Re: Boris Johnson : Sun Oct 27, 2019 5:04 pm  

The Ghost of '99 wrote:

I'll cut the rest of this misinformed (being polite rant) to just mention that we can add an understanding of Polish politics and corruption to the things Sal pontificates on but doesn't actually know about.

Are you saying what I said is not true? I would suggest your clueless understanding of anything has once again been exposed for what it is - any kind of basic comprehension and you are the classic oxymoron

Re: Boris Johnson : Sun Oct 27, 2019 5:11 pm  

Mild Rover wrote:

The Conservatives are the party of capital, with a long history of prioritising its interests ahead of labour rights. While the Conservatives have been in government since 2010, their ability to de-regulate the labour market and change workers’ rights has been constrained by EU law. Leaving the EU is why this may start now. The fear (or hope, I suppose) is even greater because the One Nation wing of the party is in retreat and Johnson’s cabinet is further to the economic right than Cameron’s or May’s. However, it will only happen with a democratic mandate - if people vote to keep people like Dominic Raab and JRM in power, then they are willing to accept lighter regulation and different (i’m trying to avoid emotive or overly biased language, but realistically I mean ‘lower’) standards, and that is their choice.

Why would many people, who rely on selling their labour, do that... why might it be a vote winner? Well, that is a question based on the assumption that we live in a democracy. And we do, both legally and to a large extent in reality. But it isn’t a pure democracy - such a thing would be hugely difficult to achieve and maintain. To some degree the UK is a de facto plutocracy. The Conservatives particularly rely on the support of plutocrats to gain and hold power, and therefore tend to prioritise their interests ahead of those of workers.

As has been already pointed out the UK could reduce workers rights and still offer better conditions than are available across the EU. I ask again would reducing workers rights lead to more voters backing them? Of course not so why do it - its project fear all over.

Come on without the votes of the working class the Tories cannot get into and stay in power. We have a one person one vote this is not like the Labour party whereby the unions hold all the power. It appears that is the kind of democracy you like i.e. a few telling the majority what to do.

[Mild Rover]

Re: Boris Johnson : Sun Oct 27, 2019 8:42 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote: As has been already pointed out the UK could reduce workers rights and still offer better conditions than are available across the EU. I ask again would reducing workers rights lead to more voters backing them? Of course not so why do it - its project fear all over. Come on without the votes of the working class the Tories cannot get into and stay in power. We have a one person one vote this is not like the Labour party whereby the unions hold all the power. It appears that is the kind of democracy you like i.e. a few telling the majority what to do. Yeah, that’s kinda the opposite of what I intended to say. I assume your response is deliberate misrepresentation, but let me know if you just misunderstood my point. We are very fortunate. According to the EIU, we are among the just 4.5% of the world’s population who live in a full democracy, and the UK is ranked the 14th most democratic of 167 countries. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index However, the one person, one vote characterisation is somewhat naive. the Conservatives won’t call it ‘reducing workers’ rights’, because that clearly wouldn’t win votes, you’re right. It’d be sold as ‘building an agile modern economy’ reflecting the ‘flexibility of today’s workplaces’, ‘allowing Britain to exploit fully opportunities for growth’ or some such. On page 18 of their manifesto, ideally.

Sal Paradise wrote: As has been already pointed out the UK could reduce workers rights and still offer better conditions than are available across the EU. I ask again would reducing workers rights lead to more voters backing them? Of course not so why do it - its project fear all over. Come on without the votes of the working class the Tories cannot get into and stay in power. We have a one person one vote this is not like the Labour party whereby the unions hold all the power. It appears that is the kind of democracy you like i.e. a few telling the majority what to do. Yeah, that’s kinda the opposite of what I intended to say. I assume your response is deliberate misrepresentation, but let me know if you just misunderstood my point. We are very fortunate. According to the EIU, we are among the just 4.5% of the world’s population who live in a full democracy, and the UK is ranked the 14th most democratic of 167 countries. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index However, the one person, one vote characterisation is somewhat naive. the Conservatives won’t call it ‘reducing workers’ rights’, because that clearly wouldn’t win votes, you’re right. It’d be sold as ‘building an agile modern economy’ reflecting the ‘flexibility of today’s workplaces’, ‘allowing Britain to exploit fully opportunities for growth’ or some such. On page 18 of their manifesto, ideally.

