Bring back Barmy?

It has been mentioned that Barmy has gone missing. For two weeks now his calming and creative influence has been absent from Greenwich Market. How you must miss his cosy little chats on the correct way to suck eggs. How you must miss his arrogant confident strut and assertive clipboard tapping.

I say don't worry. The poor guy (as you were - that's his brother, who's also gone walkabout) must be burnt out after his huge expenditure of energy on the Thames Festival. He's probably just resting and he'll back among you soon.

Hold on though. It wouldn't be the first time a member of the Greenwich Market team had been "disappeared". Perhaps at this very moment Barmy is the unwilling recipient of a shafting at USM HQ. Perhaps he'll be sighted next at Elephant & Castle clutching a tube of Anusol.

Just in case, perhaps I should start a "bring back Barmy" campaign. What do you think?

Lost weekend

Well well well. Who would have thought the Thames Festival could have generated so much debate?

First off - to anyone who left the market for the weekend to do the Festival I say well done. You're running a business and you have to turn a profit. If anyone took a personal pop at you in my blog I have to say that's not fair. Unless you cravenly crawled up Barmy's arse to achieve your ends - but I'm sure nobody would do such a thing.

To Barmy I also say well done. You're in this market business to line your pockets and blow your own trumpet (and Eric's too no doubt) so sod Greenwich. As you've made crystal clear for the last four years, loyalty's for shlubs.

I think Barmy made a magnificent fist of the Thames Festival. Sure there were problems - arriving on the day to find he didn't have the right power couplings to light the stalls was inspired - but overall the idea of using another market's resources at someone else's expense to enable his own enterprise was brilliant.

What other manager of Greenwich Market would have thought of taking its manager (himself), its assistant manager, its stall erectors and half its regular traders away from Greenwich for a whole weekend. Genius.

So Greenwich Market was half empty and looked like shit, leaving half the visitors with such a bad impression that they won't come back again. So what? So Greenwich Hospital's profit-based rental income was nixed for a whole weekend. So what? So USM staff had to neglect other duties to fill in for the missing ones. So what? So the remaining market porters and Barmy's substitute manager had to erect and break down stalls for the missing stall erectors. So what? It was all for Barmy - be proud and bask in his reflected glory.

When Barmy's stand-in at Greenwich was asked "where's Barmy and Pat?" the reply was "on holiday". Can the dynamic duo really have been getting holiday pay from USM while trousering a fee from the Festival for neglecting their duties at Greenwich? Surely not.

Bravissimo Barmy! You're a complete prick - oh bugger this keyboard - I meant prince, of course.

Hold the press!

I've had a charming invitation via email from a reporter with a regional newspaper:-

Hello, I was wondering if I could speak to you about some of the issues surrounding Greenwich Market. Would you be able to give me call this week? Alternatively, is there a number I could get you on?

Thanks,
**name**
Reporter
**newspaper**

It would be impolite not to respond, wouldn't it?

Comments are free - what a bargain!

Well alright - I'm giving nothing away. I've just had a change of heart about comment moderation. As my blog seems to have been free of the Fudgepacker blight your comments will now appear as soon as you make them. I still reserve the right to nuke anything I don't fancy though.

Oliver: The barrowboy

Now, I'm as keen as anyone to uphold the wholesome traditions that made Britain great. I do tend to draw the line at vulgarities such as slavery, though.

I also draw the line at making little girls sell matches and flowers on the street, or making little boys scavenge loose cotton from beneath looms or sending them up chimneys. Who can forget those engravings of children as young as nine (as long ago as 1833 - yes, 1833 - the Whigs sought to outlaw the employment of children under nine) toiling underground pushing carts of coal from the face?

In his drive to revive Britain's glory days, GSM's great overseer, Barmy, brought back to us the sight of tiny children straining against burdens far bigger than themselves.

Who can forget seven-year-old Dodger manfully pushing trolleys laden with traders' goods to and from storage? Who can forget them toppling over on the bends while Dodger manfully struggled to keep them upright? Who can forget the tears on the poor kid's face when a trader forgot themselves and called the boy a clumsy arse for cocking-up a job he shouldn't have been doing?

Who can forget GSM turning a blind eye yet again?

Oliver: The Peacemaker

For quite a while, the proper complaints procedure has been to raise issues you may have with a fellow trader with the office first. If necessary, the manager can have a quiet, conciliatory, private word with the offending trader. A sensible, adult approach to defusing disputes before they start.

