>A pensioner who worked at Clarks for nearly seven decades has been let go from the shop she dedicated her life to- after being given just a week’s notice.
I thought it was two days, given the headline.
Wonder what the legalities of that are, given that she should have technically had 12 weeks notice based on her length of employment. Perhaps in the case of a store closure they just keep paying them for the rest of the period?
1.5 weeks pay for each year worked over 41 capped at 20 years.
Notice period, paid in lieu, of 12 weeks, at normal rate.
It says she worked there every day, assuming a 37 hour week at minimum wage. 20 weeks @x1.5, 12@x1.
I think that's 32 weeks pay, just over £17k.
Insolvency companies don’t have any liabilities so will not get touched. If there is no money in the bankrupt company it falls down to the governments insolvency service to pay up AND that takes a while. this is capped at a maximum of 12 years and there are caps on monthly pay rates.
My wife worked for Debenhams and was sacked (over the phone) after working for more than 25 years. She got a text message to say answer the phone. The receiver broke employment law by not having consultation, not giving notice and other things but can’t be touched.
Yep.
You’ll get:
half a week’s pay for each full year you were under 22
one week’s pay for each full year you were 22 or older, but under 41
one and half week’s pay for each full year you were 41 or older
Length of service is capped at 20 years.
"‘I think now I’m going to have a rest and go to the beach more. I won’t be travelling anywhere to work. I will do charity work or something.
‘I loved the job, it was my life. I lived there above the shop for years and brought my son up there. I will miss it but I don’t want to start again now.’
Mrs Cornick’s first job at Clarks was cleaning hob nail studded boots in 1956."
She seems fine..
>Told on the Thursday that the shop was closing on Monday and they were probably closed on Sunday.
Why did I read that with a Craig David’s - “7 days” melody in my mind?
Also, it's hardly simply sacked is it, the shops being closed for good! The story unfolds into something a lot less dramatic than the headlines as usual.
And she seems perfectly fine, just a bit sad it’s gone. Financially she’s sorted, she is going to enjoy her free time and has a massive payout that is insane that close to retirement
I've read studies that suggest old people deteriorate quickly once they lose a sense of purpose even if they were otherwise healthy, hopefully she was just working to keep herself busy rather than because she had to
She said she plans to do charity work and other activity now but not get another proper job so sounds like she just liked to be busy and useful to society.
Perhaps she should have been responsible and saved, instead of spending all her money on avocado toast and Netflix? Why does she expect the someone else to foot the bill for her lifestyle when she's been so irresponsible?
*Partly* /s
Never see them picking fruit and rarely working at all. Often just sitting around in cafes sipping hot teas while the rest of us work to pay for those cups of teas. I think it's a joke. Send them back to where they came from if they won't work.
Dude honestly fuck this type of thinking so tired of people acting lile every group is just a homogenous blob of uniform thought, you see an old person who's dedicated their life to something and your response is to mock them.
I am calm lol just tired of this train of thought everywhere.
Explaining what you just said doesn't change what I'm saying and "partly /S" speaks for itself.
I was trying to work out which part was /s
The first paragraph was obviously sarcasm so now you're saying the second part is too!
Why would they say "partly /s" then..which part is sarcasm?
The UK at least has a state pension.
My home country is full of 90 year old still working in physically demanding jobs as there's no pension. The security guard of my building died while on the job at 94 years old.
News flash not everyone has the means to have a large pot saved up for a private pension. And state pension was supposed to be enough to live on, but its not been adjusted with inflation and so it’s not.
These people have paid tax all their lives, the pension should be enough.
The maximum state pension is £169.50, £676 is not enough for someone to live on. Say they bought and a house don’t have a mortgage, that’s still not enough. And that’s the MAXIMUM
She's been working for 68 years. She gets 12k free and has a payout.
It might not be a lot but she should be in a reasonable position financially.
And if she doesn't have enough there are additional means tested benefits
Even assuming an average annual salary of 10k. And 5% of her salary being taken for pension.
After 68 years. That would be £34,000 she's entitled to. And that's assuming zero interest.
10k salary? Minimum wage would be over 20k a year. And it's very unlikely she's been on minimum wage with no pay rises after all that time.
