came from 3-4 year stint in similar role at Halifax , an Ully-Gully

Seems to have been a hot potato of a role of late, hope he settles in and proves a valuable asset.

Anyone taking bets on how long he will last as there has been quite a turnover in that department.

Simpson eh?

Who did all these jobs when Fenty. was in charge  ?

Decent haircut. Can't see any pics with him wearing properly polished shoes but he looks the sort.

Best of luck to the lad. Welcome to the Mariners Ed.

You'd expect he'd be using the role to grow his experience and move on as soon as possible given the wage on offer. Was it around 24k? sodomist that.

Quoted from grimsby pete

Who did all these jobs when Fenty. was in charge  ?

Hopefully, the new guy won't write his press releases late at night when merlot-fuelled.

Quoted from fishboyUTM

You'd expect he'd be using the role to grow his experience and move on as soon as possible given the wage on offer. Was it around 24k? sodomist that.

And this is how it's always going to be.

Every time that role is advertised there's near universal condemnation of the salary on offer.

I guess the expectation and understanding from the club is that it's high risk of a quick turnover rate.  These lads (or lasses) will come in, get a bit more experience, exposure, build up some more contacts and then move on.  We get the benefit of fresh eyes and ideas in frequently but no stability and continuity.  Stockwood has spoken previously, on more than one occasion, that he wants people to leave for bigger and better things because it means the club are doing things right.  I'm fully on board with that.

In some ways it's not too far away from the approach to the playing staff.  Get people in who can help you move forward a little bit, knowing that if they're successful they'll move on.  Difference to the playing staff and non-playing staff is whilst the former will hopefully generate you a transfer fee which you can reinvest, the non-playing staff don't.  But they might move the dial a little as an organisation overall, hopefully generating more income...in term we can play better wages further down the line and attract better candidates etc. etc. etc.

The low wage approach sits very uncomfortably with me and it still surprises me when we look at what 1878 say they're about.  But I can see the logic and long-term approach to it.

Unless the club reverses their very un-B-corp stance of paying just over minimum wage for this role (which involves working unsociable hours, long distance travel and creating content and communications which go out through the club's official accounts) there'll continue to be a high turnover in the role. The club clearly know they can rely on an unending stream of young kids, probably a few months on from graduating in BA (Hons) Football Business & Media at UCFB, who want to break into the football industry, and as such can get away with offering such a paltry salary as they use the role as a stepping stone (like the last guy, who's left and gone to Newcastle, who'd you'd hope with all their blood/oil money are paying more than £24k a year to their Media & Comms employees).

Quoted from HatTrickHero

Simpson eh?

Hans Moleman productions presents…Man getting hit by football….

our ex left back involved in it. Glad to see he's back playing regularly

Quoted from forza ivano

our ex left back involved in it. Glad to see he's back playing regularly

Yeah, Woking struggling a bit though this season after making the play-offs last year. Just the 3 goals for Podge this season - he’s 36 now. Where does the time go?

. The club clearly know they can rely on an unending stream of young kids, probably a few months on from graduating in BA (Hons) Football Business & Media at UCFB, who want to break into the football industry, and as such can get away with offering such a paltry salary as they use the role as a stepping stone (like the last guy, who's left and gone to Newcastle, who'd you'd hope with all their blood/oil money are paying more than £24k a year to their Media & Comms employees).[/quote]

Pay £40k a year and several on here would be having a meltdown on why that money isn’t being used to get in a better centre back! Like others have said it provides a good route into the industry and opens up great opportunities for the future if you’re any good. Plus we don’t know if the salary is reviewed regularly and increased quickly based on performance.

Quoted from Lincoln Mariner 56

. The club clearly know they can rely on an unending stream of young kids, probably a few months on from graduating in BA (Hons) Football Business & Media at UCFB, who want to break into the football industry, and as such can get away with offering such a paltry salary as they use the role as a stepping stone (like the last guy, who's left and gone to Newcastle, who'd you'd hope with all their blood/oil money are paying more than £24k a year to their Media & Comms employees).

Pay £40k a year and several on here would be having a meltdown on why that money isn’t being used to get in a better centre back! Like others have said it provides a good route into the industry and opens up great opportunities for the future if you’re any good. Plus we don’t know if the salary is reviewed regularly and increased quickly based on performance.[/quote]

Dammed if they don't and dammed if they do.

Speaking as an old fart, it is probably always some very young person as they are into all the various media outlets, Facebook, X, tick-tock etc.

I think it is by nature a role which has a high turnover. Else you end up with “so what type of player are you” for 20 years. Difficult to come up with constantly new ideas for something as narrow as this. Best thing to do is keep it fresh, give people who want to do it a leg up, and help them on to better things. There are still loads roles in media (especially in London) which are filled on an unpaid intern basis.

Quoted from diehardmariner

And this is how it's always going to be.

Every time that role is advertised there's near universal condemnation of the salary on offer.

I guess the expectation and understanding from the club is that it's high risk of a quick turnover rate.  These lads (or lasses) will come in, get a bit more experience, exposure, build up some more contacts and then move on. We get the benefit of fresh eyes and ideas in frequently but no stability and continuity.  Stockwood has spoken previously, on more than one occasion, that he wants people to leave for bigger and better things because it means the club are doing things right.  I'm fully on board with that.

In some ways it's not too far away from the approach to the playing staff.  Get people in who can help you move forward a little bit, knowing that if they're successful they'll move on.  Difference to the playing staff and non-playing staff is whilst the former will hopefully generate you a transfer fee which you can reinvest, the non-playing staff don't.  But they might move the dial a little as an organisation overall, hopefully generating more income...in term we can play better wages further down the line and attract better candidates etc. etc. etc.

