Support NeoGAF

[Clay Davis]

The Maastricht Treaty. The whole thing that was supposed to ensure this wouldn't happen..

yep.

our trade deficit or them 'needing' us is irrelevant when they are faced with the destruction of the euro and of their economies. anyone who pretends that countries wont go through years of turmoil if they leave the euro are very disingenious or flat out lying or dont know any better.

it wont take one or two quarters for resume normal services, well maybe financial sectors will recover quickly as they usually do, but the rest of the society will suffer tremendously. of course zomg doesnt really factor in the proles when he takes about countries recovering in a couple of quarters, he really means the sectors that only benefit the very, very few but people still lap it up from our resident 'expert'.

 

[Parl]

regarding your comment about pensions. do you really think that a nurse should receive the same pension as someone who works at a bank till? or a teacher should receive the same pension as sales assistant?

really?

The rest of what you said had nothing to do with his comment about pensions.

 

[kitch9]

thats not really true.

theyve said they want to make easier for companies to fire staff, theyve taken away legal aid so people cant fight unfair dismissal against employers. theres more but its still early and i havent had cup of coffee yet.

regarding your comment about pensions. do you really think that a nurse should receive the same pension as someone who works at a bank till? or a teacher should receive the same pension as sales assistant?

really?

No they don't, they want to make it easier for companies to hire staff and there is a distinction that is difficult to see depending which side of the political fence you are.

I'm a director of a small business that employs 5 staff, my dad is a director of a larger company that employs 60+ staff. Both of our companies service the public sector as we are mainly involved with the mass insulation projects of council housing so we are in a funny position.

We need labours spending as the more the government spends on its housing stock, the more potential business we get, but we also would like lesser corporation tax and easier employment laws.

With employment laws as they are, for a small employer like me taking on full time staff is a gamble. 1 year is not enough time to find out if somebody will accept my training well and become a fully productive member of staff, and that's all I have before I have to make a decision as that member of staff suddenly becomes difficult to remove. Its because of this I tend to run on the side of caution, as I probably have less staff than I need 80% of the time but I make do with what I have to minimise my exposure to potential staff problems. Most businesses will do the same with current employment laws.

My dads situation is worse because he has the above problem, but he also, due to EU equality laws finds it hard to employ to right person for the job if his "Ethic staff ratio" is not right, as he has to write a full report on why he picked the better suited to the role candidate if it throws his "Ethnic staff ratio mix" off as a public contractor.

Don't get me started on the questionnaire he has to give his staff to file to the government which asks if they are homosexual or not, as he must be seen to be employing them...... To be fair, there's not many homosexual builders out there, yet my dad has to answer why that is the case once a year.

Because of all this, he runs understaffed too (Probably by around 5-10 people) as its not worth the damn hassle of employing people some times. He's achieving a turnover he's happy with and he's not pushing for more due to all the potential headaches he'll get.

So, out of two companies there's probably 7 or so people who could have a job but are not provided one due to the owners not wanting the hassle of jumping through the employment law hoops...... How many more is out there?

 

[Sage00]

[Snip]

You have two demands in this post:

1. More spending and less tax

I feel like hitting my head off a wall. Surely you see what you've done here?

2. Less employment law, including rules about equality and employing minorities.

Are you actually serious?

 

[Clay Davis]

The rest of what you said had nothing to do with his comment about pensions.

stop being disingenious,

they just want public sector pensions to be somewhere in the real world along with the rest of us.

dissect that if you think i was wrong with my reply.

the fact is that they are in the real world when you factor in the kind of job those people do. don't nurses deserve a nicer pension than someone who works behind a till all day? don't policemen deserve a nicer pension than a manager of a supermarket?

what does he mean in the real world if not that he wants them to resemble those in the private sector where the level of work and sacrifice isn't comparable.

 

[Clay Davis]

You have two demands in this post:

1. More spending and less tax

I feel like hitting my head off a wall. Surely you see what you've done here?

2. Less employment law, including rules about equality and employing minorities.

Are you actually serious?

you beat me to it. this is basically the standard response you can expect from those who support the removal of workers rights for companies.

he says he its to make it easier to hire staff, yeah, by making it easier to fire someone over something trivial. whats to stop companies from abusing this? work for a company for 20 years only to find yourself fired because of something that would normally result in a written or verbal warning? no recourse of course as theres no legal aid and its law for them to fire someone for whatever reasons without due process.

companies can fire workers who arent efficient, to claim they cant because of red tape or some other nonsense is beyond pathetic/flat out lying.