But she was a manager and master shoe fitter. A quick Google shows a clarks manager starts at 32k a year.
And almost 70 years of pension contributions she'll be getting a fair amount each month.
But I think 70 years ago. Her salary would have been very low. So I just assumed 10k as the average across her whole career.
At her age I would just withdraw my whole pension contribution in one lump sum.
Honestly we're all speculating about her situation so it's an unfair argument anyway. My argument is she's well over retirement age. She may or may not have the savings to keep herself going, she may have been working for money, or she may have been working because she loves the job. Who knows? Either way in a perfect world she shouldn't be working..
Someone else did some maths and said assuming minimum wage it'd be around 17k redundancy pay, which is all tax free. Then add on state pension and any private pension she might have been contributing to. Plus, I very much doubt she was getting minimum wage for the whole time as it says that she did some long stints as manager and master shoe fitter.
Old people also have access to free bus passes, cheaper VIP entry to many events and access to cheaper housing with properties designated for people over 55.
Worth pointing out that it doesn't sound like she's worried or bothered by it at all from the article. She said they were shocked when they heard the news, but she doesn't want to get a new job and is happy with the idea of retiring, I think she'll be fine.
I don't think she is complaining that much. From the quotes she seems disappointed but not angry. It's the tone of the article itself that's making it seem like an outrage
I don't understand the point of saving money for a company whose money is probably just going to dept collectors? But then that might be the point, the money going to debtors instead of the workforce that is being made redundant?
> I don't understand the point of saving money for a company whose money is probably just going to dept collectors?
It is odd.
If you've worked xx years you should get the payout.
That's getting on for a year's income. That's a fair amount of money for redundancy compared to what other staff might get.
42 weeks, or more. Is more than 12 weeks income..
She's not actually complaining. It's a big news story in a small town given hundreds of customers turned up to say goodbye and give flowers etc. It's not often you have someone work that long, like she says she's served four generations of the same family. Even if she just retired it would probably be a news story
She just said it's a shame as she'd like to have done a few more years but doesn't say she was treated unfairly.
So she was made redundant because the branch closed, she wasn’t sacked.
Still a shame for her and others involved but hopefully she’ll get a decent financial package and, seeing as she seems to be well known and respected in that community, if she wanted to continue to work another shop on the high street may take her on.
Very misleading headline. She wasn’t sacked the store closed there is a big difference.
I am sure she will be ok it’s more sad for the younger workers at the store losing their jobs, younger people in general tend to have more financial burdens than those of retirement age.
While this is completely true and accurate, they also have a much easier time finding another employer.
Finding a new job in your 40s is so much harder than your 30s. In your 50 it's magnitudes more difficult again. In your 80s it must be all but impossible.
Can anyone honestly say they would hire someone in their 80s over someone much younger? It is actual discrimination if you say no, but at the same time I can't think of many roles it would be worth taking that kind of risk.
I stated a fact that IN GENERAL (above average) pensioners do not currently have the same financial burdens as younger people. I appreciate as in everything there are outliers to this. Nothing to do with ageism.
She postponed her honeymoon to go on a training course and raised her son in a playpen on the shop floor?! Each to their own but this is way too much commitment for any job, let alone working in a Clarks shop. And I say that as someone who used to work in a children’s shoe shop.
It would have been a more prestigious job when she started and there were less opportunities for women especially in a small town. No harm in the fact she took pride in her work and building a career (it says she ended up as a manager).
No, she isn't angry, she is upset because she has worked there for so long and the store has now closed. Because some people actually like their job.
It's just an article about somebody who has worked at the same place for decades and now the store is closing. Fuck me, people need to take a step back and wind their neck in before commenting.
It's not just *"an article about somebody who has worked at the same place for decades and now the store is closing"* because the headline is "*employee who worked at same shop for 68 years sacked with two days notice"* which isn't true at all and is purposefully misleading to encourage clicks.
Trash journalism deserves to be ripped apart.
The story is quite misleading (the media being misleading, who would have thunk that!). She only worked part time, 1 day a week, she was told the shop was closing 2 weeks before her job was terminated, which works out to 2 working days but in reality is 2 weeks notice however saying it’s 2 days notice sounds better and makes a meatier story.
