Employers struggling to fill positions with hundreds of thousands unemployed

jakiah

ypres5 wrote: »

I do none of those things so maybe stop building and demolishing strawmen and take an introspective look as to why there isn't a queue forming around the road of people looking to work for you.

If he comes across in real life like he does on this website I doubt anyone wants to be anywhere near him, nevermind work for him

Smee_Again

seamus wrote: »

This.

Businesses that have a policy of revolving-door employees are rarely good quality ones. Keeping your wages on the floor to ensure that you only get students, immigrants and young people who are there to begrudgingly make a few quid, also ensures that customers will not enjoy going to your premises. They'll go in, buy and leave again. Maybe that's your business model. If so, then you don't get to whinge that nobody wants to work for you.

Businesses who pay enough money, even in the "lower" jobs, so that someone is happy to make a career out of it, build workplaces that customers want to go back to.

The hotel example is a perfect one, but a pub is a good one too. If you think about the best experiences you've had, the staff weren't all disinterested young ones and young fellas. They were all experienced, professional staff, from the top to the bottom of the organisation, who took pride in their work.

And the foundation stone of giving someone pride in their work is making it worth their while to do the work.

Al this talk of having to increase prices to cover a slight increase in wages is nonsense.

If a pub or a hotel pays decent wages, has engaged staff who are properly trained any increase in costs will be off-set by less waste, less mistakes, less complaints, less turnover of staff and an increase in revenue.

It's very easy for a well trained waiter or barman to get a customer to spend a little extra by talking them into ordering an extra side, starter or dessert, 1 drink for the road etc but when you pay minimum wage and as a result only hire uninterested kids then this doesn't happen.

LillySV

Smee_Again wrote: »

Why would someone who previously worked and earned c. €20K a year (to qualify for PUP of €350 p/w) suddenly become so lazy that they settle for €350 p/w, then €300, then €250 and finally €203?

It makes no sense.

That’s what’s happening ... go ask many businesses

Topgear on Dave

flexcon wrote: »

Initially that seems like a fair response, but to play devils advocate a bit further then with the same logic,

A pub paying 8euro a hour more to its (2X4euro) staff behind the bar (average, could be 1, or as high as 4 or whatever) means the pub would put 2euro on each pint?

That would suggest the pub is really not a steady business at all. Borderline insolvent. I know some pubs would struggle, but if they truly would struggle at an extra 4euro an hour per person, something is up.

I don't work in the sector so I might be missing some very obvious nuances

Even pre-covid the country towns were filled with closed pubs, not too sure about the cities.

seamus

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

My youngling's new job is in retail on minimum wage. I also have a close friend who owns a retail business so business is a regular topic of discussion. The reality in retail is that it is very cut-throat and there is very little scope to increase basic wages because, we the public, are unwilling to pay for that.

That's not quite the case though, because plenty of retailers do pay half-decent wages and not just bottom line minimum wage. Lidl, who you would think shave costs absolutely everywhere they can be shaved, pay €6k per year more than minimum wage.

I think the "public won't pay more" is a bit of a cop-out though. We're really not that price sensitive in most cases. Obviously every retail space is different, but most employers aren't willing to take the time to build their reputation on quality over rock-bottom prices, because it takes longer to pay off.
Customers will pay a little more for a better experience.

This is why McDonalds and real restaurants both continue to coexist.

Like I say, if someone's business model is to drive prices down to nothing through paying the bare minimum and having disposable staff, then so be it. But they forfeit the right to complain about staff shortages. They've positioned themselves as the employer of last resort.

flexcon

Smee_Again wrote: »

Al this talk of having to increase prices to cover a slight increase in wages is nonsense.

If a pub or a hotel pays decent wages, has engaged staff who are properly trained any increase in costs will be off-set by less waste, less mistakes, less complaints, less turnover of staff and an increase in revenue.

It's very easy for a well trained waiter or barman to get a customer to spend a little extra by talking them into ordering an extra side, starter or dessert, 1 drink for the road etc but when you pay minimum wage and as a result only hire uninterested kids then this doesn't happen.

I used to work for an advertising company that had a contract with a well known Drinks brand about 15 years ago.

They hired 18-22 year olds on 8euro an hour(back then minimal) and the only task they had was to call into the publican and give them a bale of drip mats, some merch, maybe a free case of promotional drinks and some posters.

on average, if I recall correctly, about 50% of the calls came back as - no install allowed. Publicans just disliked these guys coming in, disinterested, and dropping the merch off.

