High Street chains favouring UK employees
Discussion
Murph7355 said:
I am 10yrs older (11 actually) - it wasn't mandatory, you could teach yourself decent enough skills...but if you wanted to improve your chances of getting work it was helpful as the tech used in the workplace was more markedly different to that available at home than it is now.
But your point about discipline, self starting and desire is key. University courses should be helping foster these skills, and certainly used to (* ). I think that's why firms started worrying less about the specific course and more about the attendance and outcome - narrowing the odds that someone had demonstrated these areas of life.
Unfortunately everyone going diminished that too.
Yep, very true, the attitudes have changed and so has the tech. I taught myself Linux and other open source software at a time when it seemed like only geeks were using it. It turned out to be a very lucky thing to have done. The main reason for doing it wasn't because I somehow knew it would get big (though I hoped it would), but rather because it was so easy to access and learn with (for free, as in beer, and as in freedom) vs the closed-source vendor way of doing things (Sun, Microsoft, Oracle etc). They weren't teaching this stuff in my university course.But your point about discipline, self starting and desire is key. University courses should be helping foster these skills, and certainly used to (* ). I think that's why firms started worrying less about the specific course and more about the attendance and outcome - narrowing the odds that someone had demonstrated these areas of life.
Unfortunately everyone going diminished that too.
Murph7355 said:
(* ) there is, of course, a decent likelihood that this is entirely down to the individual and that attendance at uni or not makes little difference. A degree or other HE certificate is no guarantee that someone will succeed...which brings me back to drinking and girls 
Indeed, the cornerstone of any male (or les/bi-female) university experience!markyb_lcy said:
...
Don't be so sexist. The girls seemed more predatory than the blokes where I was. Pyjama Jump was a frightening experience Murph7355 said:
(* ) there is, of course, a decent likelihood that this is entirely down to the individual and that attendance at uni or not makes little difference. A degree or other HE certificate is no guarantee that someone will succeed...which brings me back to drinking and girls
Indeed, the cornerstone of any male (or les/bi-female) university experience!
slightlyoldgit said:
yellowjack said:
They don't you clown. They live like sardines in (often illegal) HMOs, and send back every spare penny of what they earn. Because the rent is shared by many, all earning, the can more readily afford to rent than a young couple where one or the other needs to stay at home to raise a family in the early years. And it knocks on to skewing the rental market to favour a similar high occupancy shared rent model, against a low occupancy shared rent model. This is often why foreign nationals are able to accept lower wages than indigenous British kids. They simply expect less from their "standard of living" because they have done the maths and can see en end point to the situation. People who want a traditional lifestyle in the UK can't afford the low wages because there is no realistic prospect of earning your way out of the situation in a low paid job, so they don't put themselves into that position in the first place. I haven't worked for 7 years. I've also not claimed a penny in benefits over that same period. I live on an army pension and what my wife earns. i've looked for work, but rarely ever see anything advertised for wages that i would regard as fair or reasonable for the work required from me. Make of that what you will. But I'd clean toilets if the wages made up for the (perceived?) indignity of working with (and in many cases for) turds all day every day. I live near a large hospital. my skills are in logistics, storage, and distribution. I'd love a stores job in the hospital, and am on their mailing list for alerts. I keep getting offered chef jobs, and other stuff I'm not fitted for, like estates stuff, sparkies, carpenters, etc. But not one stores or portering job has come up. Yet my wife, who works there, tells me they're short of porters. Go figure? I've been advised to "put myself on the portering bank" but that isn't an obvious route to anyone applying from outside the NHS. Yet I'm a native English speaker, have pretty decent people skills (outside of PH, obvs), I'm smart, clean, and am used to working long hours and getting no extra for it (overtime is not a concept yet adopted by the military 
). I walk my wife over to work every morning, and while most of the staff are equally smart, intelligent, and motivated, there are one or two who I look at and wonder how it is they tie their own shoe laces in the morning. Maybe I ought to sign on? At least that way I'd be a "statistic on a government chart" and they'd be desperate to get rid of me into employment? Not claiming benefits hasn't done my state pension (NI contributions) any good either. I'm not scraping by either. We pay the mortgage, all the bills, we have a modest cushion in savings and have no unsecured debts, but we also have little over at the end of a month (save for an overpayment on the mortgage statement). Surely "the system" would be a lot better off if people like me weren't sitting on their arses typing guff on the internet, or out cycling for 8 hours at a time? They can't tax what I'm not earning, after all, and my pension is under the threshold for paying even the basic rate on it...