Which only works if the manager in question is also an adult...

A trader selling clothes was using stepped hanger bars which protruded from the top bar of the stall into the aisle. Another trader thought this narrowed the aisle affecting their trade and may have been a hazard to the public. They went to the office and told Barmy their concerns.

Minutes later Barmy's enforcer, the Dodger, arrived at the stall and told the trader to remove the bars immediately because Barmy "said so".

Jaws dropped.

To boldly go

How heart-warming it is to see GSM supporting Young Enterprise. The two back-to-back stalls in the market on Sunday were an inspiration to budding young entrepreneurs everywhere. Stupidly, the operators of the scheme and the young people's business mentors have been cramming their heads with budgeting, manufacturing, marketing and the other harsh realities of starting in business.

Those stars of modern market management, GSM, were on hand to show the future young business leaders the reality of Greenwich Marketism. The four and a half quid their excellent beaded jewellery made on one of their stalls may have been taken as a rebuff of their business skills by Joe Public. They should not be downcast, as the sheltered rent-free position, and consequent lack of any need to turn a profit, should be taken as an object lesson in how to succeed in today's Greenwich Market.

Meanwhile, Dominique, a real market trader, was stuck outside under a piece of plastic next to the toilets again.

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.

Grumpy

Not content with being identified with Dopey the dwarf, a certain trader (see "What a dope") has been observed stomping around like Grumpy lately. I do hope my exposure of the market's drug habit hasn't adversely affected their income. If so, I do sympathise and can only regret that they'll have to try to survive on the takings from their over-the-counter business.

Can this mean that GSM have reacted to my post and cleaned up their act after all these years?

Oliver: Thank heaven for little girls

There were so many events featuring Dodger that I nearly forgot to mention Rose. Rose was another of the market waifs and even younger than Dodger. Barmy often played with her, but didn't appoint her to the staff. Usually.

One Christmas, on a very busy day for casuals, there were only two traders remaining to be allocated. Unfortunately there was only one pitch left. As a mature market manager, the obvious thing to do would be to decide who should take the pitch based on logic, common sense, an evaluation of their goods and their contribution to the market over the past year.

Nobody was surprised, therefore, when Barmy turned to little Rose, squatted next to her, and asked her to choose which trader should get the pitch - and who should lose a day's earnings.

Naturally, her choice prevailed.

As I was saying...

Funny I should have just remarked upon the jewellery situation.

Overheard on Saturday, customer to trader:-

"The last time I came here there was loads of jewellery in this place - now there's even more."

So it's not my imagination then.

In case Barmy should forget what he's trying to achieve, here's a picture.

Diamond geezer

I think I speak for all when I say I'm absolutely delighted to see that Barmy isn't going to let himself be limited by a so-called "saturated" category.

I don't think anyone would argue that the most saturated is jewellery, with the number of traders rigorously capped for many years. Until recently, that is. Ever the bold and adventurous manager, Barmy has ripped up his own rule book for the benefit of the market.

Seeing clearly that the market is, in fact, afflicted by a severe shortage of jewellery, Barmy's main achievement this Friday was to set a new all-time record for jewellery stalls.

In the half of the market south of Durnford Street - the arts & crafts half on Fridays now - there were 20 jewellery traders occupying 27 out of 79 stalls. That's a magnificent 34% of the arts & crafts section devoted to one type of product. In one full-width aisle of 14 stalls, 6 were devoted to jewellery. In another of only 13 stalls, there were another 6 stalls of jewellery.

Well done Barmy. We salute you.

Handbags at dawn

I must seem very unoriginal these days, but here's another comment promoted to a new post - this time from "Fan of Dominique":-

Barmy personally gave Dominique a spot quite early on Saturday. She was placed in an aisle of eight stalls,three of which were jewellery stalls, one t-shirt stall & the 4 remaining did bags of one sort or another (including Dominique). The stall opposite her (a new trader - doing women's cloths & BAGS ) was given a spreadover ( he's so kind to the new young girls ). I bet Barmy chuckled to himself all the way back to the office. He sure knows how to dish out a really creative mixture of stalls -- I don't think so !! Pat at least gave Dominique a better position on Sunday. Barmy goes on & on about creative priority, creative this & creative that, but doesn't even have a single blip of creativity in his (miss) management of the market or how he dishes out the stalls. He just doesn't see the bigger picture, even though he carries around a copy on his clipboard ( as a security blanket )to make him feel important His creativity seems to be confined to how he repairs his battered ego & how he wreaks revenge.

