In article ,
pamela wrote:
Tube drivers are vastly overpaid with a starting salary of £50,000.
Plus 43 days holiday, only 36 hours a week with full retirement at
60. No qualifications needed.

Suggest you apply for it then and stop moaning. TFL are having woman only
open days to help improve on the male/female ratio. Such a deadly boring
job should suit you nicely.

The unions has prevented the public from applying for such cushy jobs.

Ah - right. Tube drivers come from outer space, then?

We should bring back Thatcher and sort this nonsense out.

Nothing left to sell off. And no more oil revenue to keep her afloat. Or
was that just the whisky?

--
*Why were the Indians here first? They had reservations.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
pamela wrote:
The French and Italian unions apparently decided not to bite the
hand that feeds them.

Absolutely. Should be grateful for any morsel from the masters table. As
I'm sure you are.

--
*It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 16/02/2018 13:25, whisky-dave wrote:

Like the £50 worth I brought for my brother to park but does that
really make him a resident ? It also doesn;t give him the right to
park outtside my place or even in the road. And ANYONE can use these
passes a resident a none resident even a Martian.

Its not a residents pass then is it?!
They aren't residents only parking spaces either so are totally
irrelevant to what was being discussed.

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
On 14/02/2018 19:10, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Not expected you to know the real reason - lack of investment. The British
disease.

I've already pointed out the reality. Any attempt at investment in the
60's and 70's was met with wildcat strikes and walkouts.

The lack of investment started well before that. And continued after it.

The Germans and Japanese must have been rolling on the floor with
mirth.

Of course they were. At us thinking we could carry on selling outdated
products as we could just after WW2. While they invested in the future.

--
*Since light travels faster than sound, some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
Rover cars regularly left the factory without any paint on the
underside of the doors.

********.

--
*I'm not your type. I'm not inflatable.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , pamela
wrote:

On 23:46 15 Feb 2018, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

You really think the country as it is now a shining example of how
one should be run?

Democracy may not be perfect but it's better than communism. Which
country do you feel has a better form of government than the UK?

Venezuela, obvs, eh Dave?

So you too think this country perfect? No room for improvement?

Do you ever take your head out of the sand?

--
*WHY ARE HEMORRHOIDS CALLED "HEMORRHOIDS" INSTEAD OF "ASTEROIDS"?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 16/02/2018 13:14, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
bert wrote:
Given a GP might need to live reasonably close to their work, is 90k
that excessive for a job which needs a lot of expensive training? About
double that of a tube train driver?

Which show how overpaid tube train drivers are. Could/should be replaced
with robots. Much more reliable, don't go on strike and don't throw
sickies.

You've no idea, have you, just how much it costs to live in London? Where
tube drivers work?

Do tube worker live in London?
Why don't they live close to where the tubes start from so they can get
to work easier than travelling from London to the outskirts when there
aren't any tubes running?

I don't recall any tube parking/maintenance yards being anywhere near
the expensive parts of London that you think tube drivers live in.

In article ,
Andrew wrote:
On 12/02/2018 20:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
Andrew wrote:

On 11/02/2018 20:34, Roger Hayter wrote:
Clue: I was a member of a trade union all my working life,


Thanks for confirming what I had been suspecting for some time.

I remember the 1970's when people were bullied into joining trades
unions.

I wasn't.

I *was*.

A true wimp, then?

Very easy to explain to anyone the benefits of belonging to a decent union.
Of course there will always be free loaders who think they can get the
benefits without contributing to the costs. Like so many Brexiteers.

--
*When blondes have more fun, do they know it?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 16/02/18 14:41, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 23:21:37 on Thu, 15 Feb
2018, The Natural Philosopher remarked:

Even the people who promote the AGW meme obviously dont take it
seriously. They rush around in big cars and jets, have beachfront
housesÂ* and oppose the one cost effect means of reducing CO2
emissionsÂ* - Nuclear power - by legislating it beyond economic
viability.

And they refuse to engage in debate, instead using playground
tacticsÂ* like calling people 'deniers' - thereby demonstrating they
are afraidÂ* of and ashamed of the real science.

Its really all a bit pathetic and childish isn't it Roland?

Â*Your response is, yes. Too many straw men.

The only straw man is the one you just invented right there.

Losing your touch, I see.
Motre ad homonems and straw men.

Really Roland, you are the best adverstisement for climate scepticism I
have seen on this NG., You hsave no coherent arguments, just sneers and
denoalism and add hominems.