 

[kitch9]

You have two demands in this post:

1. More spending and less tax

I feel like hitting my head off a wall. Surely you see what you've done here?

2. Less employment law, including rules about equality and employing minorities.

Are you actually serious?

I'm saying I'm in a position where I can see things from both sides of the fence, which is far from demanding anything as you appear to have dreamt.

I'm also saying employment law is a touch too strong as I'm an employer and it hinders my employment desicions. There as been times when I needed more time with a conscientious employee, but had to let them go as they still hadn't quite grasped the job to avoid getting stuck with them.

Do I really need to be asking electricians and plasterers whether they are gays or pray to Allah?

It will be interesting to see if you dream something else I haven't said now.

 

[Sage00]

Do I really need to be asking electricians and plasterers whether they are gays or pray to Allah?

Yes, since some people may not be employing people for those reasons, especially in your industry. Do you really not understand why this legislation is in place?

 

[Clay Davis]

I'm saying I'm in a position where I can see things from both sides of the fence, which is far from demanding anything as you appear to have dreamt.

I'm also saying employment law is a touch too strong as I'm an employer and it hinders my employment desicions.

Do I really need to be asking electricians and plasterers whether they are gays or pray to Allah?

It will be interesting to see if you dream something else I haven't said now.

sounds like you lack basic common sense. you dont have to ask those questions if you dont want to, no-one is going to fine you or impede your work if you dont.

ive been to dozens of interviews for both public and private sector (radiologist) and ive never once been asked those questions. why? because the interviewer had more sense than you seemingly do and they had no relevence to my position.

 

[kitch9]

Yes, since some people may not be employing people for those reasons, especially in your industry. Do you really not understand why this legislation is in place?

Now you go and find me them....

 

[Sage00]

Now you go and find me them....

A number of studies over the years have reported that ethnic minority graduates are
less successful in gaining employment in the construction industry than their white
counterparts (CABE, 2005; Briscoe, 2005; Minority Ethnic Construction
Professionals and Urban Regeneration (MECPUR), 1996). They are twice as likely
to be unemployed, half as likely to be offered employment in their year of graduation,
and needing to make more applications before attaining interviews, despite being
more highly qualified than their fellow graduates (MECPUR, 1996, p 9). White
graduates are generally likely to receive a high rate of response to applications from
firms and find the interview process positive, whereas ethnic minority people –
particularly if they have an easily identifiable ethnic minority name – report a poor
experience in terms of response, result and feedback (CCI, 2008, p 57). Ethnic
minority candidates report very little feedback from companies and find recruitment
agencies unresponsive (CEMS, 2002). Some find that the interview is largely about
social interests, which tend to exclude those from minority cultures (CEMS, 2002).

 

[kitch9]

sounds like you lack basic common sense. you dont have to ask those questions if you dont want to, no-one is going to fine you or impede your work if you dont.

ive been to dozens of interviews for both public and private sector (radiologist) and ive never once been asked those questions. why? because the interviewer had more sense than you seemingly do and they had no relevence to my position.

Awesome, no one has asked you if you are gay so it doesn't happen?

You try winning a government contract without asking your staff all kinds of deeply personal questions.

 

[kitch9]

A number of studies over the years have reported that ethnic minority graduates are
less successful in gaining employment in the construction industry than their white
counterparts (CABE, 2005; Briscoe, 2005; Minority Ethnic Construction
Professionals and Urban Regeneration (MECPUR), 1996). They are twice as likely
to be unemployed, half as likely to be offered employment in their year of graduation,
and needing to make more applications before attaining interviews, despite being
more highly qualified than their fellow graduates (MECPUR, 1996, p 9). White
graduates are generally likely to receive a high rate of response to applications from
firms and find the interview process positive, whereas ethnic minority people –
particularly if they have an easily identifiable ethnic minority name – report a poor
experience in terms of response, result and feedback (CCI, 2008, p 57). Ethnic
minority candidates report very little feedback from companies and find recruitment
agencies unresponsive (CEMS, 2002). Some find that the interview is largely about
social interests, which tend to exclude those from minority cultures (CEMS, 2002).

Bullshit "studies" like the tripe you posted make me smile.

It's tough as a graduate in general to get into the construction industry as they are next to no use to firms such as ours. We have the odd quantity surveyor who could be described as Ethnic by the way, but the rest are tradesman who need a proven track record at their trade and not a useless PHD.

