Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

West Norwood news, chitter chatter and gossip

Am hearing reports of gunfire up Knights Hill - can’t confirm but from two separate sources. Please take care if you’re in the area.

Update: am told it was an attempted drive-by with a shotgun but they missed their target.
 

colacubes

Well-Known Member
Cheers. Is this a ‘standard’ monthly-sized event, o a special event?
This is pretty standard, first Sunday of every month (though there is a break Jan-March). Anybody is welcome to get involved, it's all completely volunteer run.

Looks like this will be the last sunny Feast this year! I'll be working with the bands on St Luke's steps - so come and say hi if you're around. I'll be at the sound desk, probably in orange hi-vis :thumbs:
 
Some news re West Norwood High St that may please/enrage residents. I'm told by a fairly reliable source that 400 Rabbits (pizza and craft beer bods from Crystal Palace) have taken on the old Kahvah premises.

Four Hundred Rabbits

They had tried to move into WN back in early 2017 but it fell through.

No news re opening dates but I'm quite pleased as their pizzas are great. And believe they do a pizza and beer for a tenner on Tuesdays :thumbs:
 

clandestino

no llevar papel
In sadder news, Cul De Sac, the charming little cafe by the Post Office, has closed. There's posters in the window for somewhere new - some guys were in there doing it up the other day. I didn't manage to see what's going there, but it looked a bit more like Otter Trading or somewhere like that.
 

colacubes

Well-Known Member
In sadder news, Cul De Sac, the charming little cafe by the Post Office, has closed. There's posters in the window for somewhere new - some guys were in there doing it up the other day. I didn't manage to see what's going there, but it looked a bit more like Otter Trading or somewhere like that.
Yeah shame :( I saw the sign yesterday and it was being advertised as a bar/cafe due to open end of September.
 

Maharani

Just like Heaven
Anyone know what’s coming next to the independent pharmacy on the high street. There’s a licencing ap on the front so no doubt a food/drinks joint.
 

editor

hiraethified
21p less than London living wage then
You realise that the Living Wage is the absolute minimum it's calculated that people can live off? And the whole point is that Lambeth are bigging themselves as supporters of the Living Wage but then hand over millions to a profit-scooping multi-national who won't pay the Living Wage?
 
You realise that the Living Wage is the absolute minimum it's calculated that people can live off? And the whole point is that Lambeth are bigging themselves as supporters of the Living Wage but then hand over millions to a profit-scooping multi-national who won't pay the Living Wage?
I'm not going to get into an argument about this, and I'm not saying I don't support the Living Wage. But it's fair to add the benefits which many other businesses locally won't pay. The membership bonus isn't made clear but this is a really decent package. If people take advantage of some of the benefits here (like food and free coffee and nighttime allowance etc) then they can be effectively paid more than the London Living Wage. That isn't me saying that it's OK - you might not want free unlimited cinema tickets and you might not eat popcorn or drink coffee or soft drinks, but this is a pretty decent benefits package.

*Membership bonus adding between 10 and 25p to each hour worked (excludes Ritzy) [No idea why Ritzy isn't included but we're not talking about the Ritzy here]
*Paid breaks. So staff working an 8 hour shift, are paid for 8 hours but only work 7.5
*Membership to The Forum - an official, recognised staff union with bargaining rights
*Statutory paternity, pension, sick and holiday pay
*Unlimited Cineworld and Picturehouse Cinema tickets (subject to availability)
*Two tickets per week for guests
*Free eye tests (for those using screens)
*Cycle to work scheme
*Free popcorn, soft drinks and hot drinks
*30% off all food and beverages
*Late night working allowance


Lambeth Council's apparent double standards is another matter. I don't know enough about that so i won't comment. But West Norwood now at least has a library, and a community room, none of which we have had for a very long time. Oh, and a cinema.

I'm adding this to the thread merely for context, not in support of Cineworld.
 
You realise that the Living Wage is the absolute minimum it's calculated that people can live off? And the whole point is that Lambeth are bigging themselves as supporters of the Living Wage but then hand over millions to a profit-scooping multi-national who won't pay the Living Wage?
If the Living Wage was the absolute minimum that people can live off then we wouldn't have any businesses in West Norwood, because workers couldn't support themselves

Picturehouse is one of the better paying businesses round here. And yes, that is a bad thing.
 

editor

hiraethified
If the Living Wage was the absolute minimum that people can live off then we wouldn't have any businesses in West Norwood, because workers couldn't support themselves.
You haven't thought this through. A lot of workers on low wages will be on benefits, so we're all effectively propping up shitty businesses who won't pay their staff enough to live off, and we're all lining the bosses' overstuffed pockets.

Research published last week by Citizens UK found that companies in the UK are paying their workers so little that the taxpayer has to top up wages to the tune of £11bn a year. The four big supermarkets (Tesco, Asda, Sainsburys and Morrisons) alone are costing just under £1bn a year in tax credits and extra benefits payments.

This is a direct transfer from the rest of society to some of the largest businesses in the country. To put the figure in perspective, the total cost of benefit fraud last year was just £1bn. Corporate scrounging costs 11 times that.

