Boycotting Byron

[Gladders]

Never heard of it people live in places where there aren't an easy supply of illegal immigrants.

Location:Norfolk
Location:Staffordshire

Been to London at least 5 times already this year, and numerous other times during my lifetime, I like visiting London, best city in the country to get around because of the tube, would like to live there one day.

Still never heard of them.

 

[Alty]

I think that the Brewdog comparison is quite apt, as I struggle to understand the sustainability of the whole craft beer/ microbrewery and the "gourmet" burger industries.

The portions in posh burger joints are too big also.

How many people who've got into craft beer are going to go back to drinking piss? I mean, you'll have a few who move on to wine and perhaps there's the odd person who genuinely hates hoppy/malty beer and just soldiers on through in the hope Carling becomes trendy again, but the days of there only being 8 breweries in London are gone for good. Kind of like with food. People in Britain ate dreadful food for years. Now that we know better, settling for a slab of bland meat and vegetables boiled to fuck isn't something most people we countenance.

 

[Jockney]

See Shane's point above. If you know you don't have the right to work in the UK and decide to do so anyway, I don't think you can complain about the employer you've hoodwinked (which is the assumption we're making) assisting the Home Office in returning you to your country of origin.

Your morals are so wrapped-up in bureaucratic legalism it's frightening. I did not say they had a legal right to complain, I said what BB did to them and the way they went about it was immoral.

What do you think Byron should have done, out of interest? Given the workers a tip-off in order to say thank you for their loyal table waiting?

If they were not legally compelled through their own wrongdoing to entrap their employees, then they should have not colluded with the HO. That is the only thing that matters here. They could have dismissed the offending employees. They could have said something. They could have said nothing. They didn't have to actively collude.

 

[smat]

settling for a slab of bland meat and vegetables boiled to fuck isn't something most people we countenance.

Especially not pescatarians like myself.

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

Never liked his poems.

Rumour has it he was mean to his employees too - when they'd finished toiling over his burger dinner he'd lock them up in his DonJuan!

 

[Alty]

Your morals are so wrapped-up in bureaucratic legalism it's frightening. I did not say they had a legal right to complain, I said what BB did to them and the way they went about it was immoral.

If they were not legally compelled through their own wrongdoing to entrap their employees, then they should have not colluded with the HO. That is the only thing that matters here. They could have dismissed the offending employees. They could have said something. They could have said nothing. They didn't have to actively collude.

No, hang on. You're conflating two points here.

Legally the illegal workers don't have a leg to stand on. You accept that. Fine.

From a moral standpoint, by working illegally you're shafting someone else somewhere along the line. Whether a competitor for your job, the taxpayer, whoever. In what way would it have been more moral of Byron to refuse to assist the Home Office? Where's the morality in saying nothing and waiting for the Government to spend much more taxpayer money slowly catching up with these people one by one? Where's the morality in sacking these people and leaving them to scratch around trying to find another job to which they're not legally entitled? I find your logic truly bizarre.

 

[smat]

In what way would it have been more moral of Byron to refuse to assist the Home Office?

He's dead, mate.

The poet Byron.

Is dead.

 

[mnb089mnb]

Been to London at least 5 times already this year, and numerous other times during my lifetime, I like visiting London, best city in the country to get around because of the tube, would like to live there one day.

Still never heard of them.

5 times? Wow.

 

[eightiesrobin]

How many people who've got into craft beer are going to go back to drinking piss? I mean, you'll have a few who move on to wine and perhaps there's the odd person who genuinely hates hoppy/malty beer and just soldiers on through in the hope Carling becomes trendy again, but the days of there only being 8 breweries in London are gone for good. Kind of like with food. People in Britain ate dreadful food for years. Now that we know better, settling for a slab of bland meat and vegetables boiled to fuck isn't something most people we countenance.

Fair enough, but how many gourmet burger joints or microbreweries does a country need? I imagine the majority of them will either go bust or be aquired by bigger concerns. Bit of a bubble IMO.

 

[Gladders]

5 times? Wow.

That's five times more than you thought I had ever been because you read Norfolk on my profile, you can admit you had the wrong impression of me if you like.

 

[mnb089mnb]

That's five times more than you thought I had ever been because you read Norfolk on my profile, you can admit you had the wrong impression of me if you like.

My original post was clearly a joke, as was the follow up.

 

[Gladders]

Clearly...

Looked more like you were upset because people hadn't heard of Byron, prehaps you work for them?