So as a Pilot, the company hired tenured ex reps, in their late 30's, 40's on much better money and the results were insane. upwards if 90% completion rates. engagement and feedback was incredible, and even the drinks company themselves were impressed.

Antidotal at best, but it's an example I can recall showing, you pay well - get good workers and it can work.maybe.

Smee_Again

flexcon wrote: »

Initially that seems like a fair response, but to play devils advocate a bit further then with the same logic,

A pub paying 8euro a hour more to its (2X4euro) staff behind the bar (average, could be 1, or as high as 4 or whatever) means the pub would put 2euro on each pint?

That would suggest the pub is really not a steady business at all. Borderline insolvent. I know some pubs would struggle, but if they truly would struggle at an extra 4euro an hour per person, something is up.

I don't work in the sector so I might be missing some very obvious nuances

You're not, the biggest issue facing his fictional pub isnt a wage cost of €14 per hour. It's a lack of custom, and paying 2 staff when only 1 is needed.

And, as someone who has helped run a pub and been that staff member working for the first hour and not serving anyone, it's not like I wasn't working.

I was cleaning, re-stacking shelves, alternating stock, stock-taking, meeting with suppliers and reps, placing orders, paying bills, preparing the rota, organising whatever events were on that week, doing whatever DIY needed fixing after the weekend etc etc.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Does price vs the cost of a hotel have any impact on your choice of Airbnb over a hotel ?

More comfort. I like being able to cook for myself what I want when I want for example.

My point though is: competition. Free market enterprise that everyone harps on about is built on the concept of adapt or die. It happened to the airline industry when Ryanair arrived. It happened to the accommodation trade when Airbnb arrived - and Airbnb has been around a lot longer than covid.

Poor hotels and restaurants will have issues and moan about it. Good ones will survive and adapt.

THAT'S business.

flexcon

seamus wrote: »

I think the "public won't pay more" is a bit of a cop-out though. We're really not that price sensitive in most cases.

On balance, this might be quite true.

After all, look at all the hippy Coffee shops opening up selling coffee and insane margins. Avocado on toast for 5euro? yes please.

If I was someone looking for a job now, I would be going hard on the pay, quality of life and returns I can give to the business.

I'd make sure to sell myself hard though.

Smee_Again

LillySV wrote: »

That’s what’s happening ... go ask many businesses

Funny enough I did, we've a pub leased out to a guy and I was asking him if he had any problem finding staff and he said no. He had 3 people from before he was forced to close chomping at the bit to get back to work and had loads of applicants for the few part time roles he was offering.

Anecdotal I know, but I'd take his word over some folk on the internet.

mohawk

seamus wrote: »

This.

Businesses that have a policy of revolving-door employees are rarely good quality ones. Keeping your wages on the floor to ensure that you only get students, immigrants and young people who are there to begrudgingly make a few quid, also ensures that customers will not enjoy going to your premises. They'll go in, buy and leave again. Maybe that's your business model. If so, then you don't get to whinge that nobody wants to work for you.

Businesses who pay enough money, even in the "lower" jobs, so that someone is happy to make a career out of it, build workplaces that customers want to go back to.

The hotel example is a perfect one, but a pub is a good one too. If you think about the best experiences you've had, the staff weren't all disinterested young ones and young fellas. They were all experienced, professional staff, from the top to the bottom of the organisation, who took pride in their work.

And the foundation stone of giving someone pride in their work is making it worth their while to do the work.

We have our wedding booked in a hotel on the west coast. It’s four star and staff are a mixture of young and experienced professionals. Lovely group of people. Hotel kept as many in jobs as they could. Such as doing takeaway coffees, ice cream, meals etc and also took time to repaint and do repairs etc where needed. As a result they still managed to keep lots of their staff in a part time capacity. It’s the kind of place where the managers and owner get stuck in with the work when it gets busy and don’t just stand there issuing orders. Obviously since we are getting married there we love the place and treat ourselves to an occasional night away there. Place gets great reviews, however there are a fair few people who run the place down because of the price of a night there. Weekend in peak season is over €250 a night. Before reopening they had their staff in training. I know that cost them money to do but in the hotel business your reputation can go down hill very fast after taking years to build. However, I will acknowledge that the higher the price of rooms in a hotel the smaller your market becomes. I know personally I can’t afford to book a 5 star hotel in Ireland for a weeks holiday but I can afford a 3 star. Post covid I bet many of us predict many of the worst hotels, pubs, restaurants etc won’t survive.