What can one say? A common response to "trouble makers" is to swamp them with competition. I have other examples, which I'll post from time to time. In the meantime, let's see what happens to Dominique on Barmy's next shift.

Oliver: Reviewing the Situation

Everyone was familiar with the Dodger and his clipboard. Incurring Dodger's displeasure was something you would try hard to avoid, even if it meant treating the wee tyke as though he actually was a figure of authority. There was good reason for treating him that way - he reported back to his master.

An anonymous commenter shared their experience with us:-

When working on the market about a year ago, I came under the scrutiny of the young Dodger. He popped up in front of my stall when I was still setting up. With clip board in hand he cast his eye over my stall & uttered "rubbish", then ticked a box on his board. When I asked him what he was up to, he said that barny asked him to go round & see which stalls were good & which were rubbish. Later he came back to tell me that I should put up my company name sign. At the time I just laughed it off. I'm sure this kid was having great fun doing Barny's bidding, but this should not be, as the market can be a dangerous place for an unaccompanied six year old.

Your eyes did not deceive you. Traders' displays were being critiqued by someone whose cultural horizons were defined by Spongebob, Lego and cheese string, and whose ideal retail experience was Toys R Us. And Dodger was copying him.

Off yer trolley

A quick plea to the management.

As Ben is not around at the moment to effect repairs, can you please send someone out to "liberate" a few new trolleys to replace the crippled ones.

The picture should remind you where to "borrow" them from.

Thanks.

Oliver's choice

O happy day. You're a casual trader. It's coming up to Christmas and there just aren't enough pitches to go round. You're one of a few traders left at the end of allocation. You're not too worried about getting a pitch though. You've been coming to the market most days all year round. Loyalty has it's reward and you're sure Barmy will pick you.

Wait... What's this? Barmy's got young Dodger with him. Ah, it's alright. He's obviously brought the young spud along to show him how a professional market manager operates. Here we go - the moment of choice.

Barmy bends down to little Dodger, indicates you and your fellows, and asks the lad to choose who should stay and who should go. Dodger points at one trader, then another, then another. But not you. You're not one of the favoured. You're going home.

Oliver: a responsible adult speaks

I'm still shocked by a trader's visit to the market on Sunday to circulate a letter naming their child and family as the subject of my posts. I have been sent a copy of the note, but I don't intend to publish it as I have no wish to compound the harm it has already done. (I am grateful for the publicity though - the blog had more visitors yesterday than at any time since it started.)

Rather than address the note's authors, I'll address myself to the Dodger's parents, who, like the boy himself, I am not prepared to identify by name. I firmly believe they would be right to be angry with anyone who might name their child openly and therefore reveal their identity publicly, in a blog or a note. The lad is innocent and shouldn't be named to anyone who doesn't know who he is. I am a responsible adult and his identity is safe with me.

I also think the parents are right to be angry with whoever thought it was a good idea to expose this child to risk and them to ridicule in the first place. That Dodger was used as some sort of unofficial, unpaid assistant manager is outrageous and I am quite sure the boy's parents were blissfully unaware of this. I do not doubt that they had no idea he was being encouraged to collect rent, carry cash, vet traders and disrespect adults. I am confident they didn't know about the traders who left the office carrying receipts adorned with their son's childish doodles. I wouldn't question that they had no knowledge of their "friends" being afraid to refuse giving their son a tip, especially when he asked for one.

I'm sure of all this because I cannot conceive of any parent who, being aware of these things, would allow them to continue for a moment. I'm convinced that they would not have wanted their fellow traders, with whom they enjoyed much banter and laughter, to be fearful of attracting their son's displeasure, resulting in the real management's unwelcome attention. They would no doubt have admonished those responsible for encouraging their lad to play a game of "managers and traders".

What has been posted in this blog and reaffirmed here must have been news to them, and I envy them. In their blissful ignorance they were almost unique. A great many people in the market did know about these events. Many were affected by them. Everyone involved, including traders and GSM's staff, must have known these things were wrong, but did nothing to stop them, such was the climate of oppression.

If my little blog has helped alert Dodger's parents to the way their son was used, I am happy, and I hope they will actively pursue those who misused him and alienated so many potential friends.