 

[Omikaru]

Bullshit "studies" like the tripe you posted make me smile.

It's tough as a graduate in general to get into the construction industry as they are next to no use to firms such as ours. We have the odd quantity surveyor who could be described as Ethnic by the way, but the rest are tradesman who need a proven track record at their trade and not a useless PHD.

Did you just dismiss a study because it didn't adhere to your personal views? And you have the temerity to claim that it's the one full of bullshit?

 

[Guerrillas in the Mist]

This whole ordeal had highlighted how reliant Britain is on the financial sector, something resulted in us being hit hard when the recession came round. I don't want this to be an anti-Thatcher rant, because New Labour continued this with full force, but the issue stands that Britain has become a company driven by services, when perhaps the Government should have been more concerned with courting other industries.

 

[phisheep]

some here will continue to eat up everything zomg and his 'expert' friend tells them, the stark truth is that we're fucked.

doesnt matter if there are treaties in place, do people think germany, france, etc will suddenly start to follow treaties to the letter after years of ignoring ones that hurt their national interests? naive in the extreme.

we're fucked, no number of temporary jobs from china or india is going to save us if we're frozen out of the eu.

Well, it seems to me that, from the legal angle at least, zomg’s expert friend is right on the button.

Without unanimously-approved changes to the EU treaties, whatever accord the other members come to can’t be implemented by the existing EU institutions – or at least not enforceably – for example, if there is any dispute as to penalties for breach of whatever the fiscal requirements are the ECJ will have no jurisdiction to deal with it. And without that, it pretty well comes down to Germany bossing the rest of the EU, which isn’t exactly the political outcome that anyone (even Germany) wants. In the short term (as in immediate and now), sure, France will blame the UK. But medium-term France may well be the first to default and want protection given their banking exposures.

Now I’m not saying that the UK government’s approach would have been right in all possible circumstances. If, for example the political will were more aligned across Europe then it might have been a bad move. But as things stand this is a rational stance for the UK to take, it hugely improves our negotiating position, allows the Eurozone to push for internal reforms without affecting other countries, but also allows a backstop renegotiation of the EU treaties if it doesn’t work. I don’t believe for a minute that the other governments didn’t see this coming, and they know well enough that it provides a second line of defence. So for all the posturing that is going on it is a good move for the UK and for the Eurozone.

Notice that I’m not personalising this to Cameron or to the Tories. It would have been a good move whichever party was in power here.

This whole ordeal had highlighted how reliant Britain is on the financial sector, something resulted in us being hit hard when the recession came round. I don't want this to be an anti-Thatcher rant, because New Labour continued this with full force, but the issue stands that Britain has become a company driven by services, when perhaps the Government should have been more concerned with courting other industries.

It's going to take, I guess, another 300 years or so for the global economy to settle down in terms of where manufacturing is best done. And it's going to settle - as it did the last few times round - somewhere near a source of raw materials and/or cheap labour and/or cheap transport. Whatever the answer is, it isn't (now) in the UK. We've done the exploited workers bit here, but what happens when you've done that is the few remaining exploited workers get better wages and the bulk manufacturing moves somewhere else. The crunch comes when we run out of exploited workers which will mean we have, all of us, to get by with less stuff. And less stuff means more specialisation and more of a service economy than a purchasing economy.

Now in the main I don't have a problem with that. Human society is flexible enough to cope with all sorts of different ways of doing things - for example going to cinemas rather than buying HDTVs and videos. It's a bit of a problem for banking in that there will be fewer and more localised assets to have a claim on if things go wrong. But a predominantly service economy is nothing to be ashamed of.

 

[kitch9]

Did you just dismiss a study because it didn't adhere to your personal views? And you have the temerity to claim that it's the one full of bullshit?

No, its because I know its bullshit. There's too many "studies" and not enough common sense in the UK at the minute.

We are currently running contracts involving the refurbishment of thousands of social houses in Birmingham, Liverpool, Leeds/Bradford, Manchester etc etc. You would think in those areas we would not have a problem with what I am saying but we do.

I can fill our offices with "Ethnics" (God I hate that word.) all day long, but finding experienced tradesmen which can provide the required quality standards to fit the government and EU forced bill is incredibly hard.

I'm not saying I'm against employment law, and am merely saying its a touch too tight as I struggle with a probationary period that is only 12 months, and feel one that is 18 months could be beneficial all round, I fear I have let staff go that could have come good for us but hadn't quite grasped the nettle in time so my hand was forced.

