Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Brixton Ritzy staff in pay dispute for London Living Wage with Picturehouse Cinemas

Rushy said:
In general bosses do try to get the most out of those who work for them. That is not the same as being exploitative. They might be exploitative and they might not. You seem to be mixing terminology to make a point.
Click to expand...

What point?
 
Rushy said:
In general bosses do try to get the most out of those who work for them. That is not the same as being exploitative. They might be exploitative and they might not. You seem to be mixing terminology to make a point.
Click to expand...

It's certainly feels exploitative when one is working for a boss. This isn't personal. It's what one expects a boss to do.

I fail to see what I've saying here is controversial.

Its based on personal experience and what friends and acquaintances say to me.
 
Gramsci said:
It's certainly feels exploitative when one is working for a boss. This isn't personal. It's what one expects a boss to do.

I fail to see what I've saying here is controversial.

Its based on personal experience and what friends and acquaintances say to me.
Click to expand...
'Exploitative' to me looks like a company raking in ever-fatter profits off the backs of their staff every year while refusing to pay them what is independently deemed to the minimum required to live off in London

The cinema chain saw revenue rise 17.8 per cent to £420.2 million in the six months to June 30 [2017], while pre-tax profit increased 57.5 per cent to £48.2 million.
Box office hits drive growth at Cineworld
Click to expand...
In 2016 Cineworld (Picturehouse's parent company) posted profits of £93.8m, an 18.3% increase on the previous year, whilst CEO Mooky Greidinger earned over $2 million. Yet they claim that they cannot afford to meet workers needs, refusing to take part in official negotiations.
Living Staff Living Wage - BECTU
Click to expand...
 
Gramsci said:
It's certainly feels exploitative when one is working for a boss. This isn't personal. It's what one expects a boss to do.

I fail to see what I've saying here is controversial.

Its based on personal experience and what friends and acquaintances say to me.
Click to expand...
I think where I disagree is you seem to be saying anyone who works for any boss is being exploited. Correct me if I have misunderstood you though.
 
But surely everyone (who works) effectively has a boss? Even if you're self employed, you are working for your customers who direct your work and pay your wages.... like a boss.
 
Mr Retro said:
I think where I disagree is you seem to be saying anyone who works for any boss is being exploited. Correct me if I have misunderstood you though.
Click to expand...

I did say in previous post that this wasn't being personal. I'm not being moralistic about bosses. My view is that this is a Capitalist society. That labour is a commodity that people have to sell. Following Marx. Which fits into my observations of how work operates. The relationship between boss and worker is an unequal one. One does not elect ones boss. The failing of bourgeois democracy is that it's partial. The economic sphere us excluded. So yes anyone who works for a boss is being exploited. There are however different degrees of exploitation. Picturehouse aren't the same as say Sports Direct. But exploitation of labour is fundamental aspects of how Capitalism works. In a Capitalist society ones labour is not free.

Getting back to Ritzy. The Living Wage dispute is example of class struggle. Picture house for what they might see as sound economic reasons don't want to be committed to Living Wage and other benefits. They would argue that Picture house workers get reasonable deal compared to other jobs in London. The Ritzy workers/ Picture house workers are trying to get maximum they can from the employer for no increased work load. It's quite understandable that Picture house oppose Living Wage on one level.
 
Gramsci said:
The Ritzy workers/ Picture house workers are trying to get maximum they can from the employer for no increased work load. It's quite understandable that Picture house oppose Living Wage on one level.
Click to expand...
Well, to be fair, the workers are trying to get what has been independently deemed as the minimum amount required to live in London.
 
Gramsci said:
I did say in previous post that this wasn't being personal. I'm not being moralistic about bosses. My view is that this is a Capitalist society. That labour is a commodity that people have to sell. Following Marx. Which fits into my observations of how work operates. The relationship between boss and worker is an unequal one. One does not elect ones boss. The failing of bourgeois democracy is that it's partial. The economic sphere us excluded. So yes anyone who works for a boss is being exploited. There are however different degrees of exploitation. Picturehouse aren't the same as say Sports Direct. But exploitation of labour is fundamental aspects of how Capitalism works. In a Capitalist society ones labour is not free.

Getting back to Ritzy. The Living Wage dispute is example of class struggle. Picture house for what they might see as sound economic reasons don't want to be committed to Living Wage and other benefits. They would argue that Picture house workers get reasonable deal compared to other jobs in London. The Ritzy workers/ Picture house workers are trying to get maximum they can from the employer for no increased work load. It's quite understandable that Picture house oppose Living Wage on one level.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, these are your observations, which I think are interesting, about how work operates. Following somebody who did their writing the thick end of 200 years ago. They are not my practical experiences in 2017, thankfully.

I think this is a country that wants to move to the left and wants more fairness for everybody. I worry when intelligent people on the left say things like "anyone who works for a boss is being exploited". It will scare people off. Everybody who works has a boss. Even powerful CEO's. It's just not true that everybody is being exploited.

I *do* think anybody who doesn't get a LLW and be expected to work in London is being exploited. I also think the LLW is too low and too simplistic. I mentioned it earlier, the retail sector in particular is a disgrace.
 
Mr Retro said:
Everybody who works has a boss.
Click to expand...
Nah. That's way too simplistic a claim. Many freelancers have no one who who fits the traditional definition of a 'boss' telling them what to do, how to act, when to start work, how to dress etc. They work with clients and companies and take on the jobs they choose, when they want and turn down the ones they don't want.
 
Mr Retro said:
Fair enough, these are your observations, which I think are interesting, about how work operates. Following somebody who did their writing the thick end of 200 years ago. They are not my practical experiences in 2017, thankfully.