Pathetic

You probably even vote liberal democrat


--
Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.

On 16/02/2018 14:49, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
pamela wrote:

It's so nice to be reminded of the benefits we have today of
prosperity, industrial peace, low unemployment, unvictimised customers,
cheaper goods and reliable services (except those where unions still
operate).

Yup. Great to see so many being exploited by minimum wage and zero hours
contacts etc so you can lounge at home and have cheap deliveries.


I think you will find the delivery drivers you are talking about aren't
covered by the minimum wage and if they were you would pay a lot more.
These things are being addressed as more and more is covered by the
minimum wage. You shouldn't regard it as a bad thing as its a lot better
than what was there when there was no minimum wage.

On 16/02/2018 16:49, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew wrote:
Rover cars regularly left the factory without any paint on the
underside of the doors.

********.


There were cases where they left the factory having been painted over rust.
They were rusty because they were left unfinished in the yard until the
paint shop stopped striking and then were painted without the benefit of
acid dips and the like to remove the rust on them.

On 16/02/2018 16:59, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew wrote:
On 12/02/2018 20:14, Roger Hayter wrote:
Andrew wrote:

On 11/02/2018 20:34, Roger Hayter wrote:
Clue: I was a member of a trade union all my working life,


Thanks for confirming what I had been suspecting for some time.

I remember the 1970's when people were bullied into joining trades
unions.

I wasn't.

I *was*.

A true wimp, then?

Very easy to explain to anyone the benefits of belonging to a decent union.
Of course there will always be free loaders who think they can get the
benefits without contributing to the costs. Like so many Brexiteers.


I refused to join "the union", I didn't want them to have sole
negotiating rights over *my* terms and conditions.

I also didn't go on strike when they called one as I didn't have any say
in it so why should I do what they wanted?

It works both ways unions shouldn't expect to influence non members when
they don't listen to them.

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
You've no idea, have you, just how much it costs to live in London?
Where tube drivers work?

Do tube worker live in London?

Most who work shift work when by the nature of that means there isn't
likely to be decent public transport probably would. But of course if you
were Rees Mogg you'd simply have a pied a terre paid for by the taxpayer
and keep the country pile for the weekends.


Why don't they live close to where the tubes start from so they can get
to work easier than travelling from London to the outskirts when there
aren't any tubes running?

Only the likes of you would expect them do be able to do that and have low
pay too.

I don't recall any tube parking/maintenance yards being anywhere near
the expensive parts of London that you think tube drivers live in.

You don't recall very much, then. Depots are scattered all over London.

--
*Gaffer tape - The Force, light and dark sides - holds the universe together*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
On 16/02/2018 16:49, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew wrote:
Rover cars regularly left the factory without any paint on the
underside of the doors.

********.


There were cases where they left the factory having been painted over
rust. They were rusty because they were left unfinished in the yard
until the paint shop stopped striking and then were painted without the
benefit of acid dips and the like to remove the rust on them.

Yes - bodies were delivered in bare metal and left outside to rust. All
obviously the fault of the assembly workers. Who as well as assembling
cars were responsible for overseeing just how and when bodies were made
elesewhere - and how they were stored after delivery. All Red Robbo's
fault at the end of the day. And of course those in that nice shiney new
paint plant - computer controlled - were responsible for making sure the
robot didn't miss out large chunks. Or perhaps that fancy new high
technology paint simply fell off - plenty did. All the fault of Red Robbo
again, obviously. OMG that man got around.

--
*If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
I refused to join "the union", I didn't want them to have sole
negotiating rights over *my* terms and conditions.

Ah - right. Not many large companies would be willing to negotiate new
terms with every single employee on perhaps an annual basis. And I can
imagine you jumping up and down if you discovered someone doing the same
job was better paid than you...

--
*A bicycle can't stand alone because it's two tyred.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
pamela wrote:
Ah - right. Tube drivers come from outer space, then?

The public is not elgible to apply for these vastly overpaid jobs.

And quite right too. Perhaps you expect the public can apply for any job
at all anywhere?

Here is an article about it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/gene...2015/politics-
blog/11730449/Want-to-be-a-Tube-driver-Well-you-cant.-Heres-why.html

Plenty of companies advertise jobs internally first. Means they will know
the people applying, and that they (for example) are already used to shift
work etc.

But I expect you'd like to ban that too. Where it suits you.