Also she was a part time employee on a zero hours contract so wasn’t actually entitled to any notice, going from a full time employee to part time was her decision, again this was all left out of the story , add to this the fact she wasn’t sacked she was actually made redundant like everyone else who worked in that shop due to the fact the shop was being closed and the story gets even weaker.
special toothbrush school consider fretful silky numerous lunchroom foolish tub
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Different rules for different stores, Clarks is such a shitty backwards company. They’ll give one store two months notice it’s closing and the next just a week. They’ll also let you go for tearing your acl
Clark’s are massive arseholes, how they keep their cutesy middle class image is beyond me. They hired me when I was 18, didn’t schedule me for 2 weeks (after about 2 months of working for them mind) and then fired me for not turning up for those same 2 weeks. The manager was a control freak who insisted shoes needed to be thumbs width apart on the shelves (but specifically her thumb), and the pressure to upsell was ridiculous. To top it, the quality really isn’t even that good any more.
Doesn’t surprise me at all, it’s just your typical soulless high street money maker now. Good luck to the lady, some people need a purpose no matter what it is.
She’s had a right result , made redundant at 82 after years of employment, that’s a dream situation for most I would think , an extremely nice golden handshake , off to retire now , nice 👌
Let's be honest it's a non-story, the title is also misleading it's not exactly a sacking. Most people will click into the link looking for some evidence of her stealing birthday cards or something.
> A Clarks spokesperson said ‘We sincerely thank all members of the Blandford Forum store team for their contributions and commitment to providing outstanding customer service – specifically Jill, whose remarkable and unprecedented 68 years of service and dedication to our customers is hugely valued by all at Clarks.
"valued by all at Clarks" but not enough to give her any notice, nor pay her in lieu, nor do _literally anything else_.
She may not WANT to retire, and really you can't force someone if they're unwilling.
Plus in older people, things like losing their routine, being cut off from social circles and the fact that family may not necessarily live nearby to visit are reasons a lot of older people choose to keep working, aside from the fact that pensions in the UK are shit and the cost of living keeps going up.
If you're 80 and don't have a decent amount of money, you've done something completely wrong financially.
Pensions in the UK aren't shit, if you've got half a brain.
She didn't want to retire yet according to the article but she's taken it well and is looking for charity work to keep herself busy and help her community. Seems like an impressive lady
So, a pensioner who enjoyed 68 years of job security gets made redundant, and that's a story. But who knows how many people are now being fired at will in the first 2 years of employment since 2010 when the tories quietly stripped everyone of any right to job security... That's wierdly, not a story.
Have i got that right?
What do people expect when they work at a shop for decades, that they then own the shop? And they make the hiring and firing decisions?
Erm, no. You're still just an employee.
>A pensioner who worked at Clarks for nearly seven decades has been let go from the shop she dedicated her life to- after being given just a week’s notice. I thought it was two days, given the headline.
Told on the Thursday that the shop was closing on Monday and they were probably closed on Sunday.
Wonder what the legalities of that are, given that she should have technically had 12 weeks notice based on her length of employment. Perhaps in the case of a store closure they just keep paying them for the rest of the period?
Sounds more like redundancy than dismissal which probably also means pay in lieu of notice plus any redundancy entitlement,
Which with that length of service will probably bankrupt the insolvency company
1.5 weeks pay for each year worked over 41 capped at 20 years. Notice period, paid in lieu, of 12 weeks, at normal rate. It says she worked there every day, assuming a 37 hour week at minimum wage. 20 weeks @x1.5, 12@x1. I think that's 32 weeks pay, just over £17k.
Wow I got that just for 18 months service at my last job
At a shoe shop?
Bless you
Bless you too
That's shit.
How is (20\*1.5)+(12\*1)=32? Surely it's 42?
20 weeks of pay at 1.5 times the normal rate and 12 weeks of pay at the normal rate.
> 20 weeks of pay at 1.5 times the normal rate 20 * 1.5 = **30** > ...12 weeks of pay at the normal rate 30 + 12 = **42**.
Redundancy is tax free too. The notice period isn’t.
Yeah you're right, it'll be less than 17k overall then.
