WTF:Unions back welfare cuts/privatisation!
- Thread starter treelover
- Start date
The unemployed + disabled should stage a protest in Southwold .......bout claiments not ever getting holidays. In James mad scheme where he swaps the word 'work' for 'full time activities'.......does that mean that claiments will be entitled to tea breaks, lunch breaks , sick leave and finally holidays.....or have the Unions decide that the underclass do not get any rights like 'workers' and will have to slave away for the system FULL TIME .....??? Completely and utterly holidayless?
_angel_
.
Come off it they're not going to give their slave army rights. Holidays? Daytrips with the kids in the holidays - forget it.
Er who IS looking after the kids in the school holidays whilst mum's yoked on the chaingang?
I spoke to one disabled lady about this and she said she faints sometimes.....loses consciousness. Will they have slave guards trained in first aid if any of the claiments pass out during their un- unionised full time activities? Or have the Unions suggested safeguards, union reps and rights for the 'full -time activists'?
_angel_
.
Hmm interesting. Say they throw a load of physically disabled people onto JSA and, discrimination being what it is, plus the fact they may only be able to consider certain types of jobs, don't meet with any luck, are they then going to make allowances for the 'fulltime activity' if they are physically unable to sweep the streets (by the way what's the obsession with street sweeping - has it got to be public? Is it meant to be humiliating ??- not very nice for paid roadsweepers but there you go) Or will community service be reassessed as something you could do sitting down?
Well if they break their own minimum wage laws may as well adopt ALL the tacets of slavery...maybe put everyone in chains and get em to sing "old man river"?
That is what is what I cant understand....James is quite specific......it is 'Full-Time Activity'......not just 'Activity'......nor part -time activity........so does he mean a standard 40 hour week.......???? Does the term Full Time...mean no tea breaks, no breaks for the toilet, no sick leave and no holidays......it is a whole new concept......''erm and what to you do?'' .....'' oh Im a full-time activist'.......sorry to go on but that is the whole point of a green paper...then white ...then a bill . It is all in the exact wording.????
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
It's tough talk in a Green Paper, there's a way to go before these schemes are introduced, if they are introduced. I have no doubt that there will be attempts to introduce such schemes, i'm not so sure that the state of the economy, in particular the labour market, is robust or strong enough not to suffer severe shrinkage over the next 12-18 months at least which would make the rationale and purpose of such a change very difficult to demonstrate.
People get their benefits stopped, people don't have money to buy stuff, people steal to survive.....recipe for chaos. Shops on rough estates will all go out of business . The government are absolute nutjobs that never think anything through, they really do think that charvers are gonna say "ok then i'll do it, i'll work 40 hours a week for a quarter of the minimum wage" and NOT burgle houses, rob shops, sell drugs etc
I am not suprised as far as i am concerned the union bosses are just as bad as brown and co
also it dawned on me that soem people seem to think that the reforms like daily signing will not be possible so i got to think how when the welfare reform bill comes in they will make people sign on dailey even lo the proposals are ment to become law in 2015 they dont make up these ideas and not follow them thru then it struck me - ID cards - you will have to report to be scanned dailey and you will see an advisor weekly ID cards will be and the excuse that you cannot afford to have one will not stop them giving out ID cards at a discounted rate
it makes me sad and angry at the indifferent attitude of a lot of urban posters who seem to think that none of these things will affect them
btw the point about CAB is that under nushamebore they have been cut back to the bone often in areas that need them most
also it dawned on me that soem people seem to think that the reforms like daily signing will not be possible so i got to think how when the welfare reform bill comes in they will make people sign on dailey even lo the proposals are ment to become law in 2015 they dont make up these ideas and not follow them thru then it struck me - ID cards - you will have to report to be scanned dailey and you will see an advisor weekly ID cards will be and the excuse that you cannot afford to have one will not stop them giving out ID cards at a discounted rate
it makes me sad and angry at the indifferent attitude of a lot of urban posters who seem to think that none of these things will affect them
btw the point about CAB is that under nushamebore they have been cut back to the bone often in areas that need them most
No i disagree welfare reform is just a part of a bigger picture of social control if you look at the so called left wing liberal press what you will see are stories such as debroh ore s who are affectivly arguing that intelligence and therefore social status are genetically determined then what we are witnessing is the triumph of neo con ideaology and the left and the liberals have all sold out
i think there is a massive question of how much supposedly cost saving technology is driving political policy but hey this is britan and that would involve orignal journalism
_angel_
.
That's why they're targetting lone parents and disabled people. They know they're less likely to resort to crime, even if they wanted to do it they're probably not capable.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
They're basically targetting anyone/everyone who claims benefits tbh with you. JSA claimants for longer than 2 years to do full time community work, ESA claimants being forced to look for work, income support abolished and carers/lone parents forced onto JSA, ambitions for completely privatise the employment support functions so the state pays to push benefit claimants into low-paid work, thus providing a steady stream of mostly non-migrant labour, it's all there potentially.
_angel_
.
