Making the news today....

[kevinjohnsonmbe]

In my experience of pay negotiations, just because somebody wants £x doesn't mean they get it.

 

 

That's not quite what I meant Felix.

 

It would be normal to expect a progressive scale and it must have an entry point.

 

If the entry points was set, then goes up by X, would it not follow that all associated scales would similarly go up by the factor X?

 

The consequence of not doing so would be a kick in the slats for anyone that was more qualified or taking greater responsibility only to find entry level gets same pay for less graft/experience/skills.

[felixthelogchopper]

That's not quite what I meant Felix.

 

It would be normal to expect a progressive scale and it must have an entry point.

 

If the entry points was set, then goes up by X, would it not follow that all associated scales would similarly go up by the factor X?

 

The consequence of not doing so would be a kick in the slats for anyone that was more qualified or taking greater responsibility only to find entry level gets same pay for less graft/experience/skills.

 

It's up to both parties to step the pay levels appropriately, for instance by having narrower band width between pay grades. It's not right by any stretch of the imagination that businesses should be subsidised by tax payers because they won't pay a decent living wage yet still make excessive profits. When you have people working a 40 hour week yet still needing a top-up from the benefits system to survive, somebody is taking the pee.

[eggsarascal]

It's up to both parties to step the pay levels appropriately, for instance by having narrower band width between pay grades. It's not right by any stretch of the imagination that businesses should be subsidised by tax payers because they won't pay a decent living wage yet still make excessive profits. When you have people working a 40 hour week yet still needing a top-up from the benefits system to survive, somebody is taking the pee.

 

Fecking Liberal Leftie.

[felixthelogchopper]

Fecking Liberal Leftie.

 

[Richard 1234]

Nobody seems to be acknowledging the inevitable snowball effect either.

 

If the bottom rung becomes £10, the bloke that WAS on £10, now wants £13, the bloke that was on £13 now wants £16 etc, etc...

 

 

I said the same thing a few pages back.

All the rise will do is make inflation rise too.

 

It's got to be better that people are in work so the government(us) only have to top them up rather than pay for everything?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[eggsarascal]

I said the same thing a few pages back.

All the rise will do is make inflation rise too.

 

It's got to be better that people are in work so the government(us) only have to top them up rather than pay for everything?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

 

Are you suggesting that it's ok for businesses to pay low wages whilst creaming big profits, and let the rest of us pick up the slack?

[Mark J]

I reckon a tenner an hour could incentivise those who are on the dole for the 'lifestyle', to get a job.

[Richard 1234]

Are you suggesting that it's ok for businesses to pay low wages whilst creaming big profits, and let the rest of us pick up the slack?

 

 

No I'm saying they they want and will get in most cases the big profits regardless. If people are out of work we end up picking all the slack up not just topping it up.

Is it right no it's not but how do you suggest it's changed.

Corybn isn't the answer in my opinion.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[Mark J]

We currently have a prime minister who has spectacularly misjudged the opinion of a great deal of voters. By calling this snap election (which she promised not to do), she took us all for granted. There's no way a person who has the audacity to do that, should have any place at the table when it comes to Brexit negotiations.

[Barton77]

If everything else went up to pay this new minimum wage except your business you would either start losing money or go broke.

People on minimum wage now are no better off than when it first came in. It's still not really enough but prices have a tendency to move to what people can afford (or not as the case may be)

In my opinion a higher minimum will simply have the effect of raising prices across the board. Maybe that's what labour want so that the debt becomes less through inflation?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

 

Nobody seems to be acknowledging the inevitable snowball effect either.

 

If the bottom rung becomes £10, the bloke that WAS on £10, now wants £13, the bloke that was on £13 now wants £16 etc, etc...

 

 

So by this logic cheap immigrant labour is a good thing (assuming immigration does drive down wages at the lower end)?! Keeping that bottom rung lower keeps all wages lower, which is good for business, which in turn benefits all of us?

 

Dont really understand how it benefits anybody if people are not paid enough to survive without relying on welfare. If a business cant afford to pay its staff enough to live on maybe they should think about if they have a viable business..

 

When wages are driven up by reducing immigration it is a good thing for ordinary working people.. when its done through regulation/minimum wage its a bad thing for business and therefore bad for all of us.

 

A few months ago we were at war against an ‘elite’ who wanted us to stay in EU for their own financial gain.. now the same people are defending the elites right not to contribute through taxation.

 

I’m considering voting labour - i’m not sure if that makes me a champaign socialist, member of the cosmopolitan, liberal elite or a lazy, work shy scrounger who expects others to pay my way.

Edited June 2, 2017 by Barton77