Just out of interest have you thought about going via the apprenticeship route to retrain? ). I walk my wife over to work every morning, and while most of the staff are equally smart, intelligent, and motivated, there are one or two who I look at and wonder how it is they tie their own shoe laces in the morning. Maybe I ought to sign on? At least that way I'd be a "statistic on a government chart" and they'd be desperate to get rid of me into employment? Not claiming benefits hasn't done my state pension (NI contributions) any good either. I'm not scraping by either. We pay the mortgage, all the bills, we have a modest cushion in savings and have no unsecured debts, but we also have little over at the end of a month (save for an overpayment on the mortgage statement). Surely "the system" would be a lot better off if people like me weren't sitting on their arses typing guff on the internet, or out cycling for 8 hours at a time? They can't tax what I'm not earning, after all, and my pension is under the threshold for paying even the basic rate on it...I know I am banging on about it a bit but it really does work.
I have a someone in my wider team who was a supervisor for a printing company, worked his way up over 20 years, good job, house, almost grown up kids and his company shut down.
He got a decent redundancy and his wife has a good job and due to a modest inheritance around the same time thankfully had no mortgage left.
So he came into one of the technology teams as an adult apprentice at 43 years old, completed his two year apprenticeship and is now in a £40k a year role and a very happy chap doing something he was always interested in but never thought he would be able to and earning more than he was in his old job. Also, he has 20 years of work left and I can honestly see him getting to a far more senior position than he is now on probably £70k+ a year in his new career.
Ok had to put up with being on £15k for 2 years but he knew it was a means to an end.
markyb_lcy said:
I think it's the internet "what done it". These days there is so much good and free learning content online that IMO anyone with some skills and discipline in self-teaching (which to be fair are just as required in university) can teach themselves pretty much any of the skills I personally use on a daily basis. If I was 10 years older (I'm 38) I think I would have HAD to go to university to pickup those skills.
Meh, I _am_ 10 years older :-) .... I learnt FORTRAN with a book and a hookey compiler on a 386SX. Strangely, I was at university, but other than dedicated process monitoring systems, no one really used computers. I ran out of maths ability about half way through the 3rd year, and with a year to go, I discovered writing software to solve complex fluid mechanics was more fun that doing it the pure maths way, and yielded better answers.I’ve never used anything of my degree (Chemical Engineering) in the subsequent 30 years. All it taught me was that I didn’t want to be a Chemical Engineer, and I did quite like writing software. However, I think there is immense value in doing something really f
king hard at that stage in your life. At work, we have apprentices (and damn good they are too), but they are solving previously solved problems in small chunks which is a different discipline. If I’d not gone to uni, I’d probably have gone and worked for Shell at some oil refinery and been bored witless in a few years.rxe said:
Employers will have to automate, and they will have to complete for low skilled workers. Those of us who've been making a killing from cheap prices will have to pay more. Those of us who've been screwed for the last 20 years will get more. Outside remainer echo chambers, this is what Brexit was all about..... We may well have fewer coffee shops. That's also a good thing.
Quite. I find it amazing how many "progressives" who are happy (for some people) to pay more taxes for subsidised housing, transport, childcare etc etc for the good of "the poor" are suddenly horrified that they might have to stump up a bit more for goods and services so that they can be delivered by people earning a decent wage by the standards of the poor who actually live here rather than an imported poor who see the country as a sort of oil rig where a few years hard graft can set you up for life at the expense of having a decent life for that time.
Does anyone actually believe that taxes will go down, or that the government will reduce in work benefits?
If everything goes up in price then money will buy less, and so even £9ph for 'minimum wage' jobs will not be worth any more than £8 is now and so the government will still have to subsidise childcare or housing or whatever. All that will happen is inflation will go up, which benefits nobody really.
If everything goes up in price then money will buy less, and so even £9ph for 'minimum wage' jobs will not be worth any more than £8 is now and so the government will still have to subsidise childcare or housing or whatever. All that will happen is inflation will go up, which benefits nobody really.