I know, but some 18 year old lad living at home with his parents is in all likelihood going to avoid signing on, maybe living off his parents/ doing cash in hand work here and there etc. They know a lone parent is going to be completely dependent and have to do whatever they get told (even if that means leaving their kids either alone or in unsuitable childcare)
its why they are going to be building loads of new prisons
nightbreed
Im Bored
This report from the Financial Times just about sums up what really was acheived at the Warwick NPF. If the bosses were happy with the result then we are all doomed........
UK - Politics & policy
Business cheers Brown’s policy on unions
By Jean Eaglesham and Jim Pickard
Published: July 28 2008 22:19 | Last updated: July 28 2008 23:28
Gordon Brown was on Monday praised by business for resisting “the worst” union demands on policy, but urged to stand his ground in the run-up to this autumn’s politically charged party conference season.
Business reacted with undisguised relief to the measures for Labour’s next manifesto hammered out at the party’s National Policy Forum over the weekend. Reports on Monday claimed the prime minister had “caved in” to the unions, which represent the sole funding lifeline for his cash-strapped party. But employers pointed out that the reality was somewhat different. Facing a list of 130 union demands, Mr Brown rejected the vast majority outright and gave little ground on the remainder.
“Everybody appears to have seen some sense and understood the current economic climate,” David Frost, director-general of the British Chambers of Commerce, told the Financial Times. “The business community must be heartened by this.” Richard Lambert, director- general of the CBI employers’ body, said the government had “resisted the worst of the union demands”.
Employers said the document that emerged from the weekend talks between ministers, unions and Labour activists – a central plank of the party’s policymaking machine – contained little to cause them alarm.
After stripping out union-friendly rhetoric and vague assurances, the document was notable principally for the lack of substantive new commitments. The main exception was the pledge to lower the age threshold for paying the adult rate of the national minimum wage from 22 to 21, subject to advice from the Low Pay Commission.
Working life
New commitments
• Minimum wage: Age threshold for the adult minimum wage to be lowered from 22 to 21, if that is again recommended by the low pay commission
• More use of in-house services for hospital cleaning
Restatement of existing commitments
• Family friendly: Right to request flexible working extended to parents of children aged up to 16; measures to allow mothers to share paid parental leave with fathers
• Equality bill: Requirement for private sector companies contracting with the public sector to provide more information on the proportion of women they employ
• Redundancy pay: An increase in the statutory minimum
• More apprenticeships, particularly in the public sector
Measures to be considered (no policy commitment)
• A promise to “look at” non-profit making companies acting as train operators
• An inquiry into health and safety standards in the construction industry
“We’re pleased that this agreement appears to be mainly a rehash of existing policies,” the EEF manufacturers’ organisation said. Stephen Alambritis of the Federation of Small Businesses told the FT: “We’re keeping a beady eye on this [area] but there’s nothing earth-shatteringly new that would worry us in it.”
The relaxed business reaction was in stark contrast to a Tory briefing document that on Monday proclaimed the resurrection of a Labour party in hock to its historic paymasters. “The unions are regaining control of Labour’s agenda, demonstrating that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Brown’s government is lurching to the left in response,” the opposition party declared.
But the Tories’ citing of the “huge list” of union demands made before the policy forum served only to highlight how few of them were ceded. Rejected policies included the abolition of the ban on secondary picketing, the reopening of public sector pay deals and higher taxes for people earning more than £40,000.
“The unions went in with a shopping list and came away with a bag of sweets,” Bob Marshall-Andrews, the veteran Labour MP, commented wryly on Monday.
Employers are acutely aware that their relief at Mr Brown’s refusal to grant this wish list could prove short-lived, however. Most of the union demands will be revived at the annual Trades Union Congress this autumn. Many Labour MPs on the left of the party believe a radical, union-influenced agenda is the only way the party can avoid catastrophic defeat at the next election. The rejected union call for a windfall tax on energy companies, to take just one example, has been backed by 48 Labour MPs who have signed a parliamentary motion.
Business is keeping a wary watching brief. “All we can do is absolutely stiffen their [the government’s] resolve,” Miles Templeman, Institute of Directors director-general, told the FT.
“They’ve stressed how important pay restraint is – now they’ve got to stick to it. We just can’t afford a further movement in that direction [of union demands] or we’ll harm our competitiveness.”
Additional reporting by Andrew Taylor
In other words New Labour have NOTHING to offer working class people at the next general election!!! Hey we knew that already though didnt we.
UK - Politics & policy
Business cheers Brown’s policy on unions
By Jean Eaglesham and Jim Pickard
Published: July 28 2008 22:19 | Last updated: July 28 2008 23:28
Gordon Brown was on Monday praised by business for resisting “the worst” union demands on policy, but urged to stand his ground in the run-up to this autumn’s politically charged party conference season.
Business reacted with undisguised relief to the measures for Labour’s next manifesto hammered out at the party’s National Policy Forum over the weekend. Reports on Monday claimed the prime minister had “caved in” to the unions, which represent the sole funding lifeline for his cash-strapped party. But employers pointed out that the reality was somewhat different. Facing a list of 130 union demands, Mr Brown rejected the vast majority outright and gave little ground on the remainder.