The low wage approach sits very uncomfortably with me and it still surprises me when we look at what 1878 say they're about.  But I can see the logic and long-term approach to it.

That's not why they are leaving.

Quoted from arryarryarry

That's not why they are leaving.

Why are they leaving? It can't be Debbie's fault anymore as she's leaving.

Joe came here from doing the same role in rugby, isn't from the town so doesn't have blinded loyalty and has just landed the same role at a Premier League team.

Football does pay non-playing staff notoriously low; the salary and job expectations for a lot of what we have advertised don't marry up to me, but that is football.

Quoted from jamesgtfc

Why are they leaving? It can't be Debbie's fault anymore as she's leaving.

Joe came here from doing the same role in rugby, isn't from the town so doesn't have blinded loyalty and has just landed the same role at a Premier League team.

Football does pay non-playing staff notoriously low; the salary and job expectations for a lot of what we have advertised don't marry up to me, but that is football.

Who said anything about it being Debbie's fault.

Who do you know left because of her?

Quoted from arryarryarry

Who said anything about it being Debbie's fault.

Who do you know left because of her?

🤔🤔

Quoted from jamesgtfc

Why are they leaving? It can't be Debbie's fault anymore as she's leaving.

Joe came here from doing the same role in rugby, isn't from the town so doesn't have blinded loyalty and has just landed the same role at a Premier League team.

Football does pay non-playing staff notoriously low; the salary and job expectations for a lot of what we have advertised don't marry up to me, but that is football.

Have your ever left a job to further your career, gain more experience at a higher level  or for a significantly higher wage? I know that I have and I'm sure many others have.

Please let’s not start with this boring shite about people leaving because of the owners/Debbie again!

Wouldn’t say it’s a massive turnover for this role is it? There’s been what 3 people ever including this guy in the last 10 years or so.

24k is not an amazing salary, but it is what it is. A family member recently graduated with a forensic biology degree and her first role in that field is paying a salary of 19k and it’s based in Norwich.

I know for certain some junior level positions in London at media companies pay the same kind of salary. At least Cleethorpes/Grimsby is one of the cheapest areas in the country to live In.

Doesn’t mean it’s right and it certainly shouldn’t be a race to the bottom, but I guess this is all we can afford to allocate to the role and with that comes the risk that a member of staff might not stay years. Especially if they’re successful in using the club as a stepping stone to a bigger/better role (which is a totally normal thing to do), or in time somehow prove that they are indispensable and worth paying more to keep hold of through the work they produce.

I really do not understand this fascination with office staff at the club, how much they earn, why they decide to move on, etc. Seems to be a recent phenomenon but seriously, as long as they are doing their job well who cares?

Quoted from DB

Pay £40k a year and several on here would be having a meltdown on why that money isn’t being used to get in a better centre back! Like others have said it provides a good route into the industry and opens up great opportunities for the future if you’re any good. Plus we don’t know if the salary is reviewed regularly and increased quickly based on performance.

Dammed if they don't and dammed if they do.

[/quote]

We should get him on a 3 year contract with a sell on clause

Charlton Athletic advertising same job with same money.
No big deal it is what it is. The going rate for a job that appears to get it's own thread on here.
Everyone goes to University now, so these nothing jobs demand a degree however there is no wage battling to change that.
I would suggest it's more likely a football linked job is a CV starter role therefore doesn't attract bigger money, and I would suggest for good reason

Quoted from pizzzza

I really do not understand this fascination with office staff at the club, how much they earn, why they decide to move on, etc. Seems to be a recent phenomenon but seriously, as long as they are doing their job well who cares?

I have to say I find the over analysing a little bit odd.  But I don't think it's exclusive to our club, lots of clubs are posting similar positions and you get the same type of responses.

Be it right or wrong, it's the going rate for this type of role.  It's a step-up type role and I'm pretty sure that there's that expectation of a high turnover rate.

Locally I think the 'interest' probably comes more from the ethos, culture etc. that 1878 talk about and people think because we're going for B-Corp we should be paying higher.  When actually, this role probably is about the Real Living Wage (voluntary) and a fair bit more than the National Living Wage (statutory). UK wide the Real Living Wage is about £24k based on a normal working week and £12 an hour. The National Living Wage is about £20k.   https://www.livingwage.org.uk/what-real-living-wage.

That link takes you to an accrediting body for the UK to show you're paying the National Living Wage.  If you've got that B-Corp sign it off from their perspective (no point checking twice).  It's not required but probably just speeds things up.  GTFC are actually accredited by The Living Wage Foundation along with Liverpool, Everton, Newcastle, Leicester, Palace, Fulham, Man City, Arsenal, Luton and Brighton which came at a cost of about £60,000 in upping wages. - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/62996172

For anyone cool enough, here's B-Corp's Living Wage Assessment Framework - https://kb.bimpactassessment.net/support/solutions/articles/43000671646-answering-living-wage-questions-in-the-b-impact-assessment#2.-Answering-the-living-wage-questions-in-the-B-Impact-Assessment

There's definitely an argument that the cost of living here is lower than the vast majority of the rest of the country.  Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, Liverpool, Birmingham are all more expensive to live yet don't get London weighting.  I'm not saying it's right that we could pay less owing to location but just stating the situation.

Fair points that there will be times when this role has long days.  But it will also have periods of significant down-time.  End of the season for example.  It's standard across many industries to cram hours at pinch points and then ease off at others.

Salaries at the club seem to be the latest stick to hit the club with, yet it's not quite as simple as just putting extra money into it.  The BBC article has some interesting comments from Debbie Cook when it comes to the realities of even meeting the Living Wage Foundation rate.  

Excellent post diehatd👏👏👏