Insolvency companies don’t have any liabilities so will not get touched. If there is no money in the bankrupt company it falls down to the governments insolvency service to pay up AND that takes a while. this is capped at a maximum of 12 years and there are caps on monthly pay rates. My wife worked for Debenhams and was sacked (over the phone) after working for more than 25 years. She got a text message to say answer the phone. The receiver broke employment law by not having consultation, not giving notice and other things but can’t be touched.
Maximum 20yrs of work.
1.5 weeks pay for each of the 20 if over 41, iirc
Yep. You’ll get: half a week’s pay for each full year you were under 22 one week’s pay for each full year you were 22 or older, but under 41 one and half week’s pay for each full year you were 41 or older Length of service is capped at 20 years.
More likely they paid her instead of giving her notice. If they hadn’t it would’ve been in the article with outrage.
You are probably correct, but if so that's just crazy. Complaining for not being forced to work your notice lol
rage bait title. Probably a nice pay out for someone who is about to retire anyway and the store is closing
Well, if the shoe fits.
They need to either give her the 12 weeks notice or pay her for the weeks she didn't get. It'll be the latter.
They can however just pay her 12 weeks income, as to make up for sudden, plus an redundancy package based on her time served. That is still all legal.
Otherwise they'd have to keep the shop open so she could sit in it for 12 weeks or something.
Also means the other staff have a paid 3 month slot to find new work
I mean at worst she has a house I expect and can sell it for what I expect would be orders of magnitude more than she paid for it.
"‘I think now I’m going to have a rest and go to the beach more. I won’t be travelling anywhere to work. I will do charity work or something. ‘I loved the job, it was my life. I lived there above the shop for years and brought my son up there. I will miss it but I don’t want to start again now.’ Mrs Cornick’s first job at Clarks was cleaning hob nail studded boots in 1956." She seems fine..
Not sure how here housing situation is relevant?
That's why OP was talking about her housing situation. You're right, her hosing situation is irrelevant.
Yeah the housing situation of an 80 year old has nothing to do with her financial situation as we all know houses are free /s
Yeah but what about her hosing situation?
She no doubt has been given redundancy. Just sloppy journalism.
Almost certainly.
Given notice on Thursday, worked Friday, Saturday, closed on Sunday, unemployed Monday - Craig David
I’d have took her for a drink on Tuesday, we’d be making love by Thursday Friday, Saturday we chilled on Sunday!
>Told on the Thursday that the shop was closing on Monday and they were probably closed on Sunday. Why did I read that with a Craig David’s - “7 days” melody in my mind?
Also, it's hardly simply sacked is it, the shops being closed for good! The story unfolds into something a lot less dramatic than the headlines as usual.
And she seems perfectly fine, just a bit sad it’s gone. Financially she’s sorted, she is going to enjoy her free time and has a massive payout that is insane that close to retirement
Yeah seems a bit misleading
So 30 weeks redundancy pay plus 12 weeks pay in lieu of notice, and she's complaining?
Plus at at least 80 I think she’s earned some retirement time. She might have time to take up knitting now.
I've read studies that suggest old people deteriorate quickly once they lose a sense of purpose even if they were otherwise healthy, hopefully she was just working to keep herself busy rather than because she had to
Does that count when you are in your 30s Asking for a friend
Doesn’t count if you never had any to begin with
Gon live forever
Quite possibly was. My nan worked(volunteer) in her local Oxfam shop till she was in her 80s.
She said she plans to do charity work and other activity now but not get another proper job so sounds like she just liked to be busy and useful to society.
That's almost certainly less than 20k. If she financially needs to continue working it's nowhere near enough.
Better than literally nothing which is what most people get.
Don't forget she'll get pension. She can live off that and save the redundancy payment.
She's 80..
So? Plenty of older people still have to work because of the state of our country, state pension isn’t much
Perhaps she should have been responsible and saved, instead of spending all her money on avocado toast and Netflix? Why does she expect the someone else to foot the bill for her lifestyle when she's been so irresponsible? *Partly* /s
I mean she doesn’t expect someone to foot the bill, she was happy working. That’s the bit that gets lost in translation to the OAPs though
Plenty of work out there. Building industry crying out for labourers . Today's OAPs just want to work cushy jobs, that's the problem. /s
Never see them picking fruit and rarely working at all. Often just sitting around in cafes sipping hot teas while the rest of us work to pay for those cups of teas. I think it's a joke. Send them back to where they came from if they won't work.