We should bring back Thatcher and sort this nonsense out.

Nothing left to sell off. And no more oil revenue to keep her
afloat. Or was that just the whisky?

I meant Maggie is needed to clean up these Spanish practices. The
savings on the luxury £50,000 starting pay could be used to make
travel cheaper for the public.

Plenty of very highly paid jobs you could have a go at first. But then you
already have.

--
*If at first you do succeed, try not to look too astonished.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
pamela wrote:
On 14:47 16 Feb 2018, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
pamela wrote:
A subjective view about the profits a company makes has nothing
to do with trade unions abuses of power. A company can make
money and pay its workers well, such as Nissan in Sunderland. It
doesn't need unions.

And just what would you do if working for a company making very
good profits but not paying its workers well?

Lay down and take it seems to be your way.

If you don't like the pay and conditions then try another job. If
nothing suits you then get a grant and study to better yourself.

Yup - a degree really helps when serving fries with them.

--
*What happens if you get scared half to death twice? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In message , at 17:01:56 on Fri, 16 Feb
2018, The Natural Philosopher remarked:
Even the people who promote the AGW meme obviously dont take it
seriously. They rush around in big cars and jets, have beachfront
houses* and oppose the one cost effect means of reducing CO2
emissions* - Nuclear power - by legislating it beyond economic viability.

And they refuse to engage in debate, instead using playground
tactics* like calling people 'deniers' - thereby demonstrating they
are afraid* of and ashamed of the real science.

Its really all a bit pathetic and childish isn't it Roland?

*Your response is, yes. Too many straw men.

The only straw man is the one you just invented right there.
Losing your touch, I see.
Motre ad homonems and straw men.

Really Roland, you are the best adverstisement for climate scepticism I
have seen on this NG., You hsave no coherent arguments, just sneers and
denoalism and add hominems.

I'm merely reflecting back what I see coming from you.
--
Roland Perry

On 16/02/2018 18:20, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
I refused to join "the union", I didn't want them to have sole
negotiating rights over *my* terms and conditions.

Ah - right. Not many large companies would be willing to negotiate new
terms with every single employee on perhaps an annual basis. And I can
imagine you jumping up and down if you discovered someone doing the same
job was better paid than you...


I take it you have never worked in a technology company.

On 16/02/2018 18:18, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
On 16/02/2018 16:49, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Andrew wrote:
Rover cars regularly left the factory without any paint on the
underside of the doors.

********.


There were cases where they left the factory having been painted over
rust. They were rusty because they were left unfinished in the yard
until the paint shop stopped striking and then were painted without the
benefit of acid dips and the like to remove the rust on them.

Yes - bodies were delivered in bare metal and left outside to rust. All
obviously the fault of the assembly workers. Who as well as assembling
cars were responsible for overseeing just how and when bodies were made
elesewhere - and how they were stored after delivery. All Red Robbo's
fault at the end of the day. And of course those in that nice shiney new
paint plant - computer controlled - were responsible for making sure the
robot didn't miss out large chunks. Or perhaps that fancy new high
technology paint simply fell off - plenty did. All the fault of Red Robbo
again, obviously. OMG that man got around.


Well yes, the management should have laid off all the plant without pay.
That was the correct thing to do.

In article ,
pamela wrote:

That's about right. Plum jobs should not be reserved for insiders
who, in all probability, are only union members.

You really think driving a tube train a plumb job? You really must have
had an even more boring job and I pity you. Perhaps that's why you're so
bitter.

--
*It's a thankless job, but I've got a lot of Karma to burn off

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 00:36:39 -0000, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:


It's what they call "Children families and adults", in Cambridgeshire.
The biggest slice so which by far is schools.

If you choose to have kids, pay for them your ****ing self!

....says, of course, the chronic gay ****** who can't score and will never be
able to procreate! BG


Gay ****** Birdbrain on Women:

--
Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) about women:
"I don't want one. Easy enough to get one if I wanted one."
MID:

--
Gay ****** Birdbrain about women:
"I don't want one, they're nothing but a nuisance."
MID:

--
More of ****** Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) strange world:
"Women should learn to enjoy sex.."
MID:

--
More from Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) strange sociopathic
world:
"...men are superior, so a woman dressed as a man looks better, not worse."
MID:

--
Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) sociopathic "mind" at work:
"Satan is god's wife. Woman are evil."
MID:

--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) "deep thinking":
"A woman should never be allowed to operate anything technical."
MID:

--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) deep thinking:
"Looking at a woman the wrong way is now illegal. Raising your eyebrow at an
inappropriate time gets you a jail term. At this rate there won't be any
kids being born soon."