Re: Boris Johnson : Mon Oct 28, 2019 8:28 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

As has been already pointed out the UK could reduce workers rights and still offer better conditions than are available across the EU. I ask again would reducing workers rights lead to more voters backing them? Of course not so why do it - its project fear all over.

Come on without the votes of the working class the Tories cannot get into and stay in power. We have a one person one vote this is not like the Labour party whereby the unions hold all the power. It appears that is the kind of democracy you like i.e. a few telling the majority what to do.

If you are so confident that there will be no reduction in workers rights etc, how do you explain why this was moved from "guaranteed" to "maybe" in the withdrawal agreement.
Surely, a party so committed to protecting citizens and workers rights, would want them to be secured in law and yet, your beloved leader chose to move these down the list, quelle surprise.

Re: Boris Johnson : Mon Oct 28, 2019 10:02 am  

The document that was leaked over the weekend, and forced Kwasi Kwarteng to scurry onto the news media to defend, makes this argument moot; workers rights and protections were *deliberately* removed from the legal element of the deal, which makes them fair game in a post-Brexit situation. And anyone who does not see the creeping US style gig economy that we have now as being accelerated by that, is either wilfully dishonest, or thick.

Re: Boris Johnson : Wed Oct 30, 2019 2:18 pm  

bren2k wrote:

The document that was leaked over the weekend, and forced Kwasi Kwarteng to scurry onto the news media to defend, makes this argument moot; workers rights and protections were *deliberately* removed from the legal element of the deal, which makes them fair game in a post-Brexit situation. And anyone who does not see the creeping US style gig economy that we have now as being accelerated by that, is either wilfully dishonest, or thick.

We still come back to the point of why would any party reduce workers rights - these are the very people they rely on to keep them in power. It makes no sense. The idea was to enable to UK to make its own laws - why everyone is focusing on this is simply to have a go at the Tories over a fictitious threat.

Re: Boris Johnson : Wed Oct 30, 2019 2:38 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

We still come back to the point of why would any party reduce workers rights - these are the very people they rely on to keep them in power. It makes no sense. The idea was to enable to UK to make its own laws - why everyone is focusing on this is simply to have a go at the Tories over a fictitious threat.

Then why remove it from the text that was legally protected?

It has long been said that the more swivel-eyed Brexiteers, of the Rees-Mogg and Francois variety, were interested in a bonfire of regulations; Rees-Mogg is on record as suggesting it in a Treasury Select Committee meeting. Now that the swivel-eyed have taken over the Tory party, it's entirely reasonable to assume that Boris Johnson is being held hostage by their extreme version of Brexit.

Re: Boris Johnson : Wed Oct 30, 2019 2:46 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

We still come back to the point of why would any party reduce workers rights - these are the very people they rely on to keep them in power. It makes no sense. The idea was to enable to UK to make its own laws - why everyone is focusing on this is simply to have a go at the Tories over a fictitious threat.

Do you really think that the average Uber driver or worker in Sports Direct or Amazon warehouses, usually votes Tory ?
There is a move to make our workforce less secure and while it may be easier to move jobs, it will also be equally simple for companies to off load staff. Great, if you are wanting to make your company more profitable but, less good if you have a mortgage or rent to pay.

Re: Boris Johnson : Wed Oct 30, 2019 2:59 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

Do you really think that the average Uber driver or worker in Sports Direct or Amazon warehouses, usually votes Tory ?
There is a move to make our workforce less secure and while it may be easier to move jobs, it will also be equally simple for companies to off load staff. Great, if you are wanting to make your company more profitable but, less good if you have a mortgage or rent to pay.