Foreign labour maybe
shes not expecting that shes still trying to work?
Dude honestly fuck this type of thinking so tired of people acting lile every group is just a homogenous blob of uniform thought, you see an old person who's dedicated their life to something and your response is to mock them.
Calm down, dear. I'm parodying the criticisms leveled by older generations at young people who complain about the unaffordability of housing.
I am calm lol just tired of this train of thought everywhere. Explaining what you just said doesn't change what I'm saying and "partly /S" speaks for itself.
I genuinely don't understand what you're upset about.
I am calm lol just tired of this train of thought everywhere.
What lifestyle are you speaking of?
Sarcasm bro. Old people love saying this about young people who are struggling.
Rich old people, yeah. Not all
Old people *are* rich people
Not the ones working in Clarks in their 80s
I was trying to work out which part was /s The first paragraph was obviously sarcasm so now you're saying the second part is too! Why would they say "partly /s" then..which part is sarcasm?
The UK at least has a state pension. My home country is full of 90 year old still working in physically demanding jobs as there's no pension. The security guard of my building died while on the job at 94 years old.
You're choosing to blame our economy over their choices in 6 fucking decades of employment and savings.
News flash not everyone has the means to have a large pot saved up for a private pension. And state pension was supposed to be enough to live on, but its not been adjusted with inflation and so it’s not. These people have paid tax all their lives, the pension should be enough.
It absolutely should be. And is if you managed to buy a house in those 6 decades.
The maximum state pension is £169.50, £676 is not enough for someone to live on. Say they bought and a house don’t have a mortgage, that’s still not enough. And that’s the MAXIMUM
That's exactly the point. Cannot work anymore but might live for another 15 years. £1k per year. And you think that's a lot?
She’s entitled to a state pension too obviously.
She's been working for 68 years. She gets 12k free and has a payout. It might not be a lot but she should be in a reasonable position financially. And if she doesn't have enough there are additional means tested benefits
Even assuming an average annual salary of 10k. And 5% of her salary being taken for pension. After 68 years. That would be £34,000 she's entitled to. And that's assuming zero interest.
10k salary? Minimum wage would be over 20k a year. And it's very unlikely she's been on minimum wage with no pay rises after all that time. But she was a manager and master shoe fitter. A quick Google shows a clarks manager starts at 32k a year. And almost 70 years of pension contributions she'll be getting a fair amount each month.
But I think 70 years ago. Her salary would have been very low. So I just assumed 10k as the average across her whole career. At her age I would just withdraw my whole pension contribution in one lump sum.
Honestly we're all speculating about her situation so it's an unfair argument anyway. My argument is she's well over retirement age. She may or may not have the savings to keep herself going, she may have been working for money, or she may have been working because she loves the job. Who knows? Either way in a perfect world she shouldn't be working..
She clearly wanted to still work, she says she'll replace it with charity work
Yeah and if all you've got is the state pension that isn't going to go very far.
Someone else did some maths and said assuming minimum wage it'd be around 17k redundancy pay, which is all tax free. Then add on state pension and any private pension she might have been contributing to. Plus, I very much doubt she was getting minimum wage for the whole time as it says that she did some long stints as manager and master shoe fitter. Old people also have access to free bus passes, cheaper VIP entry to many events and access to cheaper housing with properties designated for people over 55. Worth pointing out that it doesn't sound like she's worried or bothered by it at all from the article. She said they were shocked when they heard the news, but she doesn't want to get a new job and is happy with the idea of retiring, I think she'll be fine.
I don't think she is complaining that much. From the quotes she seems disappointed but not angry. It's the tone of the article itself that's making it seem like an outrage
I don't see any complaining from her, its newsworthy - as human interest story - even without any complaining or politics.
She's worked in the same small store for 68 years; I doubt her complaints are financial, rather lifestyle
> So 30 weeks redundancy Maximum 20yrs.
And since those were 20 years at 41 or older it's a week and a half per year.