I think this is a country that wants to move to the left and wants more fairness for everybody. I worry when intelligent people on the left say things like "anyone who works for a boss is being exploited". It will scare people off. Everybody who works has a boss. Even powerful CEO's. It's just not true that everybody is being exploited.

I *do* think anybody who doesn't get a LLW and be expected to work in London is being exploited. I also think the LLW is too low and too simplistic. I mentioned it earlier, the retail sector in particular is a disgrace.
Click to expand...

I'm not following somebody who wrote 200 years ago.

Last week read a good piece in the New Statesman about the rise of Corbyn. John McDonnell said after the failing out if the banks people started reading Marx again. This was a crisis if Capitalism. When Gordon Brown and New Labour ideology said this would not happen.

I was one of many who went back to read Marx in the original. I've only read Volume one of Capital so far . And on Butchers Apron recommendation watching the geographers David Harverys lectures on it.

Reading Volume one and I'm surprised how much of it resonates with now. The chapter on the working day for example.

I think a generational shift is going on. Corbyn appealed to young people. My brother's 18 year old daughter is Corbyn fan and has been asking me what to read. I'm pretty staggered as I thought my kind of attitudes were finished.

I don't think I'm scaring her off. Bought her a couple of books and she was delighted.

And I don't even think I'm a proper socialist. My background is second generation "alternative society".

I don't agree people, especially younger age group, are being put off by lefty opinions. The opposite is the case. I'm surprised.

I just wish the now in there 40s children of Thatcher would step aside. People like Chuka.
 
Had a chat with one of the the Ritzy workers who was there this evening. She recognized me as (former) Ritzy regular. She thanked those old regulars like me who had been boycotting Ritzy.
 
Last edited:
friendofdorothy said:
I used to be a Ritzy member, but since the boycott I've discovered the joys of Peckhamplex - only £4.99 every show!
Cineworld would have to do a lot to ever win me back.
Click to expand...
I agree.

The only thing Ritzy does and Plex doesn't is live Opera as far as I know.
 
I have a life long interest in film. When I was growing up it was normal cheap entertainment. In my town going to cinema was no big thing.

When I was first in London it needs to be remembered that living in inner cities wasn't popular. With competition from TV it looked like cinemas were dying. Scala, Ritzy, Renoir, BFI were kept going by enthusiastics. Cinephiles and the "dirty mac brigade" kept alternative and foreign language film alive.

What I always liked about it was that it wasn't snobby.

Fast forwarding 30 plus years and its all changed. Thanks to loyal cinephiles cinemas in London have survived. Curzon and Picturehouse have gone upmarket. Curxon in particular. The old cinema goers like me are pushed out.

I don't know if Peckhamplex pay living wage. What they do have is long lease on the cinema. The Council want to " regenerate" the area. But Peckhamplex long lease is scuppering that. When I go to Peckhamplex it's always busy. The demographic isn't just the well off. Given the area hasn't been gentrified yet the business model works. Negotiated long lease when it wasn't popular, cheap prices mean lot of bums on seats. It's probably quite profitable.

What winds me up with Picturehouse and Curzon ( who to pay LL) is that there business model is jettison loyal customers from the ",bad times" in !London" and go for the new better off demographic. It's shit.

I've talked to people in Curzon and Picturehouse. They say they miss there old customers like me who find it hard to afford to go now.

I'm supporting the Ritzy boycott. If Peckhamplex workers did the same I would support that.

Some of us who post here only just scrape by. Options are limited. Do my best to support a long dispute at Ritzy. If Picturehouse workers win it will have knock on effect in other areas of industry.

If everyone got at least living wage and proper conditions at work there wouldn't be these arguments.
 
Last edited:
Gramsci said:
When I was first in London it needs to be remembered that living in inner cities wasn't popular. With competition from TV it looked like cinemas were dying. Scala, Ritzy, Renoir, BFI were kept going by enthusiastics. Cinephiles and the "dirty mac brigade" kept alternative and foreign language film alive.
Click to expand...
In the case of the Ritzy, it was kept going thanks to support from Lambeth so it's unforgivable that we've got to the situation where Cineworld are now pricing out the locals.
A collaboration between Lambeth Council and the management of the time ensured the cinema's survival, with the facade being rebuilt and restored to near-original condition
Ritzy Cinema - Wikipedia
Click to expand...
 
This is a good piece:

Picturehouse management implied they were the ones being unfairly victimised. The company asserted that, once paid breaks are added in, its hourly wages of £9.30 in London and £8.36 elsewhere were equivalent to £9.92 and £8.92 over an eight-hour shift and that these had been agreed with its own in-house union, The Forum (described by protesters as a “sham union”). Its basic rates of hourly pay were also higher than at Cineworld or Odeon — and at many other independent venues in London. The company also described itself as “one of the highest-paying employers in the cinema industry”.

To some observers, the management’s refusal to come to an agreement with the protesters was baffling. If the cinema chain really was paying the equivalent of the Living Wage, as it claimed, why not then just pay the actual Living Wage? That would end the dispute.
Click to expand...
What the Picturehouse pay dispute means for the UK exhibition industry
 
More strike actions on Sunday and Monday:

ritzy-workers-2015-campaign-2.jpg



Brixton Ritzy workers out on strike on Sun 5th and Mon 6th Nov for Living Wage Week
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

editor
Homophobia in Brixton
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
Tulster218
T
editor
Where to watch England vs Spain Euro 2024 final in Brixton
Replies
6
Views
398
madolesance
M
N
Looking for an affordable dance studio space for hire in Brixton or South London ?
Replies
8
Views
485
Ms Ordinary
M
story
Palestine support action in Brixton
Replies
23
Views
1K
8ball
8ball
K
House prices in Brixton
Replies
18
Views
2K
Shippou-Sensei
Shippou-Sensei
Back
Top Bottom