2,000 Sports Direct staff each in line for a £76,500 windfal

[Chimps_tea_party]

From the Tory Trumpet (Daily Mail)...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... l?ico=news" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;^headlines

Thousands of shop workers at Sports Direct are in line for a bonus worth £76,500 after the High Street retailer posted bumper profits.

The firm, which owns 396 shops including Lillywhites in London’s Piccadilly, has benefited from unprecedented success in British sport and has attracted more shoppers by slashing prices and revamping stores.

It is set to distribute millions of shares among 2,000 staff – many of whom earn a basic salary of around £20,000.

The firm says its generous incentive scheme is what has driven annual profit up 40 per cent to £207.2million.

‘The share scheme has been the glue to the performance,’ said chief executive Dave Forsey. ‘It has combined with better products, low prices and good value to deliver record results.

‘If you have so many people linked to performance, from thousands in the back office to the shop floor, all driven by such an incentive, it is very powerful.

'Everyone is thinking about how they can challenge the business and they really do care about every aspect. It is a very compelling culture – good for consumers and great for employees.’

Mr Forsey said he has been contacted by a number of non-competing retailers wanting to emulate the incentive scheme.

Britain’s biggest sports goods retailer, which is controlled by Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley, created the lucrative bonus plan in 2009.

It is set to pay out to eligible staff – more than 2,000 of its 23,000-strong workforce – next month. An employee on £20,000 a year in 2009 will pick up 12,000 shares – worth around £76,500.

[spoodoo]

Once again sports direct staff get a huge bonus ,,, there profit goes righ through the chain ,not just the execs etc . Wake up Royal Mail !,,,

[cloherty1976]

That's what you get for a company listed on the stock market. Shares rise so staff can reap the rewards.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

That's what you get for a company listed on the stock market. Shares rise so staff can reap the rewards.

To be pedantic, only staff who have shares "reap the rewards".

Shares can also fall, just to keep everything on board and legal, just like RM do.

[cloherty1976]

To be pedantic, only staff who have shares "reap the rewards".

Shares can also fall, just to keep everything on board and legal, just like RM do.[/quote]yes that is right and it will be the risk I take when buying more shares. But the shares you get for nothing if they fall to nothing then you lose nothing.. Win win in my book

[hubbahubba]

To be pedantic, only staff who have shares "reap the rewards".

Shares can also fall, just to keep everything on board and legal, just like RM do.

yes that is right and it will be the risk I take when buying more shares. But the shares you get for nothing if they fall to nothing then you lose nothing.. Win win in my book[/quote]

It's all relative.See how much your £2000 worth will get you in 3-5 years,when you t&c's are at rock bottom,that's if you haven't been laid off by then....

[cloherty1976]

We're have to wait 5 years and see.

[sledger]

the word eligible staff has cropped up again,2000 out of 20 odd thousand,are these just senior staff,if we are privatised will it just be senior staff benefitting and most of us get sweet nothing,why does this remain a secret

[TrueBlueTerrier]

the word eligible staff has cropped up again,2000 out of 20 odd thousand,are these just senior staff,if we are privatised will it just be senior staff benefitting and most of us get sweet nothing,why does this remain a secret

They have to keep saying eligible because some subsidiaries of RMG will not be receiving shares, such as those based in Europe. Full contracts of all types will probably get shares based on their contract hours (the pro-rata bit is in the Terms and conditions and is the same for all grades). The messy part will be will casuals be getting any, and will the AWR play a role, will there be any difference if employed by an agency, RM direct or Angard. Another question is the fixed term contracts will they qualify. Its no Secret, its probably being discussed prior to the share issue.

[aposter]

2,000 staff out 0f 23,000 and on an average of20k, so that will be non of the shop floor front of house staff that do all the work then

[UnhappyGremlin]

I'd be willing to bet most of it goes to managers.

Find it hard to believe those on the front line would be getting pay outs like this.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

I'd be willing to bet most of it goes to managers.

Find it hard to believe those on the front line would be getting pay outs like this.

Your instincts where right.

That's what you get for a company listed on the stock market. Shares rise so staff can reap the rewards.

Not all the staff

Once again sports direct staff get a huge bonus ,,, there profit goes right through the chain ,not just the execs etc . Wake up Royal Mail !,,,

Well not right through

THE DEVILS IN THE DETAIL. http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013 ... -contracts" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sports Direct: 90% of staff on zero-hour contracts
Retail chain's 20,000 part-time workforce do not know how many hours they will work each week and have no holiday or sick pay

Sports Direct's entire 20,000 part-time workforce are employed on zero-hour contracts at a time when 2,000 full-time staff are about to cash in bonuses of up to £100,000.

The contracts, handed to 90% of the company's 23,000 employees, leave staff not knowing how many hours they will work from one week to the next, with no sick pay or holiday pay, and no guarantee of regular work.

