To think these stewards at the pageant should have been treated better

[enimmead]

www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/04/jubilee-pageant-unemployed

"A group of long-term unemployed jobseekers were bussed into London to work as unpaid stewards during the diamond jubilee celebrations and told to sleep under London Bridge before working on the river pageant.

Up to 30 jobseekers and another 50 people on apprentice wages were taken to London by coach from Bristol, Bath and Plymouth as part of the government's Work Programme.

Two jobseekers, who did not want to be identified in case they lost their benefits, said they had to camp under London Bridge the night before the pageant. They told the Guardian they had to change into security gear in public, had no access to toilets for 24 hours, and were taken to a swampy campsite outside London after working a 14-hour shift in the pouring rain on the banks of the Thames on Sunday."

Ok - so it's the Guardian but it seems these people were bussed in as part of the new deal programme to get work experience, had to camp out.

"Close Protection UK confirmed that it was using up to 30 unpaid staff and 50 apprentices, who were paid £2.80 an hour, for the three-day event in London. A spokesman said the unpaid work was a trial for paid roles at the Olympics, which it had also won a contract to staff. Unpaid staff were expected to work two days out of the three-day holiday.

The firm said it had spent considerable resources on training and equipment that stewards could keep and that the experience was voluntary and did not affect jobseekers keeping their benefits.

The woman said that people were picked up at Bristol at 11pm on Saturday and arrived in London at 3am on Sunday. "We all got off the coach and we were stranded on the side of the road for 20 minutes until they came back and told us all to follow them," she said. "We followed them under London Bridge and that's where they told us to camp out for the night ? It was raining and freezing."

A 30-year-old steward told the Guardian that the conditions under the bridge were "cold and wet and we were told to get our head down [to sleep]". He said that it was impossible to pitch a tent because of the concrete floor."

Maybe they had to wait under the bridge after the long coach trip but it does not sound very good.

Having an agenda doesn't mean they lie about stuff.

Show me one paper that doesn't have a stance. Of course they all do.

Papers don't often lie. There is often an element of truth in the story spun to suit their own agenda.

You may not believe The Guardian but perhaps you might believe the BBC.

Frankly the comment that this was "valid work experience" totally beggar's belief :(

"work experience" except without the experience of being paid.

One of my friends was shipped up from plymouth to work there, it sounded pretty shoddy when he told me about it. I wouldn't like the idea of a group of over tired unenthusiastic unpaid 'trainees' being
in charge of anythink tbh... Not saying they wouldn't do their best but where is the incentive to work hard?

"Afaik, councils were duty bound to take the lowest contract bid, regardless of how unfeasible it appeared"

that is true of my local council, they have to put jobs to tender and anyone can bid online, there's a well known story around here of a random man who put in the lowest bid for a big big job and won it (he had no experience or staff at the time), he did complete if for the price agreed in the end, he had to

It doesn't go by merit at all, once it goes out to tender they apparently have to take the cheapest

So they were expected to arrive at 3am after a long bus journey, stand under a bridge for 90 mins in the freezing cold and then expected to steward the jubilee all day. For no money?

So working 24 hrs? For no pay? Fuck that.

YANBU.

This is a shocking way to treat people in a so-called civilised society.

And if you're in the crowd, do you really want those who are meant to be looking out for your safety, to be under-trained, sleep-deprived, cold, wet and miserable, before they've even started their shift?

the ones I saw looked a bit lost and as if they didn't really know what they were doing.

Now I understand why.

I do believe this and think it's a disgrace.

Why did they bus them in from Bristol? Haven't we got enough unemployed people in London?

I think probably no one would expect them to provide proper accommodation for the extra two and a half hours, but you might expect Close Protection to pay the coach to wait, so that they could at least keep in the warm. And maybe pay people something for what is effectively a 24 hour shift, And perhaps also not to use such a high profile event as 'training' for the Olympics.

I actually believe in some form of workfare, despite being a bit of a lefty. However, training people to work in this industry isn't quite what I have in mind, because not only is it low paid and low skilled, it's highly seasonal and casual. Unless they are a supervisor, i suspect most people doing this sort of work don't do it as their main source of income because you basically can't live off the earnings.

PS local authorities are not obliged to accept the lowest bid, they can apply quality based criteria.

DP worked as a football steward for minimum wage when we first moved to London we rented a tiny basement for £50/week. I was earning a whopping £10,000 a year.

His income certainly kept the wolf from the door - paid properly, at me or above, these jobs can be worth having. But it's crap like bussing people bloody miles and not paying them due to 'training' that makes it do onerous.

Security guards and stewards are employed at my workplace and they are treated very shoddily indeed, so this doesn't surprise me at all. Even those on permanent contracts get basic pay, crap conditions and minimal, if any, training.

Sorry for going off topic slightly but it always astounds me as it is an important job, can't imagine any of the guards at my place putting their life on the line for minimum wage, and I wouldn't blame them either!

Councils have to assess tenders using the methods they declare at invitation stage which can be price only or price / quality split depending on nature and value of potential contract. They'd be foolish if they didn't have a clause along lines of not being bound to accept the lowest or any tender which is standard practice. Certainly local gov tenders I see in my job include this type of clause.

I expect they bussed them hundreds of miles so that the impoverished unemployed people wouldn't walk off in disgust and buy a train ticket home.

"training" my arse.

I know the writer who wrote this and can confirm it is not made up. HTH?

I once sued the Guardian and got an apology.

Doesn't mean I don't believe this.

Doesn't surprise me and its pretty rubbish really. Bit like people of JSA working in charity shops. It would ok if it would lead to paid permanent employment but charity shops rarely recruit.

BBC's running the story too www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18329526

It's disgusting, using slave labour to lavish attention on multi millionaires. It's shocking that they force people to work unpaid in normal work places but this makes it even worse.

Glad the Beeb are running it. How DARE this company lie and claim this is work experience? Stewarding at high profile public events with crowds of thousands is NOT the place for workfare, even if you support workfare - you want properly trained and experienced people who know what to do if something goes wrong. Sheer luck people weren't hurt as a result of this appalling company's profiteering. And they are providing stewards for the Olympics? God help us all. (And what about security? Don't tell me all these people have been vetted. That would cost money.)

Is this ow the company generally treats employees, or just those who they aren't paying? ere the paid employees having tea and cake in the coach while the unpaid shivered outside?

I think that makes two seperate issues, and one that no one seems very clearl about.

If it's all treated the same and that's how they've always gone it - bad. But it's a general company issue about staff treatment. If it's how they treat the unpaid workers while the paid workers are living the high life then that's a very different issue and considerably worse.

If the first, it has nothing to do with "workfare" and more to do with company practices, and painting it as specific to unpaid work is disingenous.

edam - there were 30 people on "training". I'd assume there were hundreds of "proper" employees working alongside the trainees, that's how training works. A million people attentended the flotilla apparently, I don't think the entire thing was solely down to one sole band of intrepid trainees. They were probably in charge of pointing out the loos, not guarding the queen.

On another thread, someone who was there in the Jubilee crowds has posted about how ill-equipped, uniformed and generally useless the private security staff were. Big crowds require careful, trained management to ensure no-one gets hurt - that's just basic, let alone the extra requirements when you are dealing with the potential threat from terrorists. You don't need someone with no experience, shipped in from Bristol, who has no idea about the geography of London.