curious Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 There are two different scenarios here. One is businesses that are likely to have similar levels of business post-covid as pre-covid. They need to do what they can to retain employees for re-opening. Many may need more at least temporarily to cope with backlogs and demand and possibly to manage level 2 and 3 protocols. Others like Air NZ which predict a 90% reduction in business will not need large numbers of staff hence redundancies are inevitable and they might as well be getting on with them. I'd expect RITA would be closer to the latter category than the former though it's hard to know when we don't even have the half-year report let alone any indication of what they expect going forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freda Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 3 minutes ago, curious said: There are two different scenarios here. One is businesses that are likely to have similar levels of business post-covid as pre-covid. They need to do what they can to retain employees for re-opening. Many may need more at least temporarily to cope with backlogs and demand and possibly to manage level 2 and 3 protocols. Others like Air NZ which predict a 90% reduction in business will not need large numbers of staff hence redundancies are inevitable and they might as well be getting on with them. I'd expect RITA would be closer to the latter category than the former though it's hard to know when we don't even have the half-year report let alone any indication of what they expect going forward. If, however, Rita is insolvent, there will be nothing in the bin to competely comply with any contractual obligations. But, again, more knowledgeable commentators than moi will know how these situations work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJ Flash Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 54 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: So we are stuck with 600 RITA employees? I have no idea but if you have little or no money and you have to make a choice between staff redundancies and stakes money what would you choose and why. Im picking you will go one way the next person etc. It sums up human nature but ill leave it to the new RITA team to work out as they see all the numbers and have to make the future plans Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted April 9, 2020 Author Share Posted April 9, 2020 13 minutes ago, JJ Flash said: you have to make a choice between staff redundancies and stakes money what would you choose Stakes - That's what pays to keep the game going. I also think you are over playing the redundancy angle. Why is it other businesses can lay off and not RITA? In NZ there is no statutory obligation to provide redundancy. It must be written into employment contracts. Normally the notice period is 4 weeks. Given we won't see any significant uplift in betting for at least 8 weeks. How many have been let go? We used to get regular updates on the numbers and as stakeholders we are entitled to. They've been stopped. We are now over due for the half yearly report which would give us numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 1 hour ago, curious said: There are two different scenarios here. One is businesses that are likely to have similar levels of business post-covid as pre-covid. They need to do what they can to retain employees for re-opening. Many may need more at least temporarily to cope with backlogs and demand and possibly to manage level 2 and 3 protocols. Others like Air NZ which predict a 90% reduction in business will not need large numbers of staff hence redundancies are inevitable and they might as well be getting on with them. I'd expect RITA would be closer to the latter category than the former though it's hard to know when we don't even have the half-year report let alone any indication of what they expect going forward. I'd agree - I'd expect prudent management would assess the short to medium term requirements - and let that drive the decision of retention versus otherwise (and that would likely be a mixture of each in a lot of cases). When you have a business that is highly likely to be top heavy with staff such as RITA, I would have thought a perfect opportunity to remove many. Especially many that are dead wood where the position clearly doesn't currently exist. On problem with RITA, is that so many are likely to be dead wood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardigras Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 4 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: Stakes - That's what pays to keep the game going. I also think you are over playing the redundancy angle. Why is it other businesses can lay off and not RITA? In NZ there is no statutory obligation to provide redundancy. It must be written into employment contracts. Normally the notice period is 4 weeks. Given we won't see any significant uplift in betting for at least 8 weeks. How many have been let go? We used to get regular updates on the numbers and as stakeholders we are entitled to. They've been stopped. We are now over due for the half yearly report which would give us numbers. Yep, the employment contract would (should) define what the employee is entitled to. In cases such as this though, many may take the approach of being a good corporate citizen and not just throw their staff out on the basis of their contract. But even if you paid staff out 4 weeks, that is still likely to be a lot better than keeping them, if they are surplus to requirements for 12+ weeks. (Of course you are not entitled to the full 12 weeks of wage subsidy for any weeks the employee is not still effectively employed). So terminating an employee after 4 weeks, when you've received 12 weeks of subsidy - you are required to pay back the 8 weeks they are not in your employment. Normal employment laws are still in effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 The spread of COVID-19 is based on two factors. 