Tonight's topic of conversation in our house

Discussion in 'Bulletin Board ARCHIVE' started by fired, Dec 9, 2013.

Page 3 of 3
  1. Gimson&theBarnsleys

    Gimson&theBarnsleys Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2005
    Messages:
    7,679
    Likes Received:
    6,291
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    In that do you mean the minimum rate unscrupulous employers can get away with?
     
    Gimson&theBarnsleys, Dec 10, 2013
    #41
  2. tyr

    tyrone1 Banned Idiot

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,815
    Likes Received:
    358
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Yes I do

    The minimum wage is clearly very restrictive and holds back wages
     
    tyrone1, Dec 10, 2013
    #42
  3. EastStander

    EastStander Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Messages:
    29,883
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Upper tier, Gangway 11
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    what utter rot.

    It hasn't held back wages and it hasn't stopped companies taking on, which was all stated would happen when it was introduced. Employers should be paying a wage that it's employees can live on
     
    EastStander, Dec 10, 2013
    #43
  4. Pin

    PinballWizard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    Messages:
    827
    Likes Received:
    920
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Tyrone has got a point, in fairness. Government edicts are not the best way to raise wages, on all levels.
     
    PinballWizard, Dec 10, 2013
    #44
  5. BFC Dave

    BFC Dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,966
    Likes Received:
    849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Home Page:
    Style:
    XenForo - Xenith Reds
    I'm sorry Tyrone but I don't understand the logic in that one. I don't see how it holds back wages.

    The only restriction I can see is that it means employers can't pay people sweat shop wages.
     
    BFC Dave, Dec 10, 2013
    #45
  6. tyr

    tyrone1 Banned Idiot

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,815
    Likes Received:
    358
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Why pay more or offer any differentials if everyone's paying the same
     
    tyrone1, Dec 10, 2013
    #46
  7. BFC Dave

    BFC Dave Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    12,966
    Likes Received:
    849
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Home Page:
    Style:
    XenForo - Xenith Reds
    because if someone is more capable and you want to keep them then you will pay more. That's darned capitalism for ya ! :D
     
    BFC Dave, Dec 10, 2013
    #47
  8. Gloria Stitts

    Gloria Stitts Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,309
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Frank Field

    Dan Jarvis seems okay but I can't see why an ex-Army Colonel would be in the Labour Party, as such I think I'd have to bracket him as one of those modern politicians like Blair who could be in any party and therefore a bit of an opportunist.
     
    Gloria Stitts, Dec 10, 2013
    #48
  9. EastStander

    EastStander Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Messages:
    29,883
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Upper tier, Gangway 11
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    why not? He was a Labour party member before he joined up.
     
    EastStander, Dec 10, 2013
    #49
  10. tyr

    tyrone1 Banned Idiot

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2011
    Messages:
    8,815
    Likes Received:
    358
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Why pay more or offer any differentials if everyone's paying the same
     
    tyrone1, Dec 10, 2013
    #50
Page 3 of 3

Share This Page