--
Gay ****** Birdbrain about women:
"99% of females are not worth having."
MID:

On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 00:37:54 -0000, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:


And that's just the pensions of the various chief constables. ;-)

You misspelt ****stable.

You miss that EVERYONE considers you a complete idiot, Birdbrain!

--
Pelican to Birdbrain Macaw:
"Ok. I'm persuaded . You are an idiot."
MID:

--
DerbyDad03 addressing Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson" LOL):
"Frigging Idiot. Get the hell out of my thread."
MID:

--
Kerr Mudd-John about Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson" LOL):
"It's like arguing with a demented frog."
MID:

--
Mr Pounder Esquire about Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson" LOL):
"the **** poor delivery boy with no hot running water, 11 cats and
several parrots living in his hovel."
MID:

--
Rob Morley about Birdbrain:
"He's a perennial idiot"
MID: 20170519215057.56a1f1d4@Mars

--
JoeyDee to Birdbrain
"I apologize for thinking you were a jerk. You're just someone with an IQ
lower than your age, and I accept that as a reason for your comments."
MID: l-september.org

--
Sam Plusnet about Birdbrain (now "James Wilkinson Sword" LOL):
"He's just desperate to be noticed. Any attention will do, no matter how
negative it may be."
MID:

--
asking Birdbrain:
"What, were you dropped on your head as a child?"
MID:

On 16/02/18 21:49, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 17:01:56 on Fri, 16 Feb
2018, The Natural Philosopher remarked:
Even the people who promote the AGW meme obviously dont take it
seriously. They rush around in big cars and jets, have beachfront
housesÂ* and oppose the one cost effect means of reducing CO2
emissionsÂ* - Nuclear power - by legislating it beyond economic
viability.

And they refuse to engage in debate, instead using playground
tacticsÂ* like calling people 'deniers' - thereby demonstrating
they are afraidÂ* of and ashamed of the real science.

Its really all a bit pathetic and childish isn't it Roland?
Â*
Â*Your response is, yes. Too many straw men.

The only straw man is the one you just invented right there.
Â*Losing your touch, I see.
Motre ad homonems and straw men.

Really Roland, you are the best adverstisement for climate scepticism
I have seen on this NG., You hsave no coherent arguments, just sneers
and denoalism and add hominems.

I'm merely reflecting back what I see coming from you.

No, Roland, you are merely projecting your own psyche on others


--
Labour - a bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich
people
by telling poor people that "other" rich people are the reason they are
poor.

Peter Thompson

In article ,
pamela wrote:
On 18:20 16 Feb 2018, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
I refused to join "the union", I didn't want them to have sole
negotiating rights over *my* terms and conditions.

Ah - right. Not many large companies would be willing to negotiate
new terms with every single employee on perhaps an annual basis.

That's exactly how it works in most companies I have been in. I take it
your experience is different. It was the lack of individualised
assessments which made me leave the public sector.

In a large company, it's going to make the HR department even larger.
Adding to non productive overheads. And opening up the much bigger
possibility of favouritism, etc.

And I can imagine you jumping up and down if you discovered
someone doing the same job was better paid than you...

That was an almost inevitable consequence of individual pay. In some
cases people doing a better job would be paid less than someone else
doing a worse job. It depended on what salary you initially
negoatiated and how important it was to retain that person.

You think a large organisation is going to negotiate the starting salary
of everyone individually too? Even the bog cleaners?

No reason not to reward someone who is exceptional at a job individually.
But to have individual saleries for everyone would be a nightmare.

You seems to be very jealous of what some earn in jobs you can't possibly
know. I wonder why?

--
*A bartender is just a pharmacist with a limited inventory.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
pamela wrote:
You really think driving a tube train a plumb job? You really must
have had an even more boring job and I pity you. Perhaps that's
why you're so bitter.

Starting pay of £50,000 for a 36 hour week with 43 days holiday.
That's a well paid job. Pay rising to £60,000.

There's tens of thousands of people who would snatch your arm off it
you advertised that.

If they really want that job, start off with another in TFL. No problem
there. Then apply for a driver's job.
Pretty well all decent jobs (if you really think this is one) have some
sort of path to them. You don't simply get one direct from outside with no
qualifications or experience.