In case Dodger's parents haven't been paying attention, this blog isn't directed against them - it isn't anti-anyone. Really. I know it may not seem like it sometimes, but that's true. What it is, however, is pro-trader. Of his parents I ask: can you honestly say that you never felt bullied, intimidated, disrespected or ill-used? You and almost every other trader - hence the blog.

Let me be clear. I don't write about these things to upset a child. Nor to disturb blinkered parents. Not even to punish the management that brought the situation about and allowed it to continue. Just to stop it. These things did happen, they were wrong, they affected many traders and they must never happen again. That's why I write the Oliver posts.

As to the motives ascribed to me in the misguided trader's note, I would have thought that I'm obviously not engaged in a quest for attention. If I was, haven't I kind of blown it by being anonymous? I'm not the message, just the messenger - so don't waste your bullets on me.

Oliver: What the f***?

I've been reliably informed that someone's been walking around the market openly naming the Dodger - in writing.

I'm very upset about this. As I said in my first post in the Oliver strand, "Oliver Twisted":

"What happened was not the children's fault and I am not using their real names. I shall call the boy Dodger and the girl Rose."

I've never deviated from this, as I take the view that those who witnessed the events knew who was involved, and those who didn't don't need to know, so I'm rather shocked.

To all who have commented and emailed on this issue, my thanks. However I don't want to go off half-cocked and criticise anyone without being in possession of the full facts, so I'm holding your remarks back and delaying my own comments for now. Can someone please email me a copy of said note so I can see what's going on.

Compensation?

I've just seen Whistler's post called Compensation. It's a bit off the wall. Still interesting though.

There's one thing Whistler missed. I'm supposing that the shop's leaseholders come in for compensation because their businesses are going to suffer in the redevelopment. Ditto GSM. What about the dozens of businesses that operate from market stalls, some of whom have been there for more than 20 years. Shouldn't they be compensated?

Perhaps GSM will be generous and let some of their compensation trickle down to stallholders. That was a weird thought - who knows what I'll be like when the lithium wears off completely.

Seriously, why don't you guys band together and get some legal advice - before it's too late.

Horn of plenty

This is a comment I received on my "Bungled" post:-

I'm not sure of the specifics of your posting but I can tell you for sure that the non food traders are being pushed aside on the weekdays to make room for the food court. I have also heard rumours that the food stalls are not paying rent at the moment. I know this for sure with regard to Wednesdays (12 weeks grace I believe) but there seems to be confusion if this is also the case on Thursdays and Fridays. I would have thought the food court is meant to be a healthy addition to the weekday markets, rather than a take over bid at the expense of other long standing paying traders.

First let me say I have no wish to set traders against each other. Before commenting here please remember that this situation is not of the traders' making, but rather of a bizarre management style that rules by division. Much as it pains me, I have to confirm the truth of the expanding food court and the pressure on space for other traders.

I can also confirm that you are correct about the rent-free pitches. All the Wednesday traders, food and non-food, have the thick end of 3 months free, while GSM's largesse has been confined to food only on Thursday and Friday (I'm not sure if they all get that - anyone know?).

I'm not sure why the most profitable businesses in the market need that kind of subsidy, but what do I know?

Victim support

I feel the need to speak out on behalf of one of the most put-upon traders whose treatment last weekend plumbed new depths.

Dominique has been a regular casual trader for quite a while. She is affable, friendly and manages to smile in the face of adversity. She sells leather bags which although not designed or made by herself, are bright, modern, inexpensive and there are few other bags on sale in the market that are better.

She is consistently the last trader to be allocated a pitch, but last Sunday she was more put-upon than usual. There were many new casual traders; I recognised some from Covent Garden's Apple Market, which I understand has contracted recently. (Could these people's appearance have anything to do with Whistler's remarks about Sunday spreads? There were no spreads last week.) In conjunction with the new traders, there was further pressure on space due to the food court overflowing into another row of stalls.

As a consequence, although every new casual was accommodated inside the market hall, Dominique was given a stall outside the toilets in Durnford Street, traditionally the crappiest pitch available. Insulting enough, you'd think. To rub salt in the wounds, she was not given an electricity supply all day in spite of pointing out the omission to management.

Just to press their point home and dump on her business to the greatest degree, the manager allocated a double pitch opposite Dominique to a trader selling cheaper bags.

Way to respect your regulars. Morons.