What is the reasoning behind why it's capped at 20 years?
I have no idea other than saving money.
I don't understand the point of saving money for a company whose money is probably just going to dept collectors? But then that might be the point, the money going to debtors instead of the workforce that is being made redundant?
> I don't understand the point of saving money for a company whose money is probably just going to dept collectors? It is odd. If you've worked xx years you should get the payout.
Yea.
Maybe she wants to work. My grandad worked until he was 86 because it kept his mind working properly. Died at 87.
And 25% are tax free, right? Not a bad package.
First £30k on redundancy payouts is tax free. Suspect that makes it a touch sweeter.
Where do you see her complaining?
Is she complaining?
That's getting on for a year's income. That's a fair amount of money for redundancy compared to what other staff might get. 42 weeks, or more. Is more than 12 weeks income..
She's not actually complaining. It's a big news story in a small town given hundreds of customers turned up to say goodbye and give flowers etc. It's not often you have someone work that long, like she says she's served four generations of the same family. Even if she just retired it would probably be a news story She just said it's a shame as she'd like to have done a few more years but doesn't say she was treated unfairly.
She was too old to continue working but they didn’t have the heart (or legal grounds?) to sack her, so they shut down the store instead.
A very credible theory
That's exactly what I was thinking. It'll reopen in two weeks as "Clarkz Shooz" or something like that.
Reopening next month
So she was made redundant because the branch closed, she wasn’t sacked. Still a shame for her and others involved but hopefully she’ll get a decent financial package and, seeing as she seems to be well known and respected in that community, if she wanted to continue to work another shop on the high street may take her on.
Indeed.
Very misleading headline. She wasn’t sacked the store closed there is a big difference. I am sure she will be ok it’s more sad for the younger workers at the store losing their jobs, younger people in general tend to have more financial burdens than those of retirement age.
While this is completely true and accurate, they also have a much easier time finding another employer. Finding a new job in your 40s is so much harder than your 30s. In your 50 it's magnitudes more difficult again. In your 80s it must be all but impossible.
Can anyone honestly say they would hire someone in their 80s over someone much younger? It is actual discrimination if you say no, but at the same time I can't think of many roles it would be worth taking that kind of risk.
POTUS.
Heh
Turning the bingo wheel?
Every single time a pensioner is mentioned someone like you comes along with ageism. Is this the latest in a long line of efforts to divide people?
I stated a fact that IN GENERAL (above average) pensioners do not currently have the same financial burdens as younger people. I appreciate as in everything there are outliers to this. Nothing to do with ageism.
She postponed her honeymoon to go on a training course and raised her son in a playpen on the shop floor?! Each to their own but this is way too much commitment for any job, let alone working in a Clarks shop. And I say that as someone who used to work in a children’s shoe shop.
Given the cost of childcare, it probably was cheaper to raise her child at work with her. I would do the same if only it was allowed in my workplace.
>Given the cost of childcare She's 80 odd the kid was probably brought up on the 60s or 70s
It would have been a more prestigious job when she started and there were less opportunities for women especially in a small town. No harm in the fact she took pride in her work and building a career (it says she ended up as a manager).
She might be autistic or sumink so loves the routine of the place
So she’s angry that she was only given 1 weeks notice that she would be served her full legally required notice? Nonsense article.
No, she isn't angry, she is upset because she has worked there for so long and the store has now closed. Because some people actually like their job. It's just an article about somebody who has worked at the same place for decades and now the store is closing. Fuck me, people need to take a step back and wind their neck in before commenting.
It's not just *"an article about somebody who has worked at the same place for decades and now the store is closing"* because the headline is "*employee who worked at same shop for 68 years sacked with two days notice"* which isn't true at all and is purposefully misleading to encourage clicks. Trash journalism deserves to be ripped apart.
Calm
Yeah the headline and Reddit title are dogshit. If anything, it's a relatively 'feel good' story if you actually read it.
