By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
I read the Tories plan to up the NMW to £11 p.h. Soooo, in my humble: it's pointing to an election first half of next year.
And what a year 2024 is shaping up to be: UK and US elections, Trump's trials, China invading Taiwan, Rocketman firing his missiles, ULEZ, Glastonbury line-up, ongoing conflict in Ukraine, Olympics, Euros, continuing celebrity rape allegations, and a late QPR surge into the POs.
'Always In Motion' by John Honney available on amazon.co.uk
Nous sommes L’occitane Rs!
Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one’s lifetime. (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop
Vicious circle. The person now earning £11 wants £12. The person on £12 wants £££13 etc. Either prices go up or the person on minimum wage gets laid off to pay for it .
Vicious circle. The person now earning £11 wants £12. The person on £12 wants £££13 etc. Either prices go up or the person on minimum wage gets laid off to pay for it .
This was the argument that people used against laws that made it illegal to send 8 year olds down mines.
So I take it that’s a below inflation rise (no triple lock for young peasants) and someone under 23 doing the same job will be getting even less. Guess people should be grateful.
Vicious circle. The person now earning £11 wants £12. The person on £12 wants £££13 etc. Either prices go up or the person on minimum wage gets laid off to pay for it .
If only it were just a case of 'wanting' as opposed to 'needing' to survive.
Of course, your observation also dies on the vine somewhat when applied to the 'wants' and 'gets' of CEO's wages and their various tax avoidance schemes.
And we're off.....
[Post edited 2 Oct 2023 16:35]
'Always In Motion' by John Honney available on amazon.co.uk
Nous sommes L’occitane Rs!
I don't understand the Tories were always against minimum wage (Boris before being Mayor campaigned against it hard)?
The Tories were against it and even that Tory Blair was against it. Yet after winning his first election he gave it under Union pressure on the condition that they would not strike. The Unions sold that off on the cheap and Blair was loved by Big Business as he had strikes under control.
But I should not be surprised as the right of the Labour Party always claims this as a Blair victory (yet he was pressured into it by the Unions), and the Tories now cannot say it would wreck the Economy (as they used to do all the time before it came in) as then they would have to talk about the Truss Libertarians wrecking the Economy (which was already wrecked before Truss anyway).
£1 extra won't buy you something extra at even Poundland now as even their prices are above a pound for most items. It won't even heart your home for an extra day. In some places, it won't even count as a tip. A throwaway policy. It should have been another £5 at least and that's not enough.
So I take it that’s a below inflation rise (no triple lock for young peasants) and someone under 23 doing the same job will be getting even less. Guess people should be grateful.
5.5% by my reckoning. They'd better hope Rishi's aim of halving inflation comes to pass.
Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one’s lifetime. (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop
I don't understand the Tories were always against minimum wage (Boris before being Mayor campaigned against it hard)?
The Tories were against it and even that Tory Blair was against it. Yet after winning his first election he gave it under Union pressure on the condition that they would not strike. The Unions sold that off on the cheap and Blair was loved by Big Business as he had strikes under control.
But I should not be surprised as the right of the Labour Party always claims this as a Blair victory (yet he was pressured into it by the Unions), and the Tories now cannot say it would wreck the Economy (as they used to do all the time before it came in) as then they would have to talk about the Truss Libertarians wrecking the Economy (which was already wrecked before Truss anyway).
£1 extra won't buy you something extra at even Poundland now as even their prices are above a pound for most items. It won't even heart your home for an extra day. In some places, it won't even count as a tip. A throwaway policy. It should have been another £5 at least and that's not enough.
I can sense Norf’s rectum having a spasm right now but here goes anyway.
The tories are being battered in the polls, so are always going to tack left, or at least appear to tack left, to undermine Labour who would vomit at the thought of raising NMW lest they appear anti business.
I don’t know when the next GE will be, but it will be a low turnout one resulting in a Labour small to medium majority, a dent in the SNP strangle hold in Scotlanf, 10-20 Lib Dem seats, and the doubling of the green vote but maybe not enough for more seats.
There is also £1bn set aside for levelling up. All pencilled in for safe Tory seats and what the Tories believe could be winnable marginals and are banking on these sweeteners swaying the hard of thinking into voting them in again.
I don't understand the Tories were always against minimum wage (Boris before being Mayor campaigned against it hard)?
The Tories were against it and even that Tory Blair was against it. Yet after winning his first election he gave it under Union pressure on the condition that they would not strike. The Unions sold that off on the cheap and Blair was loved by Big Business as he had strikes under control.
But I should not be surprised as the right of the Labour Party always claims this as a Blair victory (yet he was pressured into it by the Unions), and the Tories now cannot say it would wreck the Economy (as they used to do all the time before it came in) as then they would have to talk about the Truss Libertarians wrecking the Economy (which was already wrecked before Truss anyway).
£1 extra won't buy you something extra at even Poundland now as even their prices are above a pound for most items. It won't even heart your home for an extra day. In some places, it won't even count as a tip. A throwaway policy. It should have been another £5 at least and that's not enough.
Sorry, but the minimum wage was supported by Blair and the shadow cabinet and was in the 1997 Labour manifesto as below.
A sensibly set national minimum wage. There should be a statutory level beneath which pay should not fall - with the minimum wage decided not on the basis of a rigid formula but according to the economic circumstances of the time and with the advice of an independent low pay commission, whose membership will include representatives of employers, including small business, and employees.