Condi said:
Does anyone actually believe that taxes will go down, or that the government will reduce in work benefits? ...
No - though I think they'll be trying to avoid them going up and will paint it such that increases only cover infrastructure spend.Yes - they will be trying to reduce the quantity of benefits paid out. Do I think they will succeed? If they get a second term, yes.
Murph7355 said:
Condi said:
Does anyone actually believe that taxes will go down, or that the government will reduce in work benefits? ...
No - though I think they'll be trying to avoid them going up and will paint it such that increases only cover infrastructure spend.Yes - they will be trying to reduce the quantity of benefits paid out. Do I think they will succeed? If they get a second term, yes.
There is just a bit of a logic fail when you can receive more whilst sat on your arse doing nothing than you can in reasonable employment.
Until that state of affairs changes, we have 2 or 3 generations of folks that simply will not get up off their arses to work.
slightlyoldgit said:
Agreed and the latter is sorely needed.
There is just a bit of a logic fail when you can receive more whilst sat on your arse doing nothing than you can in reasonable employment.
Until that state of affairs changes, we have 2 or 3 generations of folks that simply will not get up off their arses to work.
Aye, but the problem here is that work doesn’t pay (for some) rather than benefits being too high. We have people in poverty that are in work.There is just a bit of a logic fail when you can receive more whilst sat on your arse doing nothing than you can in reasonable employment.
Until that state of affairs changes, we have 2 or 3 generations of folks that simply will not get up off their arses to work.
Regarding those sat on their arses ... are they not simply playing the capitalist game in the capitalist society, in that they are aiming for the most amount of return for the least amount of work? If work paid better then a lot of them would be working.
I do think more carrot is better than more stick.
markyb_lcy said:
slightlyoldgit said:
Agreed and the latter is sorely needed.
There is just a bit of a logic fail when you can receive more whilst sat on your arse doing nothing than you can in reasonable employment.
Until that state of affairs changes, we have 2 or 3 generations of folks that simply will not get up off their arses to work.
Aye, but the problem here is that work doesn’t pay (for some) rather than benefits being too high. We have people in poverty that are in work.There is just a bit of a logic fail when you can receive more whilst sat on your arse doing nothing than you can in reasonable employment.
Until that state of affairs changes, we have 2 or 3 generations of folks that simply will not get up off their arses to work.
Regarding those sat on their arses ... are they not simply playing the capitalist game in the capitalist society, in that they are aiming for the most amount of return for the least amount of work? If work paid better then a lot of them would be working.
Minimum wage is £8.21 an hour, for a 37.5 hour week after tax the take home on that is £1,201.86 a month.
Say you are a family of two kids, one adult working part time with another £600 a month, plus child benefit for two kids at £137 a month.
All told that is a household income with zero tax credits just plain old CHB of £1,938.86 a month.
That is a perfectly liveable income and there are countless people living perfectly ok on that sort of income. I know, as a old friend of Mrs OldGit is in pretty much precisely that situation. They are in a privately rented 3 bed terrace which is about £600 a month I think and it is in a half decent area, kids go to the local secondary school and the husband usually takes on extra work at a local Amazon distribution centre over the Xmas period and they use that extra income to have a Costa Del X holiday each summer.
Edited by slightlyoldgit on Sunday 23 February 11:17
slightlyoldgit said:
markyb_lcy said:
slightlyoldgit said:
Agreed and the latter is sorely needed.
There is just a bit of a logic fail when you can receive more whilst sat on your arse doing nothing than you can in reasonable employment.
Until that state of affairs changes, we have 2 or 3 generations of folks that simply will not get up off their arses to work.
Aye, but the problem here is that work doesn’t pay (for some) rather than benefits being too high. We have people in poverty that are in work.There is just a bit of a logic fail when you can receive more whilst sat on your arse doing nothing than you can in reasonable employment.
Until that state of affairs changes, we have 2 or 3 generations of folks that simply will not get up off their arses to work.
Regarding those sat on their arses ... are they not simply playing the capitalist game in the capitalist society, in that they are aiming for the most amount of return for the least amount of work? If work paid better then a lot of them would be working.
Minimum wage is £8.21 an hour, for a 37.5 hour week after tax the take home on that is £1,334.13 a month.
Say you are a family of two kids, one adult working part time with another £600 a month, plus child benefit for two kids at £137 a month.