Bosses at Sports Direct, the UK's biggest sports retailer, were this month hailing their bonus policy for full-time staff as that of a model employer.

The Guardian has also discovered that the bonus scheme rules give managers the power to exclude a member of staff if they are considered an "unsatisfactory performer", although they do not precisely define this term and it could be subject to abuse, according to employment lawyers.

About 20 current staff are known to have been excluded from the scheme already, while others who had been excluded have since left, according to the Unite union.

The four biggest supermarkets in Britain, Tesco, Asda, Sainsbury's and Morrisons, said they do not use zero-hour contracts. Other retailers to confirm that they do not employ staff on these terms include Argos, B&Q, Homebase, John Lewis and Marks & Spencer.

Politicians have been campaigning to ban the contracts and have called on Mike Ashley, the billionaire owner of Sports Direct, to consider introducing part-time contracts with guaranteed hours.

Former and current part-time staff have also spoken out against zero hours, stressing the uncertainty created by the contracts, under which work can be cut with less than a day's notice. Others said regional managers may reduce staff hours if targets are not met.

Meanwhile, some staff still entitled to the bonus – which pays out in the form of shares next month – have suggested it has created a culture of fear that they may lose out if they are deemed to be "unsatisfactory".

Andy Sawford, the Labour MP for Corby, who has submitted a private member's bill to try to ban the use of zero-hour contracts, said: "It would be much better for Sports Direct to instead of offering bonus gimmicks, they should offer their staff the security of proper contracts.

"The zero-hours contracts are highly exploitative and suit the company because it keeps people in a fragile state where they are at the beck and call of their employers."

Alison McGovern, the Labour MP for Wirral South, is also campaigning for businesses to offer fewer such contracts.

She said: "It seems quite bizarre that a company would on the one hand be awarding bonuses in this way, and treating other staff in a completely different way.

"I would want Sports Direct to see if there is a possibility of more fixed term contracts. It appears this has been imposed across the board and is inappropriate. How can there be any investment in employees, or training or progression?

"Lots of workers in retail start off part-time on the shop floor and rise to the top, but with zero-hour contracts there is no incentive at all."

Some 2,000 permanent full-time staff who have been with Sports Direct since 2008 are to get a bonus paid in shares worth about £75,000 each for hitting profit targets. A similar payout, of shares worth about £17,500, was awarded last year.

Sports Direct's chief executive, Dave Forsey, told the Guardian at the time: "The share scheme glues this company together. These schemes are typically only for the executives, but this goes deep into the company. I'm surprised more businesses haven't adopted something like this sooner."

The Guardian has seen a copy of the share scheme rules, stating it is "intended to drive group performance and to motivate and retain permanent employees at all levels of the group, and to align the interests of those employees with those of shareholders".

However, the document adds that employees can be excluded from the scheme.

It says that any "participant who is determined to be an unsatisfactory performer" will not get the shares.

"For the purposes of the scheme, an unsatisfactory performer means a participant who at any time during the period between the grand date of his award and any relevant vesting date has been (a) notified in writing that his performance is unsatisfactory, or he has been given a written warning or other sanction under the company's disciplinary policy in place from time to time, or (b) suspended from his employment by reason of suspected gross misconduct."

By comparison, John Lewis, which runs one of the best-known employee bonus schemes in the country as part of its partnership structure, pays all employees a bonus regardless of disciplinary warnings against them.

Employment lawyers have said the wording is too vague and could be abused.

David Cohen, consultant solicitor at Keystone Law, said: "It is unusual under an all-employee share scheme for the directors to have the power to deprive continuing employees, as opposed to 'bad leavers', of their share awards.

"If workers generally became aware that the scheme was being operated in a capricious and arbitrary way, the company would risk frittering away the reputational and motivational advantages of putting in place such a generous scheme."

Sports Direct declined to comment.

[UnhappyGremlin]

Can any of us say we're really shocked?
So many caveats in the paperwork, gave them any number of reasons to exclude people, and presumably that would result in their own bonus amount going up.
Sounds like an atrocious company to work for.
These are the type of working conditions RM may be heading towards (or that could be striving for ).

[TrueBlueTerrier]

[Pinky 1]

It says that any "participant who is determined to be an unsatisfactory performer" will not get the shares.
"For the purposes of the scheme, an unsatisfactory performer means a participant who at any time during the period between the grand date of his award and any relevant vesting date has been (a) notified in writing that his performance is unsatisfactory, or he has been given a written warning or other sanction under the company's disciplinary policy in place from time to time, or (b) suspended from his employment by reason of suspected gross misconduct."

I think the majority of my office would never see a bonus if it was at the discretion of our DOM


That also goes for a few posters on this forum too