 

[sl1k]

BEEF BEEF BEEF

 

[smat]

I can confirm that I have met mnb089mnb many times and he most certainly does have a vested interest in Byron Burger. I won't reveal what that is, however. Very much for him to disclose.

 

[mnb089mnb]

I can confirm that I have met mnb089mnb many times and he most certainly does have a vested interest in Byron Burger. I won't reveal what that is, however. Very much for him to disclose.

This is a lie.

 

[smat]

This is a lie.

this made me burst out laughing

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

No, hang on. You're conflating two points here.

Legally the illegal workers don't have a leg to stand on. You accept that. Fine.

From a moral standpoint, by working illegally you're shafting someone else somewhere along the line. Whether a competitor for your job, the taxpayer, whoever. In what way would it have been more moral of Byron to refuse to assist the Home Office? Where's the morality in saying nothing and waiting for the Government to spend much more taxpayer money slowly catching up with these people one by one? Where's the morality in sacking these people and leaving them to scratch around trying to find another job to which they're not legally entitled? I find your logic truly bizarre.

Byron Hamburgers have (probably knowingly) employed people who don't have the right to work. They've allegedly engaged in exploitative business practices (allegedly tip-theft, wage-theft, denying people payslips etc) knowing that workers with precarious immigration statuses are less likely to kick up a stink/unionise etc.

Once the net has closed around some of this behaviour they've plotted to entrap said workers (and this "fake meeting" must have taken some planning - probably giving undocumented workers fake rotas for the month as well) to save their own worthless hides. Just before payday, as well, squeezing a few more free hours out of those workers.

People who don't have papers that allow them to work working is a necessary survival strategy for them. The alternative is scraping by on whatever you can beg or borrow (which is the reality for loads of people with leave to remain, but without the right to work).

Ludicrous to suggest this is "shafting" anyone. They're forced into a position where they have to accept less money for more work, and subject to regular harassment from the authorities. They're being exploited.

But even so, the exploitation undocumented workers face (and the fact that companies are happy to employ them) is a pretty good reason that we should be regularising these peoples' immigration status. The only reason not to is if its somehow in your interests to have an ultra-precarious workforce unable to collectively organise to improve its pay and conditions. Which is why the political establishment maintains a subclass of undocumented workers.

 

[Alty]

Byron Hamburgers have (probably knowingly) employed people who don't have the right to work. They've allegedly engaged in exploitative business practices (allegedly tip-theft, wage-theft, denying people payslips etc) knowing that workers with precarious immigration statuses are less likely to kick up a stink/unionise etc.

Once the net has closed around some of this behaviour they've plotted to entrap said workers (and this "fake meeting" must have taken some planning - probably giving undocumented workers fake rotas for the month as well) to save their own worthless hides. Just before payday, as well, squeezing a few more free hours out of those workers.

People who don't have papers that allow them to work working is a necessary survival strategy for them. The alternative is scraping by on whatever you can beg or borrow (which is the reality for loads of people with leave to remain, but without the right to work).

Ludicrous to suggest this is "shafting" anyone. They're forced into a position where they have to accept less money for more work, and subject to regular harassment from the authorities. They're being exploited.

But even so, the exploitation undocumented workers face (and the fact that companies are happy to employ them) is a pretty good reason that we should be regularising these peoples' immigration status. The only reason not to is if its somehow in your interests to have an ultra-precarious workforce unable to collectively organise to improve its pay and conditions. Which is why the political establishment maintains a subclass of undocumented workers.

If the company knowingly employed illegal workers - and I've seen no evidence to suggest it did - then that's deplorable. I don't think you'll find anyone on here disagreeing with that.

Those with leave to remain but without the right to work tend to be asylum seekers who are entitled to free housing, free healthcare, free education for their kids and are given some extra cash on top. It isn't a life of luxury but to claim they have to work illegally in order to survive is just wrong.

Of course it's shafting someone. Byron needs someone to flip its burgers and wait on its tables. Jobs taken by those without the right to work in the UK are jobs that those who are entitled to be here (Brits and non-Brits alike) can't have.

The last bit is just conspiracy theory stuff. Apart from anything else, the political establishment has needed to do no such thing for years because hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans willing to work for low pay have been pouring into the country every year.

 

[lordofthepies]

I intend to boycott Byron Burgers because I have been told that they serve food made from dead animals and/or animal products.

I am a vegan, you see.

 

[ZianfrancoGoal]

I intend to boycott Byron Burgers because I have been told that they serve food made from dead animals and/or animal products.

I am a vegan, you see.

ever had a five guys tho

 

[lordofthepies]

ever had a five guys tho

I've never had sex with more than 2 men at once.