Every modern industrial country has a minimum wage, including the US and Japan. Britain used to have minimum wages through the Wages Councils. Introduced sensibly, the minimum wage will remove the worst excesses of low pay (and be of particular benefit to women), while cutting some of the massive £4 billion benefits bill by which the taxpayer subsidises companies that pay very low wages.
A sensibly set national minimum wage. There should be a statutory level beneath which pay should not fall - with the minimum wage decided not on the basis of a rigid formula but according to the economic circumstances of the time and with the advice of an independent low pay commission, whose membership will include representatives of employers, including small business, and employees.
Every modern industrial country has a minimum wage, including the US and Japan. Britain used to have minimum wages through the Wages Councils. Introduced sensibly, the minimum wage will remove the worst excesses of low pay (and be of particular benefit to women), while cutting some of the massive £4 billion benefits bill by which the taxpayer subsidises companies that pay very low wages.
Blair played a canny game and put that in the manifesto, but it was a deal with the Unions. You get minimum wage, and he gets no strikes. This was stupid of the Unions as it was not linked to any index, and Blair ramped up PFI and the whole mess we see today.
Remember, this is the Blair that fooled the press with the sexed-up war dossier. He as a master at lying to people so, they heard what they wanted while he did what he wanted.
Blair played a canny game and put that in the manifesto, but it was a deal with the Unions. You get minimum wage, and he gets no strikes. This was stupid of the Unions as it was not linked to any index, and Blair ramped up PFI and the whole mess we see today.
Remember, this is the Blair that fooled the press with the sexed-up war dossier. He as a master at lying to people so, they heard what they wanted while he did what he wanted.
Sorry you clearly stated that after the election Blair changed his mind and caved in to the Unions. That is not correct. It was in the manifesto and implemented. He did not campaign against a minimum wage! Also in your Irish Times article it clearly states that Blair is talking about the sum of 4.26 per hour, not the actual policy of a minimum. It states that the Unions could make representations to the Low Pay Commission that would be set up under a Labour Government. To be clear, Blair supported the implementation of a minimum wage through the set up of a Low Pay Commission, and it was in the manifesto. You can state that he caved in on the amount, but it is incorrect to say it was regarding the actual policy. In fact when it was introduced, it was 3.50 per hr, so hardly caving in to 4.26 per hr!
Sorry you clearly stated that after the election Blair changed his mind and caved in to the Unions. That is not correct. It was in the manifesto and implemented. He did not campaign against a minimum wage! Also in your Irish Times article it clearly states that Blair is talking about the sum of 4.26 per hour, not the actual policy of a minimum. It states that the Unions could make representations to the Low Pay Commission that would be set up under a Labour Government. To be clear, Blair supported the implementation of a minimum wage through the set up of a Low Pay Commission, and it was in the manifesto. You can state that he caved in on the amount, but it is incorrect to say it was regarding the actual policy. In fact when it was introduced, it was 3.50 per hr, so hardly caving in to 4.26 per hr!
He supported it as it was the deal he made with the Unions. When he came to power, they met him to enforce it and he, of course, made sure that he got his end as he always does.
This article shows he was against the minimum wage and not for it, as this happened one year before he took power, not decades ago when he was in the Student Union bar.
This shows his real thinking and how he will make deals as it changed within a year.
He supported it as it was the deal he made with the Unions. When he came to power, they met him to enforce it and he, of course, made sure that he got his end as he always does.
This article shows he was against the minimum wage and not for it, as this happened one year before he took power, not decades ago when he was in the Student Union bar.
This shows his real thinking and how he will make deals as it changed within a year.
Next you'll be telling us the CBI (or what's left of it), big industry hitters from Indian, South Korea, so on and so forth, don't have a backdoor to the Tories and never 'influence' government policy or engineer sweetheart deals to invest in the UK - at tax payers expense - or get favourable contracts.
Making deals and negotiating with stakeholders is and should be, part and parcel of governing. Maybe if the current government sought to facilitate between the unions and train operators, the division might be healed instead of trying to play petty politics and make unions seem bad for sticking up for their members and the services they seek to provide for their clients.
The difference is: the right wing media make it seem an unholy thing when Labour talk to the TUs, yet conveniently turn a blind eye when the government talks to business. Look no further then Johnson's government and how it privately awarded PPE contracts without proper competition or seemingly, oversight, to cronies who then produced sub-standard equipment for grossly inflated prices!
Same negotiations, same deal-makings, wholly different outcomes...one enriches a few - and may well result in 'donations' back to the party awarding the contracts - the other sees large numbers of people earn the NMW and for whom, many have to work hard for their money!
'Always In Motion' by John Honney available on amazon.co.uk
Nous sommes L’occitane Rs!
He supported it as it was the deal he made with the Unions. When he came to power, they met him to enforce it and he, of course, made sure that he got his end as he always does.
This article shows he was against the minimum wage and not for it, as this happened one year before he took power, not decades ago when he was in the Student Union bar.
This shows his real thinking and how he will make deals as it changed within a year.
Sorry, last word from me on this.
It is not true he campaigned against the minimum wage. The article does not state that he was against the MW. I can only repeat, it was part of the manifesto. In the article you quoted it clearly states he was committed as per party policy to setting up a Low Pay Commission to set an hourly rate, which is what happened in 1998. The article is clear, Blair was stating that the hourly rate of 4.26 an hr was what he disagreed with. In fact he had nothing to do with setting the rate. That was determined by the commission. You couldn't have a party leader campaigning against a major policy in the manifesto at a General Election. It just didn't happen. Not sure what else I can say on this. Lets hope for a good result tomorrow?
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