--
*Until I was thirteen, I thought my name was SHUT UP .

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , pamela
wrote:

On 00:24 17 Feb 2018, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
pamela wrote:

That's about right. Plum jobs should not be reserved for
insiders who, in all probability, are only union members.

You really think driving a tube train a plumb job? You really must
have had an even more boring job and I pity you. Perhaps that's
why you're so bitter.

Starting pay of £50,000 for a 36 hour week with 43 days holiday.
That's a well paid job. Pay rising to £60,000.

There's tens of thousands of people who would snatch your arm off it
you advertised that.

That of course, is what should happen. Then we'd know what the pay
level should be.

Let's apply this to everything, then.

But then aren't you against allowing in EU workers to take UK jobs at a
lower rate?

Seems to me you haven't thought this through...

--
*Don't squat with your spurs on *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 16/02/2018 09:38, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , RJH wrote:

A few words: Private Finance Initiative;

Well we know who to blame for those.

cartels; land banking; tax evasion and avoidance;

What's wrong with tax avoidance? Anyone who files a tax return and
claims their personal allowance is avoiding tax.


I think examples of corporate tax avoidance are, in context, offensive -
Apple, Amazon, Google etc. Bit different to claiming a personal
allowance. I take it you don't see the difference?

Or are you just throwing words around at random?


Speak as you find :-)

management pay. And the way virtually everything in our society,
from housing to buses, from health to education, has become
monetised over the past 40 years.

It always was monetised. That is perhaps a bit more visible now.


Bit, yes.


--
Cheers, Rob

On 17/02/2018 10:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
pamela wrote:
On 18:20 16 Feb 2018, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
I refused to join "the union", I didn't want them to have sole
negotiating rights over *my* terms and conditions.

Ah - right. Not many large companies would be willing to negotiate
new terms with every single employee on perhaps an annual basis.

That's exactly how it works in most companies I have been in. I take it
your experience is different. It was the lack of individualised
assessments which made me leave the public sector.

In a large company, it's going to make the HR department even larger.
Adding to non productive overheads. And opening up the much bigger
possibility of favouritism, etc.

Why would it be the HR department?
Its the line managers that know what a person can do and is doing.
The HR department only has to check procedures are being done as
required and the law is being complied with.


And I can imagine you jumping up and down if you discovered
someone doing the same job was better paid than you...

That was an almost inevitable consequence of individual pay. In some
cases people doing a better job would be paid less than someone else
doing a worse job. It depended on what salary you initially
negoatiated and how important it was to retain that person.

You think a large organisation is going to negotiate the starting salary
of everyone individually too? Even the bog cleaners?

No, but do you expect the union to negotiate every individuals salary?

There is a big difference between skilled staff and semi skilled staff
like cleaner, sound technicians, train drivers, car assembly workers,
etc. Once you have worked as a skilled worker come back and let us know.


No reason not to reward someone who is exceptional at a job individually.
But to have individual saleries for everyone would be a nightmare.

You seems to be very jealous of what some earn in jobs you can't possibly
know. I wonder why?


You seem to think every worker is the same and should be treated the
same as the worst one. This results in no incentive to do a good job and
standards fall and the company goes bust.
If you pay the minimum (legal or the union rate) to everyone the good
employees will leave and get jobs elsewhere and you are left with the
dross. At this point you may as well give up and invest you money
somewhere else rather than the company as you aren't going to get
anything back.

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
On 17/02/2018 10:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
pamela wrote:
On 18:20 16 Feb 2018, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
I refused to join "the union", I didn't want them to have sole
negotiating rights over *my* terms and conditions.

Ah - right. Not many large companies would be willing to negotiate
new terms with every single employee on perhaps an annual basis.

That's exactly how it works in most companies I have been in. I take it
your experience is different. It was the lack of individualised
assessments which made me leave the public sector.

In a large company, it's going to make the HR department even larger.
Adding to non productive overheads. And opening up the much bigger
possibility of favouritism, etc.

Why would it be the HR department?
Its the line managers that know what a person can do and is doing.
The HR department only has to check procedures are being done as
required and the law is being complied with.

And this line manager is going to set the salary of each and every person
on a regular basis? Secretly, I assume? Or are you going to make these
figures available to the workforce?



And I can imagine you jumping up and down if you discovered
someone doing the same job was better paid than you...

That was an almost inevitable consequence of individual pay. In some
cases people doing a better job would be paid less than someone else
doing a worse job. It depended on what salary you initially
negoatiated and how important it was to retain that person.