Believe it or not the vast majority of employers out there hate having to lose staff, and they especially hate telling them they are letting them go, but sometimes (Or a lot of times!) because of our own laws that are supposed to protect from this happening they have to.

Well, it seems to me that, from the legal angle at least, zomg’s expert friend is right on the button.

Without unanimously-approved changes to the EU treaties, whatever accord the other members come to can’t be implemented by the existing EU institutions – or at least not enforceably – for example, if there is any dispute as to penalties for breach of whatever the fiscal requirements are the ECJ will have no jurisdiction to deal with it. And without that, it pretty well comes down to Germany bossing the rest of the EU, which isn’t exactly the political outcome that anyone (even Germany) wants. In the short term (as in immediate and now), sure, France will blame the UK. But medium-term France may well be the first to default and want protection given their banking exposures.

Now I’m not saying that the UK government’s approach would have been right in all possible circumstances. If, for example the political will were more aligned across Europe then it might have been a bad move. But as things stand this is a rational stance for the UK to take, it hugely improves our negotiating position, allows the Eurozone to push for internal reforms without affecting other countries, but also allows a backstop renegotiation of the EU treaties if it doesn’t work. I don’t believe for a minute that the other governments didn’t see this coming, and they know well enough that it provides a second line of defence. So for all the posturing that is going on it is a good move for the UK and for the Eurozone.

Notice that I’m not personalising this to Cameron or to the Tories. It would have been a good move whichever party was in power here.

I know the tabloids are talking as if the discussions are stopped and everything is off the table.....The UK currently does not have a debt crisis and to be frank asking one of the uks biggest industries to to shoulder the bulk of the burden to pay for the EU's crisis is ludicrous. All parties are playing hardball are pretending that's that, but this is where negotiations really start. I'm an ex car salesman and this is straight from the negotiating handbook on all sides imo.

 

[Rourkey]

The strong employment rules in Europe do have their drawbacks, once an employee is secure it is almost impossible to get rid of them and some bad apples take advantage of this fact. They become unproductive taking advantage of their employers and fellow employees, I'm an accountant and I hear all these problems all the time.

Only recently a client couldn't get rid of a sales man who lied about the customers he had visited, the company detected that something was wrong in his section and looked into the tracking data on his company car and found out he was doing fuck all but they couldn't sack him because it wasn't in his contract that he had a tracker in the car! They had to call all the people he had lied about visiting and it still took 6 months of tribunals and management time to move him on.

Another one I heard recently was where an employer took on a new manager and mentioned in the introduction email that 'were not getting any younger' (all the management team are 60+) and this caused 12 months of tribunals due to constructive dismissal, even though the guy was in a different part of the business all together. This procedures take up so much time and costs it really as a detriment on company's, these clients aren't evil work house factory owners like the left like to portray them as just decent people trying to keep their businesses going in difficult times.

I'm not saying we should be like the US where people have 2 weeks notice (although perhaps it would have encouraged saving rather than debt fuelled sending) but im sure it boosts productivity, there is a balance and we've gone to far if we want to remain competitive in the new world.

 

[Rourkey]

This whole ordeal had highlighted how reliant Britain is on the financial sector, something resulted in us being hit hard when the recession came round. I don't want this to be an anti-Thatcher rant, because New Labour continued this with full force, but the issue stands that Britain has become a company driven by services, when perhaps the Government should have been more concerned with courting other industries.

The unions destroyed the UK's manufacturing base in the 70's, governments tried to keep it going with state aid but it was pissing against the wind. German workers accepted 10 years of pay freezes in order that they remained competitive people here wouldn't accept it, it's why average salaries are higher here.

 

[phisheep]

This is getting really interesting as a discussion. But on the other hand I really really have to get the garden sorted out, last mow of the year, bit of weeding and so on. Probably be back in five or six hours time. Enjoy!

 

[reggieandTFE]

Hope your friend is right Zomg, what she says about the German position sounds very plausible.

Of course if it pans out like that DC will end up a hero for standing up to Europe and winning, could be a Falklands moment for him..

Have fun in Asia and bring back some jobs for Britain!

Hahahahahaha. Is he going to bring back these "jobs" in his luggage? And your last post blaming UK unions for losing the manufacturing base while praising German ones is pure historical revisionism. How old are you? 18? Did you just take your first intro to economics class and start kneeling at the discredited intellectual phallus of Milton Friean?