Worse, this is a direct subsidy for poverty pay. If supermarkets and other low-paying employers know they can secure work even at derisory wages, since pay will be topped up by the state, they have no incentive to offer higher wages.

None of this makes sense. We are all, in effect, paying a huge sum of money so that we can continue to underpay the 22% of workers who are earning below the Living Wage – the level at which it is possible to live without government subsidies. The only possible beneficiaries are business owners.
Taxpayers spend £11bn to top up low wages paid by UK companies
 
You haven't thought this through. A lot of workers on low wages will be on benefits, so we're all effectively propping up shitty businesses who won't pay their staff enough to live off, and we're all lining the bosses' overstuffed pockets.



Taxpayers spend £11bn to top up low wages paid by UK companies
Yes, fair enough. That’s largely aimed at a lot of the big businesses. And I’d add that the vast majority of businesses in the uk are very small ones and a lot of them are really struggling.
 

editor

hiraethified
Yes, fair enough. That’s largely aimed at a lot of the big businesses. And I’d add that the vast majority of businesses in the uk are very small ones and a lot of them are really struggling.
Yes, but Picturehouse/Cineworld are a fucking huge, multi-national company, raking in multi-million profits so they should be leading the way - especially since they're being part financed by the council.
 
Yes, but Picturehouse/Cineworld are a fucking huge, multi-national company, raking in multi-million profits so they should be leading the way - especially since they're being part financed by the council.
I was responding to your wider point not regarding Cineworld.

Happy to respond to your view regarding Cineworld taking into account the benefits package.

ETA: just to be clear (because I know how important this is) I am not supporting Cineworld here, just adding facts to the discussion
 

shakespearegirl

just worked out taglines
Yes, but Picturehouse/Cineworld are a fucking huge, multi-national company, raking in multi-million profits so they should be leading the way - especially since they're being part financed by the council.
Given that Lambeth became a Living Wage employer in 2012, they should be ensuring that any company they finance/give grants to/donate property to are Living Wage employers. This should be a pre-condition before they even enter into conversations with potential companies.

This is the guff from the council website during Living Wage week last year:

The London Living Wage of £9.75 per hour is now paid as the minimum wage on 99 per cent of Lambeth Council contracts, with the ambition to get full coverage coming closer.

The council first became a London Living Wage employer in 2012, and backs the rate to help reduce inequality.

Successes include getting all 30 of the council’s adult social care providers paying the wage to their 2,217 employees, three-quarters of whom live in Lambeth.

The next step will be negotiations with contractor Veolia to pay the London Living Wage rate to staff working on its environmental services contract with the council.

Word from the Cabinet
Cllr Paul McGlone, Lambeth Council’s deputy leader, said: “I want to thank all the businesses and contractors that have signed up. It is our aim to see every business and organisation in the borough pay their staff the London Living Wage.

“Since 2012 I have seen first-hand the difference receiving the London Living Wage can make. Many struggle on low incomes and better pay can make a real difference for them and their families.

“We have made huge progress over the last five-years, going from one-per-cent of our contracts being compliant to 99-per-cent, and I’m determined we will reach the wage for all our contractors.”

Since becoming an accredited London Living Wage employer in 2012 the council has also been encouraging businesses in the borough to follow suit and ensure their staff get decent pay.
 
Given that Lambeth became a Living Wage employer in 2012, they should be ensuring that any company they finance/give grants to/donate property to are Living Wage employers. This should be a pre-condition before they even enter into conversations with potential companies.

This is the guff from the council website during Living Wage week last year:

The London Living Wage of £9.75 per hour is now paid as the minimum wage on 99 per cent of Lambeth Council contracts, with the ambition to get full coverage coming closer.

The council first became a London Living Wage employer in 2012, and backs the rate to help reduce inequality.

Successes include getting all 30 of the council’s adult social care providers paying the wage to their 2,217 employees, three-quarters of whom live in Lambeth.

The next step will be negotiations with contractor Veolia to pay the London Living Wage rate to staff working on its environmental services contract with the council.

Word from the Cabinet
Cllr Paul McGlone, Lambeth Council’s deputy leader, said: “I want to thank all the businesses and contractors that have signed up. It is our aim to see every business and organisation in the borough pay their staff the London Living Wage.

“Since 2012 I have seen first-hand the difference receiving the London Living Wage can make. Many struggle on low incomes and better pay can make a real difference for them and their families.

“We have made huge progress over the last five-years, going from one-per-cent of our contracts being compliant to 99-per-cent, and I’m determined we will reach the wage for all our contractors.”

Since becoming an accredited London Living Wage employer in 2012 the council has also been encouraging businesses in the borough to follow suit and ensure their staff get decent pay.
Yes, I agree they should be. But the contracts they rely on (e.g. waste disposal) can't be easily chucked out if somebody doesn't pay LLW, otherwise there would be nobody to clean the streets.

It's a mess, and fucked up that we even have to have an 'accredited' wage.
 
Top