All told that is a household income with zero tax credits just plain old CHB of £2,071.73 a month.
That is a perfectly liveable income and there are countless people living perfectly ok on that sort of income. I know, as a old friend of Mrs OldGit is in pretty much precisely that situation. They are in a privately rented 3 bed terrace which is about £600 a month I think and it is in a half decent area, kids go to the local secondary school and the husband usually takes on extra work at a local Amazon distribution centre over the Xmas period and they use that extra income to have a Costa Del X holiday each summer.
I believe in a system where people on benefits should be able to have a reasonable and enjoyable stress free life. Not much point having a welfare state at all if it just keeps people in poverty imo.
markyb_lcy said:
slightlyoldgit said:
markyb_lcy said:
slightlyoldgit said:
Agreed and the latter is sorely needed.
There is just a bit of a logic fail when you can receive more whilst sat on your arse doing nothing than you can in reasonable employment.
Until that state of affairs changes, we have 2 or 3 generations of folks that simply will not get up off their arses to work.
Aye, but the problem here is that work doesn’t pay (for some) rather than benefits being too high. We have people in poverty that are in work.There is just a bit of a logic fail when you can receive more whilst sat on your arse doing nothing than you can in reasonable employment.
Until that state of affairs changes, we have 2 or 3 generations of folks that simply will not get up off their arses to work.
Regarding those sat on their arses ... are they not simply playing the capitalist game in the capitalist society, in that they are aiming for the most amount of return for the least amount of work? If work paid better then a lot of them would be working.
Minimum wage is £8.21 an hour, for a 37.5 hour week after tax the take home on that is £1,334.13 a month.
Say you are a family of two kids, one adult working part time with another £600 a month, plus child benefit for two kids at £137 a month.
All told that is a household income with zero tax credits just plain old CHB of £2,071.73 a month.
That is a perfectly liveable income and there are countless people living perfectly ok on that sort of income. I know, as a old friend of Mrs OldGit is in pretty much precisely that situation. They are in a privately rented 3 bed terrace which is about £600 a month I think and it is in a half decent area, kids go to the local secondary school and the husband usually takes on extra work at a local Amazon distribution centre over the Xmas period and they use that extra income to have a Costa Del X holiday each summer.
I believe in a system where people on benefits should be able to have a reasonable and enjoyable stress free life. Not much point having a welfare state at all if it just keeps people in poverty imo.
In many cases yes, especially for those "playing the system" with 4 kids, getting rent paid for on a larger and much nicer house than they could afford if they worked etc.
So we need to make our benefits system calculate peoples "free money" in such a way as it puts them in a worse situation than working would. Because you are spot on - until we do that we will not get the feckless to be anything else.
Lord knows it looks like based on this thread there will be no shortage of "work" for them to do - they just need to be incentivised to do it irrespective of if they "want to" or not.
One of my staff had two kids in care, she did 9.15 till 2.15 3 days a week as the childcare was much cheaper in that slot.
She would never cover other staffs illness, holidays or do any extra over xmas or busy periods as she would lose her tax credits etc.
She earned around £8k a year from us and was topped up to £21k.
It was an issue with the other staff that she would never help out and it was always left to them, but as frustrating as it was you couldn't blame her, she was just playing the game.
Not read the whole thread, but we need to see basic wages rise, we are all so spoilt these days, most in the UK live a life of luxury compared with only a few years ago, and at the expense of those at the bottom of the wage ladder.
Minimum wage should be £10 an hour, but needs to get there on its own, this will push up the next level of wages of course, but so it should.
For lots of "products" wages is around 20-40% of overall cost, if we see 25% increase in wages this might push prices up 10-20%, but if we all have 25% more wage products will seem cheaper, especially for those with less disposable income.
I also do think we need drop income tax for those on minimum wage as well, then have some more bands, so those earning more pay a little more.
She would never cover other staffs illness, holidays or do any extra over xmas or busy periods as she would lose her tax credits etc.
She earned around £8k a year from us and was topped up to £21k.
It was an issue with the other staff that she would never help out and it was always left to them, but as frustrating as it was you couldn't blame her, she was just playing the game.
Not read the whole thread, but we need to see basic wages rise, we are all so spoilt these days, most in the UK live a life of luxury compared with only a few years ago, and at the expense of those at the bottom of the wage ladder.