1: How dense the population is. 2: How dense the population is. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted April 9, 2020 Author Share Posted April 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, mardigras said: Yep, the employment contract would (should) define what the employee is entitled to. In cases such as this though, many may take the approach of being a good corporate citizen and not just throw their staff out on the basis of their contract. But even if you paid staff out 4 weeks, that is still likely to be a lot better than keeping them, if they are surplus to requirements for 12+ weeks. (Of course you are not entitled to the full 12 weeks of wage subsidy for any weeks the employee is not still effectively employed). So terminating an employee after 4 weeks, when you've received 12 weeks of subsidy - you are required to pay back the 8 weeks they are not in your employment. Normal employment laws are still in effect. Bet your bottom dollar they'll start screaming soon we need to close more tracks. That'll go done like a bucket of cold vomit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 4 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: Bet your bottom dollar they'll start screaming soon we need to close more tracks. That'll go done like a bucket of cold vomit! Why would RITA want to close tracks? Can't see why they would care. They just want us producing product for them to take bets on don't they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted April 10, 2020 Author Share Posted April 10, 2020 12 minutes ago, curious said: Why would RITA want to close tracks? Can't see why they would care. They just want us producing product for them to take bets on don't they? The Mesara report blurs the line doesn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 30 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: The Mesara report blurs the line doesn't it? Blurs a lot of things. It IS a bit of a blur. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted April 10, 2020 Author Share Posted April 10, 2020 The point I was making is I'm sure that those in charge are still thinking they have a right to the clubs capital. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freda Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 58 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: The point I was making is I'm sure that those in charge are still thinking they have a right to the clubs capital. Yeah, 'fraid I agree there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted April 10, 2020 Author Share Posted April 10, 2020 This subsidy is a nonsense. I've been looking up company's I know that have more capital than a bull can shit and can operate solely online and many of them have taken the dosh for themselves and their families. Once the breaks come off there will be a shite load of dosh sloshing around. Watch out inflation! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted April 10, 2020 Author Share Posted April 10, 2020 TE AKAU STUD LIMITED 54 $150,000.00 08/04/2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted April 10, 2020 Author Share Posted April 10, 2020 HAUNUI FARM LP 20 $134,932.80 08/04/2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted April 10, 2020 Author Share Posted April 10, 2020 NEW ZEALAND BLOODSTOCK LIMITED 37 $150,000.00 08/04/2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted April 10, 2020 Author Share Posted April 10, 2020 WELLINGTON RACING CLUB INCORPORATED 6 $39,348.00 08/04/2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted April 10, 2020 Author Share Posted April 10, 2020 NEW ZEALAND METROPOLITAN TROTTING CLUB 101 $582,657.60 08/04/2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curious Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 1 hour ago, Chief Stipe said: The point I was making is I'm sure that those in charge are still thinking they have a right to the clubs capital. Maybe but they've been doing that for years and I don't see it happening unless they get this draconian and illegal legislation through and I can't see that happening either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freda Posted April 10, 2020 Share Posted April 10, 2020 1 minute ago, curious said: Maybe but they've been doing that for years and I don't see it happening unless they get this draconian and illegal legislation through and I can't see that happening either. Hope you're right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muzenza365 Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 On 10/04/2020 at 9:40 AM, Freda said: I'm not that au fait with employment laws...but I surmise that it might be cheaper to keep staff on with subsidy than to lay off and fork out redundancy. It doesn't appear to be the case,as Karen Zimmerman just got made redundant from Tiley Racing, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 4 minutes ago, muzenza365 said: It doesn't appear to be the case,as Karen Zimmerman just got made redundant from Tiley Racing, does that mean she is not amongst the 9 Business Name Number of employees paid Total amount paid Last updated TILEY RACING LIMITED 9 $63,266.40 08/04/2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freda Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 1 hour ago, muzenza365 said: It doesn't appear to be the case,as Karen Zimmerman just got made redundant from Tiley Racing, But we have no idea what the terms of her contract were. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Centaur Posted April 14, 2020 Share Posted April 14, 2020 What gets me that there are businesses owned by members of the so called NZ rich list which cater for billionaires coming to NZ so hardly essential for New Zealanders. Yet these biz owners are the first to hold their hand out to the government. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.