Jockey's Union

Heard a rumour I have no proof but I certainly think it is work in progress...the Jock's are trying to get a union together managed by two ex senior jocks to represent them. They not happy with no increase this year (which I actually think is a fair point for discussion) as there has been no stakes increase either due to we know what..BULLDUST DIVIDENDS..now if Phum would like to take my colours away for not agreeing with this in my opinion unacceptable practise..please do so..I will save a fortune however you will need jobs for those that I help employ in the industry

Just watched the episode of the Simpsons Guest starring Trevor Denman ,the Jocks in the episode were hilarious.All over the World pay has been frozen,bugger the Jocks !

Hibs I love the simpsons. Is there anywhere i can get a copy of that episode?

Cheers guys would also enjoy the link, but getting back to the increase.

I feel that ALL employees should get a cost of living increase to keep up with inflation and often Unions push the boat, however many jocks on bread line or even below.

So I would suggest a sliding scale, top jocks over ? 500,000k frozen

A must for guys on the bottom end of the scale...............would even guess that it would be against the law not to meet the CPI.

tracys element Wrote:

---

> Hibs I love the simpsons. Is there anywhere i can
> get a copy of that episode?


Google this episode saddlesore-galactica

Wow Dave,socialism at it's worst.....lets restrict the top,really professional jocks,at the top of their game,and use the proceeds to improve the lot of the mediocre?
More top boys will move away and we will have another lowering of the bar within the industry..........
Why not raise the bar by ensuring that some of the mediocre boys,who appear to be the prima donna's,up their work ethic and then deserve more,which in turn leads to earning more.
When a couple of the jocks,some time ago, upped their riding fees,driven by supply and demand,a lot of the names that followed had an absolute bloody cheek........some I wouldn't want on my horse,never mind pay more!
LET MARKET FORCES PREVAIL.....some may find it worthwhile riding in the rain!

Just had a look at last years stats and took the jockey 30th on the national list and his earnings were R600000+ for the year before tax.Any presents not included.Rides 3 meetings a week normally.

rob faux Wrote:

---

> LET MARKET FORCES PREVAIL.....some may find it
> worthwhile riding in the rain!

We should have a Quote of the Week award. Maybe I can get Hollywood to sponsor a prize and we can all vote for the winner. Lol.

Rob I cant think of any other industry where the salaries (or should I say wages) have been frozen?

The point I make is that it has now become a norm where top salaries have been capped however the masses on the bread line have been given at least CPI

Not sure about the jockeys situation considering Craigs post, what the minimum rate is for the jocks?

I'm with Rob on this one; I work for a large American based computer company - due to the economy and the state of the industry, we have had NO increases for the last 3 years - that's life, take it or leave it - the unions in this country get away with murder imo

Frodo Wrote:

---

> I'm with Rob on this one; I work for a large
> American based computer company - due to the
> economy and the state of the industry, we have had
> NO increases for the last 3 years - that's life,
> take it or leave it - the unions in this country
> get away with murder imo

My 2 years no increase don't seem so bad then....()

The one interesting point to consider is that "professions" are not really allowed to belong to unions..now is being a jockey a profession or not? What I did say is that I think they have a valid point "for discussion".

I accept fully that most industries around the world have frozen salaries and employee benefits to mainly avoid retrenchments..however here we have a company which continues to pay unrealistic dividends at the expense of stakes and salaries. Now to me that doesnt make sense.

The new companies act might play a role here in that in future the shareholders will have to approve all directors fees and emoluments and that should be interesting as the RA members will have to give the RA directors on the Phum Board the go ahead for any director emoluments, What further interests me is that SURELY the RA members also have to give the directors representing their shareholding, which we know is the majority in Phum the go ahead to approve the level of dividends??

Or am I wrong??