 

[mnb089mnb]

Byron have approx 1300 employees and 60 stores. 35 were illegal. That's 3% of their workforce and more than 1 per every 2 restaurants.

If we believe the home office and Byron when they say they did it unknowingly then there must be a huge amount of illegal immigrants working for large firms in the UK and our border force are doing a terrible job of deporting/arresting them.

 

[silkyman]

Not sure why the goings on at a small regional fast food chain is national news at all.

 

[Alty]

Byron have approx 1300 employees and 60 stores. 35 were illegal. That's 3% of their workforce and more than 1 per every 2 restaurants.

If we believe the home office and Byron when they say they did it unknowingly then there must be a huge amount of illegal immigrants working for large firms in the UK and our border force are doing a terrible job of deporting/arresting them.

Just to be an absolute pedant - Border Force simply stop illegal immigrants coming into the country. I suspect what happened here is a mixture of asylum seekers with no right to work, students with very limited right to work and overstayers whose visas had expired were taking up jobs using false documents. It's up to Immigration Enforcement to stop such people and it is a fair bit harder once people are already in the country, unless you're going to be spying on people at all times. Which is unfeasible. I think the Home Office is going to start being more proactive when it comes to overstayers rather than just issuing a reminder letter saying they should extend their visas or leave the country. But it won't solve the problem completely.

Not sure why the goings on at a small regional fast food chain is national news at all.

I think it's blown up because the 'no borders' nutters got their knickers in a twist and went mad on Twitter. Although Byron have expanded into the whole country so I'm not sure you can say they're a piddly regional company. If ever you leave the shires to brave a day in the cosmopolitan metropolis you can find three stores in Manchester, for example.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

Those with leave to remain but without the right to work tend to be asylum seekers who are entitled to free housing, free healthcare, free education for their kids and are given some extra cash on top. It isn't a life of luxury but to claim they have to work illegally in order to survive is just wrong.

That's not the reality for many people. There are a few of categories in which people are prohibited from work but don't have access to the (really meagre) funds afforded to asylum seekers. Visa overstayers or people on conditional visas is obviously one (and you don't have to be a "no borders nutter" like me to have sympathy with people who don't want to uproot and transplant their life across the globe because their employment or relationship status has changed).

There's also a large number of people with limited leave to remain but no recourse to public funds - often also with conditions on employment. In theory, the government is legally obliged to provide emergency welfare to prevent these people becoming destitute. In practice, councils routinely gatekeep access to these services and the black economy is the only way these people can stay alive.

Of course it's shafting someone. Byron needs someone to flip its burgers and wait on its tables. Jobs taken by those without the right to work in the UK are jobs that those who are entitled to be here (Brits and non-Brits alike) can't have.

The UK has high employment. Anyway, once you start blaming the most precarious workers for "taking jobs" you abandon any claim to a left politics.

The last bit is just conspiracy theory stuff. Apart from anything else, the political establishment has needed to do no such thing for years because hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans willing to work for low pay have been pouring into the country every year.

Lol it's a conspiracy to suggest the capitalist class tolerate a level of undocumented migration because it's good for them.

Byron clearly benefited from employing workers with counterfeit papers (through alleged exploitative practices). They also benefited from having a load of their workforce deported just before payday. 35 workers were deported, apparently 50+ slipped through the net. Quick, back of a fag packet calculation suggests they'd have pocketed over £100k in stolen wages - a decent percentage of their profits. And because they "co-operated" they won't face sanction.

So once again immigration enforcement targets the vulnerable individuals while allowing the exploitative systems to cash in. Regularising the undocumented workforce would pull the rug from under this.

 

[Captain Scumbag]

The real crime here is PP's post with the dreadful Don Juan pun getting only two likes.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

The real crime here is PP's post with the dreadful Don Juan pun getting only two likes.

The real crime is PP's dreadful Don Juan pun

 

[Captain Scumbag]

On any decent forum it would have 25 likes by now, at least.

 

[Ian_Wrexham]

On any decent forum it would have 25 likes by now, at least.

Saw your post before I saw the pun.

I'd hoped for something like "Don Juankers" at the bare minimum.

 

[The Paranoid Pineapple]

The real crime here is PP's post with the dreadful Don Juan pun getting only two likes.

Quite! I feel it's a really sad indictment of an internet forum when a pun that bad can only garner a couple of likes. Well, 1FF, this one may have gone underappreciated but I must warn you all that, when it comes to the delivery of appalling puns, you will NEVER break my resolve.