Eric Cartman

flexcon wrote: »

Initially that seems like a fair response, but to play devils advocate a bit further then with the same logic,

A pub paying 8euro a hour more to its (2X4euro) staff behind the bar (average, could be 1, or as high as 4 or whatever) means the pub would put 2euro on each pint?

That would suggest the pub is really not a steady business at all. Borderline insolvent. I know some pubs would struggle, but if they truly would struggle at an extra 4euro an hour per person, something is up.

I don't work in the sector so I might be missing some very obvious nuances

51% of pubs turnover less than 190k a year and the average net profit in the pubs is 5% , thats 10k in profit per year, less than 1000 euro a month, a 4 euro increase in wages for even a single individual would be 640 a month.

Fann Linn

Being discussed now on NT. Pay proper wages appears to be the call from one of the employers.

Smee_Again

Eric Cartman wrote: »

51% of pubs turnover less than 190k a year and the average net profit in the pubs is 5% , thats 10k in profit per year, less than 1000 euro a month, a 4 euro increase in wages for even a single individual would be 640 a month.

What's the gross profit? We all know that net profit figure will have been managed down as much as possible.

My dad ran a pub for 40 years until 2019 and at the end he was just about showing a profit but he was still taking a wage from the business, so was my mother.

And his staff, all of whom were on more than minimum wage.

flexcon

Eric Cartman wrote: »

51% of pubs turnover less than 190k a year and the average net profit in the pubs is 5% , thats 10k in profit per year, less than 1000 euro a month, a 4 euro increase in wages for even a single individual would be 640 a month.

Wow. Not sure where those figures come from, but Yikes.

How does the owner make a living from that? That means the staff are on more money than the pub makes in profits?

Or is that figure including the Owner taking a wage?

LillySV

Smee_Again wrote: »

Funny enough I did, we've a pub leased out to a guy and I was asking him if he had any problem finding staff and he said no. He had 3 people from before he was forced to close chomping at the bit to get back to work and had loads of applicants for the few part time roles he was offering.

Anecdotal I know, but I'd take his word over some folk on the internet.

So u asked one publican and he does have staff back ... well jesas that proves that then....

seamus

Smee_Again wrote: »

What's the gross profit? We all know that net profit figure will have been managed down as much as possible.

My dad ran a pub for 40 years until 2019 and at the end he was just about showing a profit but he was still taking a wage from the business, so was my mother.

And his staff, all of whom were on more than minimum wage.

Gross profit margin in a pub is 50% minimum. AIB says anything lower is not worth your while.

That 190k figure comes from the VFI, so if they're all earning €95k gross, then it's unlikely they have any full-time staff who aren't family and the wage issue is moot.

Eric Cartman

flexcon wrote: »

Wow. Not sure where those figures come from, but Yikes.

How does the owner make a living from that? That means the staff are on more money than the pub makes in profits?

Or is that figure including the Owner taking a wage?

that would include the owner taking a wage, but the profit is whats left over, my point was without doing anything even increasing the wages of a single staff member by 4 euro an hour would wipe out the pubs viability.

And I'm sure somebodys going to claim that the pub owner and his missus are on 400k a year and also engaged in tax evasion or something...

but we all know thats reaching into absurdity.

Smee_Again

LillySV wrote: »

So u asked one publican and he does have staff back ... well jesas that proves that then....

An abundance of staff and an over abundance of applications.

I admitted it was anecdotal, but as far as I can see that's all anyone is putting forward. A few individuals are saying they can't get staff but when I walk around my area any business that is allowed open has re-opened.

Barber shops, hair dressers, clothes shops, pubs, restaurants and cafes are all open.

Well, all except 2 pubs locally but they seem to have builders in so I assume they're going to reopen soon. I don't think either had outside space.

LillySV

Smee_Again wrote: »

An abundance of staff and an over abundance of applications.

I admitted it was anecdotal, but as far as I can see that's all anyone is putting forward. A few individuals are saying they can't get staff but when I walk around my area any business that is allowed open has re-opened.

Barber shops, hair dressers, clothes shops, pubs, restaurants and cafes are all open.

Well, all except 2 pubs locally but they seem to have builders in so I assume they're going to reopen soon. I don't think either had outside space.

