PLEASE LOGIN or REGISTER FOR FEWER ADS, MORE LIVE FEATURES & CLUB RELATED NEWS
GOOGLE REPORTS FOR THE PAST MONTH : Unique Users 115,772 Pageviews 5,467,188.
WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - Olympic Army

Board index Off Topic The Sin Bin Olympic Army

 
Off-topic discussion.

Post Wed Jul 11, 2012 6:53 pm
Ferocious Aardvark User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2002 8:26 pm
Posts: 24917
Location: MACS0647-JD


So now G4S who got the gig to provide Olympics security, at a tender of £300m, have seemingly fscked it up, and are about 35% short of the staff they need. Despite record numbers of unemployed and a double dip recession.

Or, as their PR man put it, they have "some issues in relation to workforce supply". http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18804547

Solution? Easy. Having told the Army that tens of thousands of them are facing the chop, rope in what will now be a total of 17,000 on duty, cancelling their summer holidays.

Increasingly, you couldn't make any of this up.
Last edited by Ferocious Aardvark on stardate Jun 26, 3013 11:27 am, edited 48,562,867,458,300,023 times in total
Post Wed Jul 11, 2012 7:29 pm
Big Graeme User avatar
100% League Network Moderator & Fan Site Editor
100% League Network Moderator & Fan Site Editor

Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2002 12:02 am
Posts: 26505
Location: On the set of NEDS...
What they mean is they couldn't find people to do this for the crappy wages they were paying.

All they had to do was pay a decent rate for the job, offer basic accommodation and transport and for the dole to make it easier for people to take these short term contracts.
Post Wed Jul 11, 2012 7:35 pm
cod'ead User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Joined: Sat May 25, 2002 10:49 am
Posts: 37347
Location: Zummerzet, where the zoider apples grow
It will be interesting to see just how much, if anything, G4S will be fined or have payments withheld/clawed back. I would hope it will be the total cost of providing fully-trained soldiers and not the minimum-waged dopes that G4S were relying on. Apparently the Home Office were comfortable with a JiT provision, in order to keep G4S's training costs to a minimum and were, up to the weekend, happy with the "we'll be alright on the night" messages they were getting.

Although this is a very serious matter, of more concern to me is the increasing use of the likes of G4S in future policing. What would've happened in last summer's riots if these clowns were anywhere near the problem?
The older I get, the better I was

Advice is what we seek when we already know the answer - but wish we didn't

I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full-frontal lobotomy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kirkstaller wrote: "All DNA shows is that we have a common creator."

cod'ead wrote: "I have just snotted weissbier all over my keyboard & screen"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin." - Aneurin Bevan
Post Wed Jul 11, 2012 7:54 pm
JerryChicken User avatar
Bronze RLFANS Member
Bronze RLFANS Member

Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2012 2:08 pm
Posts: 3343
Location: Leeds


You have to ask though, what sort of "security" can G4S offer other than a nightwatchman type duty or guiding visitors around the sites - a job that is already being fulfilled by free volunteers (thousands of them).

Bag searches and metal detector manning maybe, but I do hope that we weren't relying on them to counter a terrorist attack, which, lets be honest, is the main concern - its one thing to have a temporarily employed and quickly trained guard in a hat three sizes too big standing at the door way of one of the athletes quarters, but quite another thing to have that guard as the first line of defence in a Munich Olympics style terrorist attack.

I do hope there is a Plan B.
Someday everything is gonna be different, when I paint my masterpiece
----------------------------------------------------------
Online art gallery, selling original landscape artwork
----------------------------------------------------------
JerryChicken - The Blog
----------------------------------------------------------
Post Wed Jul 11, 2012 8:10 pm
Billinge_Lump User avatar
100% League Network
100% League Network

Joined: Mon Aug 05, 2002 3:32 pm
Posts: 14007
Location: He can smoke a pound in a single bound!
cod'ead wrote:
It will be interesting to see just how much, if anything, G4S will be fined or have payments withheld/clawed back. I would hope it will be the total cost of providing fully-trained soldiers and not the minimum-waged dopes that G4S were relying on. Apparently the Home Office were comfortable with a JiT provision, in order to keep G4S's training costs to a minimum and were, up to the weekend, happy with the "we'll be alright on the night" messages they were getting.

