Bolitics The New Condem Government

[Risso]

 

 

Most of what Bob Crow got vilified for was his job. He carried out what he got paid to do. Doesn't matter whether you agree with the actions, that was his job. His membership voted for those actions.

 

Quite often, a very small proportion of his membership voted for those actions, even if those actions were wrong.

 

And that has what exactly to do with the man himself?

Some people didn't vote, thats Bob Crow's fault?

I'm no big fan of trade unions at all but I can't vilify a man for doing the job he was paid to do

 

 

So it's alright to support one group of people and to hell with the consequences of their actions on everybody else?

[bickster]

Most of what Bob Crow got vilified for was his job. He carried out what he got paid to do. Doesn't matter whether you agree with the actions, that was his job. His membership voted for those actions.

 

Quite often, a very small proportion of his membership voted for those actions, even if those actions were wrong.

And that has what exactly to do with the man himself?

Some people didn't vote, thats Bob Crow's fault?

I'm no big fan of trade unions at all but I can't vilify a man for doing the job he was paid to do

 

So it's alright to support one group of people and to hell with the consequences of their actions on everybody else?

Yes I think people should be allowed to organise and participate in industrial action, inconveniencing others is rather not the point.

[Kingfisher]

There will be a 19p increase in the minimum wage from October....

Tory's the party for 'hard working people'? Really? I don't think so, I'd say that it is derisory and quite frankly insulting.

Tory's cleaning up the mess.

[Jon]

There will be a 19p increase in the minimum wage from October....

Tory's the party for 'hard working people'? Really? I don't think so, I'd say that it is derisory and quite frankly insulting.

Tory's cleaning up the mess.

equivalent to just under £2 for 10 hours work.

 

If I was on the minimum wage, I'd be throwing a party right now. (but it'd have to be bring your own booze, as I wouldn't be able to afford any).

[TrentVilla]

There will be a 19p increase in the minimum wage from October....

Tory's the party for 'hard working people'? Really? I don't think so, I'd say that it is derisory and quite frankly insulting.

Tory's cleaning up the mess.

 

Actually the increase in NMW is the independently recommended 3% and far higher than the rate of inflation at 1.9%, for those on NMW wage this is pretty good news. I doubt many other workers will be enjoying a 3% rise (or rise above inflation) in their pay, except MP's obviously.

 

The reality of this increase is going to be significantly increased labour costs for both private and public sector employers which will cause some considerable headaches for councils, the likes of the NHS and private industry.

 

There is much to be critical of with this government but I don't personally think applying a 3% increase in NMW is one or not least from the angle you are coming from.

[Kingfisher]

The old nobody can afford it.

Firstly this increase is so low, it's irrelevant. Most people in poverty will be earning more than that an hour.

It should go up to the living wage level, coupled with other well thought out policies in housing and small business rates it will save the tax payer money which can be used on hospitals and services rather than in work benefits.

[TrentVilla]

Perhaps you should read what is posted rather than what you think is posted.

 

I agree with the above inflation rise but it is a matter of fact that said rise will have an impact upon labour costs. That will to some extent or another have an impact upon both public and private sector employers and potentially on their willingness or ability to recruit. 

 

I would love to see something to support the notion that most people living in poverty will be earning more than next years NMW.

 

Your last line literally makes no sense.

[Eames]

The old nobody can afford it.

Firstly this increase is so low, it's irrelevant. Most people in poverty will be earning more than that an hour.

It should go up to the living wage level, coupled with other well thought out policies in housing and small business rates it will save the tax payer money which can be used on hospitals and services rather than in work benefits.

A company employs 500 staff on the NMW. So an increase of 19p an hour for one hour costs the company £95.

 

Assume a standard 37 hour working week for all employees thats an extra £351,500 on the weekly wage bill. Across 52 weeks a year increases that companies wage bill by £18,278,000.

 

That I would argue is not an irrelevant increase.

[Kingfisher]

A company employes how many staff on NMW??

[Kingfisher]

Perhaps you should read what you post rather than what you think is posted.

I agree with the above inflation rise but it is a matter of fact that said rise will have an impact upon labour costs. That will to some extent or another have an impact upon both public and private sector employers and potentially on their willingness or ability to recruit.

I would love to see something to support the notion that most people living in poverty will be earning more than next years NMW.

Your last line literally makes no sense.

In short I said October's rise is so small it's irrelevant. It won't effect employers. A rise to the living wage level of I think around £7.75 would have an effect on small businesses which could be absorbed by reduced rates.

The NHS is an interesting example. The problems the NHS are facing and are going to face are those created by Labour and now the Tories through these crazy PFI schemes not the cleaners at the bottom.

[Eames]

 

Perhaps you should read what you post rather than what you think is posted.

I agree with the above inflation rise but it is a matter of fact that said rise will have an impact upon labour costs. That will to some extent or another have an impact upon both public and private sector employers and potentially on their willingness or ability to recruit.

I would love to see something to support the notion that most people living in poverty will be earning more than next years NMW.

Your last line literally makes no sense.

In short I said October's rise is so small it's irrelevant. It won't effect employers. A rise to the living wage level of I think around £7.75 would have an effect on small businesses which could be absorbed by reduced rates.

The NHS is an interesting example. The problems the NHS are facing and are going to face are those created by Labour and now the Tories through these crazy PFI schemes not the cleaners at the bottom.