I think a lot of workers on minimum wage vote Tory - they would get 13m+ votes without them. We still come back to the issue of how do you attract staff - if things are really bad nobody will go there to work - as we have seen with the crop picking - according to labour tonnes of food has been left rotting in the ground because the farmers couldn't get migrant labour - they also couldn't get uk labour either.

Simple solution pay more and that is the reality of most businesses including mine - I have to be competitive or I will not attract the quality of people I need to move my business forward. Its not rocket science.

[Mild Rover]

Re: Boris Johnson : Wed Oct 30, 2019 4:17 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote: I think a lot of workers on minimum wage vote Tory - they would get 13m+ votes without them. We still come back to the issue of how do you attract staff - if things are really bad nobody will go there to work - as we have seen with the crop picking - according to labour tonnes of food has been left rotting in the ground because the farmers couldn't get migrant labour - they also couldn't get uk labour either. Simple solution pay more and that is the reality of most businesses including mine - I have to be competitive or I will not attract the quality of people I need to move my business forward. Its not rocket science. There’s more to it than just pay though. Also, if companies can undercut competitors by moving their priorities toward profits and clients, then workers good options are likely to become fewer. It is a difficult balancing act, because profits and clients are the whole point businesses exist. And in many industries, companies are competing globally. Unless there is a shortage of labour of the right type, workers rights, conditions, and pay will tend to be squeezed in a capitalist system by competing capitalists. Supply and demand and all that. People like Raab, for example, want that competition to be more aggressive and restraints on the capitalist system to be reduced. My concern, and that of many others, is that will damage people’s quality of life and our society as a whole. You keep implying they won’t do things that are unpopular with the electorate, but if they can get in off the back of Brexit and a poorly led labour party, then they’re going indulge some of their pet projects - why go into politics if you can’t do some of the things you believe in? And a de-regulated economy, following the model of some Asian countries is exactly the sort of thing our Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary and Minister for International Trade believe in. They even wrote it down in a book, for avoidance of doubt. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19300051 Why would they do it? Because they want to and they can. You and I and most of the rest of the country might agree it is a bad and unpopular idea. However, I don’t agree that democracy is going to protect us from it.

Sal Paradise wrote: I think a lot of workers on minimum wage vote Tory - they would get 13m+ votes without them. We still come back to the issue of how do you attract staff - if things are really bad nobody will go there to work - as we have seen with the crop picking - according to labour tonnes of food has been left rotting in the ground because the farmers couldn't get migrant labour - they also couldn't get uk labour either. Simple solution pay more and that is the reality of most businesses including mine - I have to be competitive or I will not attract the quality of people I need to move my business forward. Its not rocket science. There’s more to it than just pay though. Also, if companies can undercut competitors by moving their priorities toward profits and clients, then workers good options are likely to become fewer. It is a difficult balancing act, because profits and clients are the whole point businesses exist. And in many industries, companies are competing globally. Unless there is a shortage of labour of the right type, workers rights, conditions, and pay will tend to be squeezed in a capitalist system by competing capitalists. Supply and demand and all that. People like Raab, for example, want that competition to be more aggressive and restraints on the capitalist system to be reduced. My concern, and that of many others, is that will damage people’s quality of life and our society as a whole. You keep implying they won’t do things that are unpopular with the electorate, but if they can get in off the back of Brexit and a poorly led labour party, then they’re going indulge some of their pet projects - why go into politics if you can’t do some of the things you believe in? And a de-regulated economy, following the model of some Asian countries is exactly the sort of thing our Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary and Minister for International Trade believe in. They even wrote it down in a book, for avoidance of doubt. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19300051 Why would they do it? Because they want to and they can. You and I and most of the rest of the country might agree it is a bad and unpopular idea. However, I don’t agree that democracy is going to protect us from it.