOURS and then the column to the right of that states the monetary amount that equates to. Its so simple I am surprised it has to be spelt out to you. I'd like YOUR source of how this man is paid, given you are clearly reading something outside a payslip.

In your rush to explain the employment methods of a company, you have made libellous statements against this mans character and I can tell you that is not comical. Needless to say, its reported.

Scotty #

LuasSimon wrote: »

Scotty...you'll be getting employee of the year award from Keelings all the defending your doing of them !!

I'm not defending Keelings though, I'm defending our need to keep the food supply chains open. It's that simple.

STB. wrote: »

In the video, he claims that there was not enough work. I have now answered you on this several times.

They don't get paid at all if there's not enough work. You think Keelings pay them to sit at home if there's no work to be done?

Edit: Sorry, I see the point you are making now. He 'claims' he was let go because there was not enough work. I suppose Keelings could have told him that to try and make him feel better. Always hard sacking someone. But I suspect the real reason is he was not very good. As is evident on his wage slip.

STB. wrote: »

Logical. You better hope a mod gets to this thread before the person you dismantled without foundation sees it, Scotty. Bye Now.

He took part in the video. I didn't ask him to.

You can't go showing your €480 payslip and then claim you're only getting €200 and expect not to be called up on it.

Alrigghtythen

Graham wrote: »

That's the MINIMUM.

I doubt the unions will be showing payslips for any of the workers that pick above the minimums.

I see we've now moved onto being outraged at €13 a day for accommodation/transport and the lack of en-suite facilities. :rolleyes:

You wouldn't get a hostel for €13 a day, and transport included too!

weldoninhio

Alrigghtythen wrote: »

You wouldn't get a hostel for €13 a day, and transport included too!

They aren’t staying in a hostel. Moot point.

maestroamado

Scotty # wrote: »

The €95 seems to also cover utilities and travel expenses (company bus).

Just with a quick look on datf, the cheapest I can find is a two bed appartment in Ballymun for €1500/month. That's about €93/person/week based on 4 sharing. But then you have all utilities and travel on top of that.

All in all, €95/week doesn't appear that excessive.

If you add 900 people to the local rent market all of a sudden, you're going to see a pretty hefty spike in rates.

To compare this with daft.ie is daft.
It you have 900x95x25 weeks = €2,223,000. A nice wee sum.

So you think people who are sharing rooms working picking fruit paying €2 more than career people probably working at Airport. I cannot imagine them staying two to a room and one toilet/shower for 4.

I simply think its way too much.
BTW thanks for info as it helped me make my point.

Alrigghtythen

weldoninhio wrote: »

They aren’t staying in a hostel. Moot point.

Its not a moot point. If accommodation wasnt provided, they'd probably be staying there. Whos going to rent out a house for only a couple of months a year?

Beasty

Closing while I review some recent comments

There's a fair chance it will not be re-opened this time as the discussion has been done to death