 

[Meadows]

Hahahahahaha. Is he going to bring back these "jobs" in his luggage? And your last post blaming UK unions for losing the manufacturing base while praising German ones is pure historical revisionism. How old are you? 18? Did you just take your first intro to economics class and start kneeling at the discredited intellectual phallus of Milton Friean?

don't be a dick

 

[Meadows]

In non-EU news, I found this YouGov poll which broke down different voter's second party preference (under AV).

The Lib Dems were very suprising:

Conservatives: 37%
Labour: 26%
Green: 17%
UKIP: 7%
Lib Dem(?): 5%
SNP/PC: 4%
No preference: 3%
BNP: 0%

That UKIP one amazes me

 

[PJV3]

In non-EU news, I found this YouGov poll which broke down different voter's second party preference (under AV).

The Lib Dems were very suprising:

Conservatives: 37%
Labour: 26%
Green: 17%
UKIP: 7%
Lib Dem(?): 5%
SNP/PC: 4%
No preference: 3%
BNP: 0%

That UKIP one amazes me

Sometimes reading LibDemVoice is very revealing, The LibDem's have a ruthless rightwing core surrounded by sandal wearing ex-hippies.
So the UKIP figure is no suprise to me.

 

[Meadows]

Sometimes reading LibDemVoice is very revealing, The LibDem's have a ruthless rightwing core surrounded by sandal wearing ex-hippies.

To be fair the results might not be quite the same as you think.

(in this argument I'm going to presume that Labour are left wing, even though your mileage varies with that presumtion)

44% voted for right wing parties (CON/UKIP/BNP)
47% voted for left wing parties (LAB/GRN/PC/SNP)

So I guess they are centrists. My 2nd vote would go to PC.

 

[PJV3]

To be fair the results might not be quite the same as you think.

(in this argument I'm going to presume that Labour are left wing, even though your mileage varies with that presumtion)

44% voted for right wing parties (CON/UKIP/BNP)
47% voted for left wing parties (LAB/GRN/PC/SNP)

So I guess they are centrists. My 2nd vote would go to PC.

LibDemVoice is more where party members hang out, so yeah i made a slight error bringing that up.
Their voters tend to be more left leaning in comparison.

 

[kitch9]

The strong employment rules in Europe do have their drawbacks, once an employee is secure it is almost impossible to get rid of them and some bad apples take advantage of this fact. They become unproductive taking advantage of their employers and fellow employees, I'm an accountant and I hear all these problems all the time.

Only recently a client couldn't get rid of a sales man who lied about the customers he had visited, the company detected that something was wrong in his section and looked into the tracking data on his company car and found out he was doing fuck all but they couldn't sack him because it wasn't in his contract that he had a tracker in the car! They had to call all the people he had lied about visiting and it still took 6 months of tribunals and management time to move him on.

Another one I heard recently was where an employer took on a new manager and mentioned in the introduction email that 'were not getting any younger' (all the management team are 60+) and this caused 12 months of tribunals due to constructive dismissal, even though the guy was in a different part of the business all together. This procedures take up so much time and costs it really as a detriment on company's, these clients aren't evil work house factory owners like the left like to portray them as just decent people trying to keep their businesses going in difficult times.

I'm not saying we should be like the US where people have 2 weeks notice (although perhaps it would have encouraged saving rather than debt fuelled sending) but im sure it boosts productivity, there is a balance and we've gone to far if we want to remain competitive in the new world.

My point entirely, for a small business this crap is a nightmare. The more time spent dealing with this shit means less time finding new business to be able to pay the rest of your staff.

 

[Meadows]

FOOKIN' EUROPEANS MAKIN' ME HIRE T'ETHNICS

/Yorkshire

 

[i_am_ben]

The strong employment rules in Europe do have their drawbacks, once an employee is secure it is almost impossible to get rid of them and some bad apples take advantage of this fact. They become unproductive taking advantage of their employers and fellow employees, I'm an accountant and I hear all these problems all the time.

Only recently a client couldn't get rid of a sales man who lied about the customers he had visited, the company detected that something was wrong in his section and looked into the tracking data on his company car and found out he was doing fuck all but they couldn't sack him because it wasn't in his contract that he had a tracker in the car! They had to call all the people he had lied about visiting and it still took 6 months of tribunals and management time to move him on.

Another one I heard recently was where an employer took on a new manager and mentioned in the introduction email that 'were not getting any younger' (all the management team are 60+) and this caused 12 months of tribunals due to constructive dismissal, even though the guy was in a different part of the business all together. This procedures take up so much time and costs it really as a detriment on company's, these clients aren't evil work house factory owners like the left like to portray them as just decent people trying to keep their businesses going in difficult times.