Minimum wage should be £10 an hour, but needs to get there on its own, this will push up the next level of wages of course, but so it should.
For lots of "products" wages is around 20-40% of overall cost, if we see 25% increase in wages this might push prices up 10-20%, but if we all have 25% more wage products will seem cheaper, especially for those with less disposable income.
I also do think we need drop income tax for those on minimum wage as well, then have some more bands, so those earning more pay a little more.
gizlaroc said:
One of my staff had two kids in care, she did 9.15 till 2.15 3 days a week as the childcare was much cheaper in that slot.
She would never cover other staffs illness, holidays or do any extra over xmas or busy periods as she would lose her tax credits etc.
She earned around £8k a year from us and was topped up to £21k.
It was an issue with the other staff that she would never help out and it was always left to them, but as frustrating as it was you couldn't blame her, she was just playing the game.
Not read the whole thread, but we need to see basic wages rise, we are all so spoilt these days, most in the UK live a life of luxury compared with only a few years ago, and at the expense of those at the bottom of the wage ladder.
Minimum wage should be £10 an hour, but needs to get there on its own, this will push up the next level of wages of course, but so it should.
For lots of "products" wages is around 20-40% of overall cost, if we see 25% increase in wages this might push prices up 10-20%, but if we all have 25% more wage products will seem cheaper, especially for those with less disposable income.
I also do think we need drop income tax for those on minimum wage as well, then have some more bands, so those earning more pay a little more.
Right now minimum wage is essentially £16k a year and it is not hard for a household of 2 adults to get £2k a month in net income between them. My wife's friend and her husband both work in Tesco and pull in a bit more than that as I think Tesco is slightly more than absolute minimum.She would never cover other staffs illness, holidays or do any extra over xmas or busy periods as she would lose her tax credits etc.
She earned around £8k a year from us and was topped up to £21k.
It was an issue with the other staff that she would never help out and it was always left to them, but as frustrating as it was you couldn't blame her, she was just playing the game.
Not read the whole thread, but we need to see basic wages rise, we are all so spoilt these days, most in the UK live a life of luxury compared with only a few years ago, and at the expense of those at the bottom of the wage ladder.
Minimum wage should be £10 an hour, but needs to get there on its own, this will push up the next level of wages of course, but so it should.
For lots of "products" wages is around 20-40% of overall cost, if we see 25% increase in wages this might push prices up 10-20%, but if we all have 25% more wage products will seem cheaper, especially for those with less disposable income.
I also do think we need drop income tax for those on minimum wage as well, then have some more bands, so those earning more pay a little more.
That is a perfectly acceptable income and many people survive and live quite happy lives on that sort of money.
I would agree with dropping those in that situation out of the tax brackets - but it is not going to make that much difference, but a difference of £100 or so would help at that level I am quite sure.
ETA - Tax is only £58 a month and NI is £73 and I would suggest that some NI ought to be paid at that level but not Tax.
Edited by slightlyoldgit on Sunday 23 February 11:36
I do find it interesting that when the capitalist ideal of “do least for most return” are considered for business vs individuals that in the case of business it’s considered to be “maximising profit” yet applied to the individual it is “feckless and work-shy”. Fact is that the system only works because it doesn’t treat entities with moral equality.
Not trying to engage in an argument with slightlyoldgit btw, just a general comment.
Not trying to engage in an argument with slightlyoldgit btw, just a general comment.
markyb_lcy said:
I do find it interesting that when the capitalist ideal of “do least for most return” are considered for business vs individuals that in the case of business it’s considered to be “maximising profit” yet applied to the individual it is “feckless and work-shy”. Fact is that the system only works because it doesn’t treat entities with moral equality.
Not trying to engage in an argument with slightlyoldgit btw, just a general comment.
Interesting perspective - no argument taken! Not trying to engage in an argument with slightlyoldgit btw, just a general comment.
Isn't one about wealth creation and contributing to the overall circular economy - whereas those on benefits are just extracting from that economy with little to no contribution?
I suppose you could say what they consume themselves in material goods and sustenance is a form of contribution. But even that is a net extraction from the economy overall, as the tax paid by the businesses from whom they are consuming is what gave them the money to do that in the first place.
slightlyoldgit said:
Interesting perspective - no argument taken!