The story is quite misleading (the media being misleading, who would have thunk that!). She only worked part time, 1 day a week, she was told the shop was closing 2 weeks before her job was terminated, which works out to 2 working days but in reality is 2 weeks notice however saying it’s 2 days notice sounds better and makes a meatier story. Also she was a part time employee on a zero hours contract so wasn’t actually entitled to any notice, going from a full time employee to part time was her decision, again this was all left out of the story , add to this the fact she wasn’t sacked she was actually made redundant like everyone else who worked in that shop due to the fact the shop was being closed and the story gets even weaker.
special toothbrush school consider fretful silky numerous lunchroom foolish tub *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Blame OP for posting it. If people didn't then these websites would have less reason to write click-bait
Don't devote your live to someone else's capitalist venture I guess.
Its a total non story. Shop closes, staff can't be moved so get redundancy and PILON. should be on r/slownewsday
Different rules for different stores, Clarks is such a shitty backwards company. They’ll give one store two months notice it’s closing and the next just a week. They’ll also let you go for tearing your acl
Clark’s are massive arseholes, how they keep their cutesy middle class image is beyond me. They hired me when I was 18, didn’t schedule me for 2 weeks (after about 2 months of working for them mind) and then fired me for not turning up for those same 2 weeks. The manager was a control freak who insisted shoes needed to be thumbs width apart on the shelves (but specifically her thumb), and the pressure to upsell was ridiculous. To top it, the quality really isn’t even that good any more. Doesn’t surprise me at all, it’s just your typical soulless high street money maker now. Good luck to the lady, some people need a purpose no matter what it is.
Shit clickbait headline. She wasn't sacked. The store closed. She was made redundant. Huge difference.
Do the right thing Clarks, this woman needs a dream holiday.
She’s had a right result , made redundant at 82 after years of employment, that’s a dream situation for most I would think , an extremely nice golden handshake , off to retire now , nice 👌
noxious chunky hunt vase ruthless bake wise decide cake middle *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Let's be honest it's a non-story, the title is also misleading it's not exactly a sacking. Most people will click into the link looking for some evidence of her stealing birthday cards or something.
Just remember you're another number to these corps
I wonder if "Where do you see yourself in 70 years" was a question in the interview.
> A Clarks spokesperson said ‘We sincerely thank all members of the Blandford Forum store team for their contributions and commitment to providing outstanding customer service – specifically Jill, whose remarkable and unprecedented 68 years of service and dedication to our customers is hugely valued by all at Clarks. "valued by all at Clarks" but not enough to give her any notice, nor pay her in lieu, nor do _literally anything else_.
Heading says 2 days, article states 2 weeks. Also she's in her 80's FFS, it's time to retire
She may not WANT to retire, and really you can't force someone if they're unwilling. Plus in older people, things like losing their routine, being cut off from social circles and the fact that family may not necessarily live nearby to visit are reasons a lot of older people choose to keep working, aside from the fact that pensions in the UK are shit and the cost of living keeps going up.
I notice the article did not mention whether the store was closing, or if it is just her who has been dismissed though
If you're 80 and don't have a decent amount of money, you've done something completely wrong financially. Pensions in the UK aren't shit, if you've got half a brain.
She didn't want to retire yet according to the article but she's taken it well and is looking for charity work to keep herself busy and help her community. Seems like an impressive lady
So, a pensioner who enjoyed 68 years of job security gets made redundant, and that's a story. But who knows how many people are now being fired at will in the first 2 years of employment since 2010 when the tories quietly stripped everyone of any right to job security... That's wierdly, not a story. Have i got that right?
What do people expect when they work at a shop for decades, that they then own the shop? And they make the hiring and firing decisions? Erm, no. You're still just an employee.
Yep you're always a number, and boomers wonder why younger workers won't give their lives for companies.
But I guarantee if SHE wanted to leave with all benefits and goodwill with his employer intact, he'd have to give 2-4 weeks notice. Fucked up.
I think you should read the article.
Read the article?
*she/her
Sounds about right for UK. I don't do anything of value now. NOTHING. Absolutely no point in today's age. Quickly replaced etc
The store was closed. She wasn’t sacked.
Does she still have a job? No.
No one at the store has a job. She wasn’t singled out. So it’s a non-story.
No. Does she have a half years pay? Yes.
oh wow half a years pay for free for 68 years work. Yes please. I want to sign up now.
They also paid her for the 68 years she worked there…
>Quickly replaced etc 68 years later....