I'm not saying we should be like the US where people have 2 weeks notice (although perhaps it would have encouraged saving rather than debt fuelled sending) but im sure it boosts productivity, there is a balance and we've gone to far if we want to remain competitive in the new world.

You poor thing.

 

[Parl]

In non-EU news, I found this YouGov poll which broke down different voter's second party preference (under AV).

The Lib Dems were very suprising:

Conservatives: 37%
Labour: 26%
Green: 17%
UKIP: 7%
Lib Dem(?): 5%
SNP/PC: 4%
No preference: 3%
BNP: 0%

That UKIP one amazes me

That's not how I expected it to break down at all, but to be fair I didn't even really put much thought into it. Before the election, I considered Lib Dems to be a second choice for many though.

stop being disingenious,

You twisted somebody's position in order to argue against something he didn't even state or imply in the slightest. Pointing that out isn't disingenious.

 

[Chinner]

i tell yer, EU law is out of control. by law i know not only have to ask if my potential employees are queers, but also suck their dicks to test if they are! god jesus EU have some common sense!

 

[PJV3]

i tell yer, EU law is out of control. by law i know not only have to ask if my potential employees are queers, but also suck their dicks to test if they are! god jesus EU have some common sense!

I would love to attend an interview if you're offering, the wife has a sore throat at the moment.

 

[kitch9]

i tell yer, EU law is out of control. by law i know not only have to ask if my potential employees are queers, but also suck their dicks to test if they are! god jesus EU have some common sense!

When people don't get employment because of it, then yes common sense should say it's out of control.

 

[blahblah...blah]

Now you go and find me them....

Kitch, I'm very much on your side with the politics, but it's wholly false to suggest that labour market discrimination no longer exists. There is so much evidence for it that it's simply not a point worth arguing anymore (if you want, I'll PM you some academic papers)

Anyway, this quote I read in the FT cracked me up:

Britain is “as isolated as somebody who refused to join the Titanic just before it sailed,” said Terry Smith, chief executive of Tullett Prebon, the interdealer broker.

 

[kitch9]

Kitch, I'm very much on your side with the politics, but it's wholly false to suggest that labour market discrimination no longer exists. There is so much evidence for it that it's simply not a point worth arguing anymore (if you want, I'll PM you some academic papers)

Anyway, this quote I read in the FT cracked me up:

Unfortunately discrimination will always exist in some form or another in every country, but I'm not sure the current rules are the best way of tackling it.

I've had documents on my desk that state that as the population of where the contract is 40% ethnics, I must employ a minimum 40% of my staff as ethnics on that contract, some go as far as breaking it down to specific ethnic groups.

Now I'm sure that sounds great on some pencil pushers desk, but it's next to impossible to action in the real world.

 

[daviyoung]

Anyway, this quote I read in the FT cracked me up:

Potentially missing the voyage of a lifetime? People who didn't make it were likely gutted they missed it, wasn't like it hitting a 'berg was pre-meditated.

 

[Meadows]

That's not how I expected it to break down at all, but to be fair I didn't even really put much thought into it. Before the election, I considered Lib Dems to be a second choice for many though.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. These are Lib Dem's 2nd choices, don't know why Lib Dems were a 2nd choice for Lib Dems though...

 

[PJV3]

Potentially missing the voyage of a lifetime? People who didn't make it were likely gutted they missed it, wasn't like it hitting a 'berg was pre-meditated.

I thought the message was never travel anywhere by boat, i feel the same way about aeroplanes.

 

[blahblah...blah]

Unfortunately discrimination will always exist in some form or another in every country, but I'm not sure the current rules are the best way of tackling it.

I've had documents on my desk that state that as the population of where the contract is 40% ethnics, I must employ a minimum 40% of my staff as ethnics on that contract, some go as far as breaking it down to specific ethnic groups.

Now I'm sure that sounds great on some pencil pushers desk, but it's next to impossible to action in the real world.

I agree that proposals like that are ridiculous and unrealistic, but it's very difficult from a policy standpoint to combat discrimination, so now and again stupid things like that will get introduced!

Also, will somebody in this topic spell "disingenuous" correctly please?

 

[Empty]

In non-EU news, I found this YouGov poll which broke down different voter's second party preference (under AV).

The Lib Dems were very suprising:

Conservatives: 37%
Labour: 26%
Green: 17%
UKIP: 7%
Lib Dem(?): 5%
SNP/PC: 4%
No preference: 3%
BNP: 0%

That UKIP one amazes me

i imagine the lib dem/ukip one is a social libertarian vote.

also if you want to see how preferences have changed now they're in coalition, before the last general election lib dems' second choices were 42% labour, 27% conservative, 31% others or don't know.

 

[Parl]

Sorry, I wasn't clear. These are Lib Dem's 2nd choices, don't know why Lib Dems were a 2nd choice for Lib Dems though...

Ah, makes more sense now. UKIP still quite high though.

I'm kinda Lib Dem, and I'd say Tories are on the only viable alternative to that because Labour and Greens are awful as it stands.

 

[PJV3]

Looking at the UKIP website i was expecting mucho happiness but they are quite downbeat about the veto, 'the day repatriation of powers died'.
Also Gary Bushell is backing UKIP and so i had to leave when his face popped up.

 

[Dambrosi]

Bullshit "studies" like the tripe you posted make me smile.

It's tough as a graduate in general to get into the construction industry as they are next to no use to firms such as ours. We have the odd quantity surveyor who could be described as Ethnic by the way, but the rest are tradesman who need a proven track record at their trade and not a useless PHD.

I'm sorry to contribute to the circlejerk, but this attitude is the problem, right here.

Exactly how are potential workers supposed to gain your precious "track record" if employers like you are so reluctant to hire them? But, of course, you want to be assured that a potential employee can actually do the job, so you look for that "track record". If they don't have that, you won't hire them - but then, how are they supposed to get work experience in the trade if nobody in the trade will employ them?

Because you're not alone, not by a long shot. There are far too many employers out there unwilling to give school leavers or graduates a chance because you think they're "unqualified" and "inexperienced", when they have in fact spent most of their lives getting ready for the world of work through school and university, the latter of which may have cost them quite a bit of their own or their parents' money?

Now, you can whinge and moan about EU workers' rights law all you want, but the fact is that most of the blame for the high youth unemployment figure is simply down to employers being unwilling or unable to hire them. Now, I'll give the coalition its due - initiatives like government-subsidised apprenticeships are a good idea, since it gives the worker much-needed experience at less risk to the employer, but that means nothing if the employer doesn't then keep the apprentice on after the DWP stops paying half their wages. The scheme may well become a conveyer belt of cheap employees for hard-up companies, but that employee now has those six months of experience on their CV, so that's something at least.

The poor uni student, who's poured their life into the study of subjects and philosophies that could actually help humanity as a whole? No such luck. Unfortunately, educational degrees don't include work experience, even though they're supposed to help you get it in the first place, and for employers like you - "No track record? No work!"

Oh, and PHD's are useless? Being educated enough to be called a Doctor is worthless to you now? So I guess your GP and solicitor should go get real jobs, then? Stop that, you're making yourself look bad.

 

[kitch9]

I'm sorry to contribute to the circlejerk, but this attitude is the problem, right here.

Exactly how are potential workers supposed to gain your precious "track record" if employers like you are so reluctant to hire them? But, of course, you want to be assured that a potential employee can actually do the job, so you look for that "track record". If they don't have that, you won't hire them - but then, how are they supposed to get work experience in the trade if nobody in the trade will employ them?

Because you're not alone, not by a long shot. There are far too many employers out there unwilling to give school leavers or graduates a chance because you think they're "unqualified" and "inexperienced", when they have in fact spent most of their lives getting ready for the world of work through school and university, the latter of which may have cost them quite a bit of their own or their parents' money?

Now, you can whinge and moan about EU workers' rights law all you want, but the fact is that most of the blame for the high youth unemployment figure is simply down to employers being unwilling or unable to hire them. Now, I'll give the coalition its due - initiatives like government-subsidised apprenticeships are a good idea, since it gives the worker much-needed experience at less risk to the employer, but that means nothing if the employer doesn't then keep the apprentice on after the DWP stops paying half their wages. The scheme may well become a conveyer belt of cheap employees for hard-up companies, but that employee now has those six months of experience on their CV, so that's something at least.

The poor uni student, who's poured their life into the study of subjects and philosophies that could actually help humanity as a whole? No such luck. Unfortunately, educational degrees don't include work experience, even though they're supposed to help you get it in the first place, and for employers like you - "No track record? No work!"

Oh, and PHD's are useless? Being educated enough to be called a Doctor is worthless to you now? So I guess your GP and solicitor should go get real jobs, then? Stop that, you're making yourself look bad.