 

And right there folks is how the left **** up the economy. As demonstrated above a rise of 19p per hour on an individual level is derisory, but scaled across a company it quickly becomes a massive expense. It will absolutely affect employers because it will reduce their willingness to recuit additional staff at best and at worst lead to redundancies as the wage costs rise to unsustainable leves.

 

The NHS PFI schemes were crazy and shit deals for the tax payer... but you will do more economic damage to NHS trusts compounding that with a massive increase in wages than you will benefit individual workers with your "derisory" increase.

[slowandlow]

 

The old nobody can afford it.

Firstly this increase is so low, it's irrelevant. Most people in poverty will be earning more than that an hour.

It should go up to the living wage level, coupled with other well thought out policies in housing and small business rates it will save the tax payer money which can be used on hospitals and services rather than in work benefits.

A company employs 500 staff on the NMW. So an increase of 19p an hour for one hour costs the company £95.

 

Assume a standard 37 hour working week for all employees thats an extra £351,500 on the weekly wage bill. Across 52 weeks a year increases that companies wage bill by £18,278,000.

 

That I would argue is not an irrelevant increase.

 

 not sure on the maths there

[peterms]

 

 

The old nobody can afford it.

Firstly this increase is so low, it's irrelevant. Most people in poverty will be earning more than that an hour.

It should go up to the living wage level, coupled with other well thought out policies in housing and small business rates it will save the tax payer money which can be used on hospitals and services rather than in work benefits.

A company employs 500 staff on the NMW. So an increase of 19p an hour for one hour costs the company £95.

 

Assume a standard 37 hour working week for all employees thats an extra £351,500 on the weekly wage bill. Across 52 weeks a year increases that companies wage bill by £18,278,000.

 

That I would argue is not an irrelevant increase.

 

 not sure on the maths there

 

 

That right there is how the right screw up the economy.  Can't tell the difference between pennies and pounds. 

[TrentVilla]

 

Perhaps you should read what you post rather than what you think is posted.

I agree with the above inflation rise but it is a matter of fact that said rise will have an impact upon labour costs. That will to some extent or another have an impact upon both public and private sector employers and potentially on their willingness or ability to recruit.

I would love to see something to support the notion that most people living in poverty will be earning more than next years NMW.

Your last line literally makes no sense.

In short I said October's rise is so small it's irrelevant. It won't effect employers. A rise to the living wage level of I think around £7.75 would have an effect on small businesses which could be absorbed by reduced rates.

The NHS is an interesting example. The problems the NHS are facing and are going to face are those created by Labour and now the Tories through these crazy PFI schemes not the cleaners at the bottom.

 

 

And in short I'm saying you are talking utter rubbish if you think a 3% rise in NWM will have no affect upon employers. As for the living wage being absorbed by reduced rates... I'd love to see how that one would work.

 

As for the rest of this post about the NHS and PFI that really has nothing to do with the topic of NMW.

[Eames]

The old nobody can afford it.

Firstly this increase is so low, it's irrelevant. Most people in poverty will be earning more than that an hour.

It should go up to the living wage level, coupled with other well thought out policies in housing and small business rates it will save the tax payer money which can be used on hospitals and services rather than in work benefits.

A company employs 500 staff on the NMW. So an increase of 19p an hour for one hour costs the company £95.

Assume a standard 37 hour working week for all employees thats an extra £351,500 on the weekly wage bill. Across 52 weeks a year increases that companies wage bill by £18,278,000.

That I would argue is not an irrelevant increase.

not sure on the maths there

That right there is how the right screw up the economy. Can't tell the difference between pennies and pounds.

maths was never my strong point so if you'd point out where I went wrong that would be good.

[peterms]

 

 

 

 

The old nobody can afford it.

Firstly this increase is so low, it's irrelevant. Most people in poverty will be earning more than that an hour.

It should go up to the living wage level, coupled with other well thought out policies in housing and small business rates it will save the tax payer money which can be used on hospitals and services rather than in work benefits.

A company employs 500 staff on the NMW. So an increase of 19p an hour for one hour costs the company £95.

Assume a standard 37 hour working week for all employees thats an extra £351,500 on the weekly wage bill. Across 52 weeks a year increases that companies wage bill by £18,278,000.

That I would argue is not an irrelevant increase.

not sure on the maths there

That right there is how the right screw up the economy. Can't tell the difference between pennies and pounds.

maths was never my strong point so if you'd point out where I went wrong that would be good.

 

 

£95 x 37 = £3515.  You've exaggerated the impact a hundredfold.

[Eames]

Hahahaha whoops. Fair enough then.

[peterms]

So you might come to a different conclusion, since the evidence is so remarkably different now...

[meregreen]

Most of what Bob Crow got vilified for was his job. He carried out what he got paid to do. Doesn't matter whether you agree with the actions, that was his job. His membership voted for those actions.

 

Quite often, a very small proportion of his membership voted for those actions, even if those actions were wrong.

And that has what exactly to do with the man himself?

Some people didn't vote, thats Bob Crow's fault?

I'm no big fan of trade unions at all but I can't vilify a man for doing the job he was paid to do

 

So it's alright to support one group of people and to hell with the consequences of their actions on everybody else?

That's what I keep telling people who vote Tory

[Risso]

There will be a 19p increase in the minimum wage from October....

Tory's the party for 'hard working people'? Really? I don't think so, I'd say that it is derisory and quite frankly insulting.

Tory's cleaning up the mess.

 

It's an extra £370 a year for the average worker.