Well I’m glad they are returning and things going back to normal. They should end the pup payments so as no longer applicable and let the remaining cohort go onto ordinary jobseekers payments .. hopefully they get work soon too

Smee_Again

LillySV wrote: »

Well I’m glad they are returning and things going back to normal. They should end the pup payments so as no longer applicable and let the remaining cohort go onto ordinary jobseekers payments .. hopefully they get work soon too

When all businesses are allowed to open without restrictions PUP will be gone, until then there are still government imposed restrictions on people's ability to work and earn a living, while that is the case PUP should stay albeit at a reducing rate.

Calhoun

seamus wrote: »

That's not quite the case though, because plenty of retailers do pay half-decent wages and not just bottom line minimum wage. Lidl, who you would think shave costs absolutely everywhere they can be shaved, pay €6k per year more than minimum wage.

I think the "public won't pay more" is a bit of a cop-out though. We're really not that price sensitive in most cases. Obviously every retail space is different, but most employers aren't willing to take the time to build their reputation on quality over rock-bottom prices, because it takes longer to pay off.
Customers will pay a little more for a better experience.

This is why McDonalds and real restaurants both continue to coexist.

Like I say, if someone's business model is to drive prices down to nothing through paying the bare minimum and having disposable staff, then so be it. But they forfeit the right to complain about staff shortages. They've positioned themselves as the employer of last resort.

Most businesses want all the profit not just some of the profit so it's much easier to say that customers won't pay so we won't do it.

As you say that is a fine stance to take as long as your ok with having no staff.

flexcon

Eric Cartman wrote: »

that would include the owner taking a wage, but the profit is whats left over, my point was without doing anything even increasing the wages of a single staff member by 4 euro an hour would wipe out the pubs viability.

And I'm sure somebodys going to claim that the pub owner and his missus are on 400k a year and also engaged in tax evasion or something...

but we all know thats reaching into absurdity.

Ah would ya stop with the hyperbole They can suggest that all they like, common sense would suggest that's most unlikely.

although I do know a well known Cork pub chain that probably would be doing that. Different thread :P:pac:

Stayed in a hotel last night. Staff in the bar/restaurant seemed a bit mixed, but definitely seemed like most of them were new there and hadn't worked there before. I'd say there were about 8 staff members (which was a lot, in fairness, as it wasn't exactly mental busy), so I assume that some/all of the new people were being trained in whilst it's still a bit quiet.

At breakfast this morning, I only seen two staff, and a manager. They all looked like they'd worked there for years and years, and when they weren't serving, they were looking at a stack of CVs and flicking through them figuring out who should be called, etc.

So, although entirely anecdotal of course, it gave the impression that there are people out there willing to get stuck in.

The PUP payment should be cut down over the course of a few months. On June 1st it should have dropped by 10%, then the same again on July 1st, August 1st etc. and when it reaches €203 or below, it just disappears and if you want to keep getting a payment, you've to sign up for jobseekers (or return to work).

Mister Vain

Has it not been extended till next February with a reduction in September? Seems a bit much.

Ginger83

Eric Cartman wrote: »

that would include the owner taking a wage, but the profit is whats left over, my point was without doing anything even increasing the wages of a single staff member by 4 euro an hour would wipe out the pubs viability.

And I'm sure somebodys going to claim that the pub owner and his missus are on 400k a year and also engaged in tax evasion or something...

but we all know thats reaching into absurdity.

A friend of mine ran a pub in the midlands where a company supplied and maintained a pool table for 60% of the revenue.

He told me his share covered two very decent holidays every year.

Also do you think all these pubs ringing bookies with bets are doing so for free?

Fann Linn

Isn't it true that this PUP payment has to be repaid to the State anyway? So any delay in returning to employment will eventually catch up with the errant employee in the long run barring they emigrate on a permanent basis,

Smee_Again

Fann Linn wrote: »

Isn't it true that this PUP payment has to be repaid to the State anyway? So any delay in returning to employment will eventually catch up with the errant employee in the long run barring they emigrate on a permanent basis,

No, its taxable but it doesn't have to be re-paid. Anyone on PUP was working and had already paid their PRSI.

Fann Linn

Smee_Again wrote: »

No, its taxable but it doesn't have to be re-paid. Anyone on PUP was working and had already paid their PRSI.

Thanks, didn't know the full workings of it,

joeysoap

Fann Linn wrote: »

Isn't it true that this PUP payment has to be repaid to the State anyway? So any delay in returning to employment will eventually catch up with the errant employee in the long run barring they emigrate on a permanent basis,

Afaik, only tax if it’s applicable