They are in the building game without experience, the problem is that it usually takes longer than 12 months to unlearn all the bad habits picked up at Uni, and learn what people are actually doing on building sites... By that point your employer has to make a decision whether to keep you or get stuck with you. Feel free to take my post out of context though as you have done already.

 

[Dambrosi]

They are in the building game without experience, the problem is that it usually takes longer than 12 months to unlearn all the bad habits picked up at Uni, and learn what people are actually doing on building sites... By that point your employer has to make a decision whether to keep you or get stuck with you. Feel free to take my post out of context though as you have done already.

I see your problem, but I still feel as if you're missing a trick here.

These graduates have already demonstrated a willingness to learn, to absorb new ideas and to work hard, otherwise they wouldn't have degrees. So why does it take more than a year to "unlearn bad habits", as you put it? What are these "bad habits" you speak of? And why is there a deadline beyond which you're "stuck with" an employee? Please elaborate.

 

[kitch9]

I see your problem, but I still feel as if you're missing a trick here.

These graduates have already demonstrated a willingness to learn, to absorb new ideas and to work hard, otherwise they wouldn't have degrees. So why does it take more than a year to "unlearn bad habits", as you put it? What are these "bad habits" you speak of? And why is there a deadline beyond which you're "stuck with" an employee? Please elaborate.

Once an employee hits 12 months it becomes exponentially more difficult to remove them from your payroll. There is a complex procedure to follow to dismiss an employee after 12 months and if you get one bit of this procedure even the slightest bit wrong you leave yourself open to expensive litigation, especially if they get legal aid.

If graduates need to be successful in the building game they need to spend a good couple of years actually on site, getting their hands dirty so they realise that loads of what they have been taught is useless.

We regularly get plans through for building designs from Architects that look like they have been designed straight out of a textbook, and we regularly point out where big savings in build costs can be made if they make a few minor tweaks.

A quantity surveyor straight out of uni wouldn't know about these tweaks he they would be using the same textbook as the Architects, and it wouldn't be until they have spent a considerable time on site to see how a building comes together, and the shortcuts available to the builders to be able to suggest them.

 

[Walshicus]

i imagine the lib dem/ukip one is a social libertarian vote.

also if you want to see how preferences have changed now they're in coalition, before the last general election lib dems' second choices were 42% labour, 27% conservative, 31% others or don't know.

Have to wonder how much of this change is due to the left wing of LD voters abandoning the party as their *first* choice.

The unions destroyed the UK's manufacturing base in the 70's, governments tried to keep it going with state aid but it was pissing against the wind. German workers accepted 10 years of pay freezes in order that they remained competitive people here wouldn't accept it, it's why average salaries are higher here.

I think that's more the result of better employer/employee relations and culture in Germany than anything else. Cooperation is the norm, whereas in England we have this ridiculous adversarial system.

 

[Meadows]

Have to wonder how much of this change is due to the left wing of LD voters abandoning the party as their *first* choice.

Could be. The left wing who don't want to work with the Tories could have moved to Labour, but then again the LDs could have gained traction among the centre-right who believe they're a legitimate party, not just the student/naive people party.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Once an employee hits 12 months it becomes exponentially more difficult to remove them from your payroll. There is a complex procedure to follow to dismiss an employee after 12 months and if you get one bit of this procedure even the slightest bit wrong you leave yourself open to expensive litigation, especially if they get legal aid.

If graduates need to be successful in the building game they need to spend a good couple of years actually on site, getting their hands dirty so they realise that loads of what they have been taught is useless.

We regularly get plans through for building designs from Architects that look like they have been designed straight out of a textbook, and we regularly point out where big savings in build costs can be made if they make a few minor tweaks.

A quantity surveyor straight out of uni wouldn't know about these tweaks he they would be using the same textbook as the Architects, and it wouldn't be until they have spent a considerable time on site to see how a building comes together, and the shortcuts available to the builders to be able to suggest them.

Apprenticeships, apprenticeships, apprenticeships...why oh why did they ever fall out of favour in this country.

 

[kitch9]

Apprenticeships, apprenticeships, apprenticeships...why oh why did they ever fall out of favour in this country.

If you want a career in the building game an apprenticeship is definitely the way to go. Once you've been an apprentice for 3-4years, then done a couple of years full time you'll be better placed to progress than a graduate fresh out of uni ever would be.

Some of our longest serving staff started as apprentices.