Isn't one about wealth creation and contributing to the overall circular economy - whereas those on benefits are just extracting from that economy with little to no contribution?
I suppose you could say what they consume themselves in material goods and sustenance is a form of contribution. But even that is a net extraction from the economy overall, as the tax paid by the businesses from whom they are consuming is what gave them the money to do that in the first place.
It creates wealth in the “wrong” places though. It creates wealth for shareholder firstly in a lot cases by avoiding tax in the countries which the profit/sales are made and secondly by keeping wages low (often leveraging offshore workers) and therefore profits high. Higher wages would imo at least create more wealth in the “right” places ... in the pockets of people who will spend it rather than horde it.Isn't one about wealth creation and contributing to the overall circular economy - whereas those on benefits are just extracting from that economy with little to no contribution?
I suppose you could say what they consume themselves in material goods and sustenance is a form of contribution. But even that is a net extraction from the economy overall, as the tax paid by the businesses from whom they are consuming is what gave them the money to do that in the first place.
Tax is another good example ... offshoring as a company is seen as standard practice, maximising profitability again. Offshore as a personal service company contractor and you’ll be labelled as a tax dodger, not paying your fair share.
slightlyoldgit said:
Right now minimum wage is essentially £16k a year and it is not hard for a household of 2 adults to get £2k a month in net income between them. My wife's friend and her husband both work in Tesco and pull in a bit more than that as I think Tesco is slightly more than absolute minimum.
That is a perfectly acceptable income and many people survive and live quite happy lives on that sort of money.
It depends where you live, and hardly leaves you with anything left over to start paying into your pension with to keep that income level going once you retire. That is a perfectly acceptable income and many people survive and live quite happy lives on that sort of money.
The cheaper end terrace houses where I am from in Norwich is around £800-900 a month.
Nursery fees start at around £150 a week after kick backs, so £600 a month. That is £1400 at least.
Then you have food at £80 a week, electricity, gas, travel, clothing etc.
You might be lucky and cover essentials.
Might be OK if you don't have kids, or have them at an age where they don't cost much, and live somewhere where you can still get a 2 bed house for £5-600 a month.
Edited by gizlaroc on Sunday 23 February 12:37
markyb_lcy said:
slightlyoldgit said:
Interesting perspective - no argument taken!
Isn't one about wealth creation and contributing to the overall circular economy - whereas those on benefits are just extracting from that economy with little to no contribution?
I suppose you could say what they consume themselves in material goods and sustenance is a form of contribution. But even that is a net extraction from the economy overall, as the tax paid by the businesses from whom they are consuming is what gave them the money to do that in the first place.
It creates wealth in the “wrong” places though. It creates wealth for shareholder firstly in a lot cases by avoiding tax in the countries which the profit/sales are made and secondly by keeping wages low (often leveraging offshore workers) and therefore profits high. Higher wages would imo at least create more wealth in the “right” places ... in the pockets of people who will spend it rather than horde it.Isn't one about wealth creation and contributing to the overall circular economy - whereas those on benefits are just extracting from that economy with little to no contribution?
I suppose you could say what they consume themselves in material goods and sustenance is a form of contribution. But even that is a net extraction from the economy overall, as the tax paid by the businesses from whom they are consuming is what gave them the money to do that in the first place.
Tax is another good example ... offshoring as a company is seen as standard practice, maximising profitability again. Offshore as a personal service company contractor and you’ll be labelled as a tax dodger, not paying your fair share.
Even those very few that are in the Facebook and Google world still spend tens if not hundreds of millions of pounds which goes into circulation in to the wider UK circular economy.
Also, chances are many of us as ordinary folks are shareholders through pension funds, investments an ISA maybe.
Just out of interest - do you think £16k a year as a minimum wage is too little then?
slightlyoldgit said:
Just out of interest - do you think £16k a year as a minimum wage is too little then?
Well, I live in south London where you’d be lucky to find a one bedroom flat for £1k a month. I’ve no idea if benefits are higher here (I suspect housing benefit would need to be). I’m not going to say whether 16k is enough because truth is I have no idea. I do know that I would find it pretty impossible myself though.Inflation is being fiddled (by leaving things out) and as such, prices of everyday things are going up and neither wages nor benefits are going up to match.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff