Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Neil.
Very good common sense post, from someone who sees that employer and employee are important to each other.
The last sentence sums it up nicely
"especially if the employer has little or no social conscience"
BarryW will never make any sensible comments like that because he only sees employees as fodder and for some reason keeps thinking his consequences and prophesies are fact, when indeed they are merely uneducated opinions.
I say uneducated, not as a name calling attack but simply he has no idea what he is talking about.
Anyone who can make a statement like below to justify zero hours contracts, proves my point.
"I do have to laugh at people who attack these contracts who never have the problem of matching productive capacity to orders or have widely varying demands for their services"
Jan.
#16. "And you would prefer the consequences then Jan?
Do not dodge the question as you cannot have it both ways"
Barryw is the dodgiest person I know for answering questions or I should say not answering them
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,658
Gary, I never expect a straight forward answer from Barry just the usual right is good, left is bad.
I can't help but wonder how any business in the past ever succeeded prior to the zero hour contract if it is so important to the success of a business now.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
indeed jan outside of seasonal work like fruit picking it has never existed before.
all businesses go through peaks and troughs so that the number of staff and wages are worked out with that in mind.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
When is a job not a job ?
When it's a load of crap ,
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
You are not answering the question Jan and neither is GaryC. You prefer to ignore the consequences of what you advocate and in doing that are just following the usual approach of Labour who time after time destroy the economy and jobs.
Howard - zero hour contracts are an answer to much of the excessive labour regulation we have to ensure efficient working practices.
If you want an end to zero hour contracts without costing jobs then the answer is dramatic supply-side reform to make life easier and cheaper to both employ and shed staff. If you want more jobs then that is what has to be done.
Remember there are no jobs for life any more and no-one owes anyone a living. Everyone has to be adaptive to change, job changing when needed. Far better to have a more dynamic jobs market with competition for employees than protecting the comfortable few while keeping many frozen out of employment or locked into low pay.
Guest 705- Registered: 23 Sep 2010
- Posts: 661
The voice of reason... #20 thanks Neil- it's reassuring to hear from a potential future employer of many in Dover.
Never give up...
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
reasoned and well thought out viewpoints are more welcome than those full of spite.
society does not work otherwise.
Guest 937- Registered: 12 May 2013
- Posts: 145
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,658
howard mcsweeney1 wrote:reasoned and well thought out viewpoints are more welcome than those full of spite.
society does not work otherwise.
How very true.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,577
post 20 says it all
barryw you are on your own (or are you?)
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Keith - that does not make me wrong.
All those who support protectionism are ignoring the consequences. Look at the world - those countries with the least flexible labour markets have the highest levels of unemployment, France, Spain etc. Years ago Germany reformed its labour laws to make them more flexible, as did Sweden when the socialists were kicked out and they have benefited massively.
I do not dispute that there are some bad employers or that some good employers may have individual bad managers and am not suggesting a total free-for-all but we should not 'cut off noses to spite your face.
So what if you get sacked from a job - if there is a healthy job market to get a new job.
It is a healthy job market that I want with lots of competition for jobs. You get that by de-risking employment to encourage job creation and reducing the costs of employing someone (not the same as salaries). Flexible labour markets are the best and only way to more employment and higher wages.
Idiotic job protectionism just reduces the jobs market and lowers wages. protection those in work at the expense of those out of work.
History as well as the current world economy prove my point..
Zero hour contracts are a response to foolish job protectionism.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
barry,you can have flexable working hours whitout resorting to zero hours.working hours can be sorted out at the interview prosses.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Brian - there is a difference between flexible hours and flexible working, they are most certainly not the same thing. Zero hour contracts have only boomed because of the need and demand for flexible working and in response to the more inflexible aspects of our labour laws.
Most of those extra rules, to be fair, are imposed by the EU but then we are only affected to this degree because the last government foolishly signed up to the EU 'social contract'.
Be grateful - thanks to our greater flexibility we have suffered far less unemployment than Keith hoped for in the recession but, as always, it could be better and to get rid of a means to protect jobs, zero hours, will not help anyone get work or the economy grow - the opposite in fact.
DT1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 15 Apr 2008
- Posts: 1,116
Foolishly signing up to EU rules and also foolish protectionism.
I'm well and truly lost.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
That is what you get with foolish governments DT1....
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
A timeline of the EU
"1957
The Treaty of Rome a first step towards the common market
The six members of the ECSC sign the Treaty of Rome setting up the European Economic Community EEC and the European Atomic Energy Community Euratom. The EEC aims to create a common market a customs union plus free movement of capital and labour. To please France it also promises subsidies to farmers. Euratom's goal is the joint development of nuclear energy. ...
...2007
New candidates admitted
Romania and Bulgaria become member states on 1 January 2007. Privately many European politicians question whether they are ready. But harsh penalties are threatened if the countries fail to continue making progress in curbing organised crime and corruption and ensuring food safety and the proper use of EU funds..."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3583801.stm Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Our right winger is notorious with his knowledge of how other posters think,how ignorant.inexperienced,
financial cretins,how stupid their views are,not in the real world,could not run a business etc,etc.....and how
correct,sound,cannot be wrong etc,etc....he always is......
.this is just one classic.....# 23...``have suffered far less unemployment than Keith hoped for`` ``
............nobody,especially Keith would hope for more unemployment.......
Zero contracts are obscene,totally in favour of the employer.........................
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
barry in answer to #33,you make appoint to a certain extent.let me explain simply.
1,sign on at job center get regular income.
2,get a zero hour contract receive no money,from employer or government.
3,get a 40 hour contract which = regular money.a win win situation.
4,with a zero hour contract,it reduses people claiming any benefit,a win win for the government.
so inconclusion,the poor person who has gone to the zero hour contract has no home,no income unable to claim any benefit as they classed as working.and you call that fair,i think not.
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
Brian.
Of course barry will think that's fair, that's his idealism, its their fault, they brought it on themselves.
I wonder what he would be like having to use a bedpan and filling in benefit forms?
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
good point gary,