Although this is a very serious matter, of more concern to me is the increasing use of the likes of G4S in future policing. What would've happened in last summer's riots if these clowns were anywhere near the problem?


Apparently it's £50,000 per day per venue for not meeting staffing levels at venues.
I'm not Jesus Christ, I've come to accept that now.


[quote][b]XBrettKennyX wrote:[/b] Once more the anti SC brigade, purposely or otherwise fail to see the point.

Thick as pig swill.[/quote]
Post Wed Jul 11, 2012 8:27 pm
cod'ead User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Joined: Sat May 25, 2002 10:49 am
Posts: 37347
Location: Zummerzet, where the zoider apples grow
Billinge_Lump wrote:
Apparently it's £50,000 per day per venue for not meeting staffing levels at venues.


If so, that seems a bloody strange penalty. It would probably be cheaper for G4S to turn round now and say "we can't cover any of it, here's your £50k per day, per venue back, we'll just bank the difference ta"
The older I get, the better I was

Advice is what we seek when we already know the answer - but wish we didn't

I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full-frontal lobotomy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kirkstaller wrote: "All DNA shows is that we have a common creator."

cod'ead wrote: "I have just snotted weissbier all over my keyboard & screen"

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin." - Aneurin Bevan
Post Wed Jul 11, 2012 8:28 pm
Staffs FC User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 2:09 pm
Posts: 11731
Location: East Staffordshire
JerryChicken wrote:
You have to ask though, what sort of "security" can G4S offer other than a nightwatchman type duty or guiding visitors around the sites - a job that is already being fulfilled by free volunteers (thousands of them).

Bag searches and metal detector manning maybe, but I do hope that we weren't relying on them to counter a terrorist attack, which, lets be honest, is the main concern - its one thing to have a temporarily employed and quickly trained guard in a hat three sizes too big standing at the door way of one of the athletes quarters, but quite another thing to have that guard as the first line of defence in a Munich Olympics style terrorist attack.

I do hope there is a Plan B.


I don't think G4S are expected to be firing the missiles from the roofs of the surrounding blocks of flats.
"To play your best football you need players with enthusiasm and drive and energy." - Peter Sterling

Adam Pearson said not wrote:
I know there are two franchises and two clubs (in Hull) and that will remain forever more
Post Wed Jul 11, 2012 10:50 pm
Big Graeme User avatar
100% League Network Moderator & Fan Site Editor
100% League Network Moderator & Fan Site Editor

Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2002 12:02 am
Posts: 26505
Location: On the set of NEDS...
JerryChicken wrote:
I do hope there is a Plan B.


That would mean having a plan A to start with.
Post Thu Jul 12, 2012 7:50 am
peggy User avatar
Cheeky half-back
Cheeky half-back

Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 12:23 pm
Posts: 513
Personally I don’t see the problem, why not force the unemployed and those claiming disability benefits to fill the shortfall? For heaven’s sake those in wheelchairs can even provide their own seating as they man the entrances.

If we could only find some well meaning, professionally run, French organisation that could provide us with the names and addresses of those fit for work. :THINK:
"...……. et jusqu’a ma mort je me rappellerai chaque seconde de ce matin de janvier."

http://www.everyeighthours.com/
Post Thu Jul 12, 2012 8:25 am
Big Graeme User avatar
100% League Network Moderator & Fan Site Editor
100% League Network Moderator & Fan Site Editor

Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2002 12:02 am
Posts: 26505
Location: On the set of NEDS...
Listening to the phone ins last night and this morning it sounds like a huge cockup by G4S rather than the availability of a workforce.
Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Cronus, Dally, shinymcshine and 49 guests

Quick Reply

   

Return to The Sin Bin



All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.

Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, the RLSA (Rugby League Supporters Association) or the 100% League Network is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites, please email the author of this sub-site if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.
Copyright 1999 - 2014 RLFANS.COM