“Everybody appears to have seen some sense and understood the current economic climate,” David Frost, director-general of the British Chambers of Commerce, told the Financial Times. “The business community must be heartened by this.” Richard Lambert, director- general of the CBI employers’ body, said the government had “resisted the worst of the union demands”.
Employers said the document that emerged from the weekend talks between ministers, unions and Labour activists – a central plank of the party’s policymaking machine – contained little to cause them alarm.
After stripping out union-friendly rhetoric and vague assurances, the document was notable principally for the lack of substantive new commitments. The main exception was the pledge to lower the age threshold for paying the adult rate of the national minimum wage from 22 to 21, subject to advice from the Low Pay Commission.
Working life
New commitments
• Minimum wage: Age threshold for the adult minimum wage to be lowered from 22 to 21, if that is again recommended by the low pay commission
• More use of in-house services for hospital cleaning
Restatement of existing commitments
• Family friendly: Right to request flexible working extended to parents of children aged up to 16; measures to allow mothers to share paid parental leave with fathers
• Equality bill: Requirement for private sector companies contracting with the public sector to provide more information on the proportion of women they employ
• Redundancy pay: An increase in the statutory minimum
• More apprenticeships, particularly in the public sector
Measures to be considered (no policy commitment)
• A promise to “look at” non-profit making companies acting as train operators
• An inquiry into health and safety standards in the construction industry
“We’re pleased that this agreement appears to be mainly a rehash of existing policies,” the EEF manufacturers’ organisation said. Stephen Alambritis of the Federation of Small Businesses told the FT: “We’re keeping a beady eye on this [area] but there’s nothing earth-shatteringly new that would worry us in it.”
The relaxed business reaction was in stark contrast to a Tory briefing document that on Monday proclaimed the resurrection of a Labour party in hock to its historic paymasters. “The unions are regaining control of Labour’s agenda, demonstrating that he who pays the piper calls the tune. Brown’s government is lurching to the left in response,” the opposition party declared.
But the Tories’ citing of the “huge list” of union demands made before the policy forum served only to highlight how few of them were ceded. Rejected policies included the abolition of the ban on secondary picketing, the reopening of public sector pay deals and higher taxes for people earning more than £40,000.
“The unions went in with a shopping list and came away with a bag of sweets,” Bob Marshall-Andrews, the veteran Labour MP, commented wryly on Monday.
Employers are acutely aware that their relief at Mr Brown’s refusal to grant this wish list could prove short-lived, however. Most of the union demands will be revived at the annual Trades Union Congress this autumn. Many Labour MPs on the left of the party believe a radical, union-influenced agenda is the only way the party can avoid catastrophic defeat at the next election. The rejected union call for a windfall tax on energy companies, to take just one example, has been backed by 48 Labour MPs who have signed a parliamentary motion.
Business is keeping a wary watching brief. “All we can do is absolutely stiffen their [the government’s] resolve,” Miles Templeman, Institute of Directors director-general, told the FT.
“They’ve stressed how important pay restraint is – now they’ve got to stick to it. We just can’t afford a further movement in that direction [of union demands] or we’ll harm our competitiveness.”
Additional reporting by Andrew Taylor
In other words New Labour have NOTHING to offer working class people at the next general election!!! Hey we knew that already though didnt we.
I am not suprised as far as i am concerned the union bosses are just as bad as brown and co
also it dawned on me that soem people seem to think that the reforms like daily signing will not be possible so i got to think how when the welfare reform bill comes in they will make people sign on dailey even lo the proposals are ment to become law in 2015 they dont make up these ideas and not follow them thru then it struck me - ID cards - you will have to report to be scanned dailey and you will see an advisor weekly ID cards will be and the excuse that you cannot afford to have one will not stop them giving out ID cards at a discounted rate
it makes me sad and angry at the indifferent attitude of a lot of urban posters who seem to think that none of these things will affect them
btw the point about CAB is that under nushamebore they have been cut back to the bone often in areas that need them most
If it was a real Labour party there wouldn't need to be a CAB at all but it is now busier than ever - welfare harrassment, debt (esp fuel poverty) is rife
One thing i forgot to mention, is someone mentioned Dave Prentis being involved in all this New Labour "fuck the poor" careerism. I dunno how true that was but if so how ridiculous is it when he spoke at the miners gala alongside the miners leader who expressed outrage at devastated communities being forced off incapacity benefit into mickey mouse jobs...didn't he learn anything?
caroline1973
Well-Known Member
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
hi could someone who knows/understands the Lisbon stuff start a thread please .. it is news to me ..
Richard Boyd Barrett on the Lisbon treaty (and the succesful campaign against it in the Irish referendum)
audiotech
wav, aiff, mp3, ogg, flac
Nigel
For A Degenerates' Workers State
Werthers original, or Murray Mint?
Met someone recentely from a think tank called CLGA (centre left grass roots alliance), who claimed that he went to talks on Warwick Agreement.
With developing casualisation in workplace, and what is likely to be ia increase in unemployment, these new agreements will become very important, in the not too distant future.
Similar threads