You think a large organisation is going to negotiate the starting
salary of everyone individually too? Even the bog cleaners?

No, but do you expect the union to negotiate every individuals salary?

Where did I even imply that? Sounds like you've not understood much of
this.

There is a big difference between skilled staff and semi skilled staff
like cleaner, sound technicians, train drivers, car assembly workers,
etc. Once you have worked as a skilled worker come back and let us know.

Another jealous of my job, eh? Love to know what you consider a skilled
job.


No reason not to reward someone who is exceptional at a job individually.
But to have individual saleries for everyone would be a nightmare.

You seems to be very jealous of what some earn in jobs you can't possibly
know. I wonder why?


You seem to think every worker is the same and should be treated the
same as the worst one.

Perhaps you would employ poor workers to do a job. I'd not. It's a recipe
for disaster - saving a few quid. But I'd guess you'd think that ideal.

This results in no incentive to do a good job and
standards fall and the company goes bust.

All I see is the sort of resentment the likes of pamela shows. Being more
worried about what others earn than just getting on with the job.

If you pay the minimum (legal or the union rate) to everyone the good
employees will leave and get jobs elsewhere and you are left with the
dross. At this point you may as well give up and invest you money
somewhere else rather than the company as you aren't going to get
anything back.

Thus speaks a good Tory. Who hasn't a clue about working as part of a
team. Everyone just out for themselves. Keep well in with your manager to
have the best pay in the department.

--
*Gun Control: Use both hands.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 16/02/2018 17:42, pamela wrote:
On 14:49 16 Feb 2018, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
pamela wrote:

It's so nice to be reminded of the benefits we have today of
prosperity, industrial peace, low unemployment, unvictimised
customers, cheaper goods and reliable services (except those
where unions still operate).

Yup. Great to see so many being exploited by minimum wage and zero
hours contacts etc so you can lounge at home and have cheap
deliveries.

I don't think someone on minimum wage is exploited. They are low
paid and personally I would struggle to maintain my lifestyle on it.

What is sad if that the minimum wage was necessary and with so many on
minimum wage.

The labour market used to determine wages, but when there is an influx
of workers into the work force who consider the minimum wage many times
their expectation, Brexit happens.

However employers offering the minumum wage are not offering a job
sufficient for all their employees to happily meet their financial
commitments no matter what they are. An employer is not responsible
for your financial affairs.

Why do they need to offer more, when they don't have to?

If that job doesn't pay enough then go to another company and if
nowhere near you pays enough to provide the spending power you want
then work in another area. If there's still nothing you like then
get better trained.

Yo do realise there is a labour market? There may be another employer
willing to pay more, but generally even their offer will be dictated by
the labour market.

One problem is the minumum standard of living too many people
expect as a absolute right includes a car, smartphone, colour telly,
home pc, central heating, modern kitchen, nights out drinking at the
weekend, blowout Christmases, holidays away, etc. Every job isn't
obliged to pay enough to cover all these things.

Quite the peasants are told the economy is doing really well, but that
doesn't translate to their pay packets. You are right about
expectations, hence Brexit.

The other issue is those on state benefits spouting why they shouldn't
be paid any more and support uncontrolled immigration, then they wonder
why Brexit is happening and whinge accordingly!

On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 11:51:05 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

snip

The labour market used to determine wages, but when there is an influx
of workers into the work force who consider the minimum wage many times
their expectation,

But what of those companies who wouldn't exist were it not for those
people willing (and able) to survive on such wages? A local company
employed about 30 people, some were immigrant / migrant workers and on
whatever wage the Co considered (as you say) appropriate for those
roles. Then the minimum wage came in, first 50% of the staff were laid
off and then the company went down the pan. So, you could say that in
that case the minimum wage cost everone their jobs, even the managers
and owners etc.

Maybe they should have asked those working if they wanted to carry on
with a job on low wages, or have no job at all?

The thing is, if you are working 10 miles away for minimum wage or a
short walk away for less, you could still *actually* be better off
getting less than the MW.

Brexit happens.

Whatever that is.


However employers offering the minumum wage are not offering a job
sufficient for all their employees to happily meet their financial
commitments no matter what they are. An employer is not responsible
for your financial affairs.

Why do they need to offer more, when they don't have to?

Quite. And by not doing so they may remain viable (continuing to pay
workers who may be very happy with their lot) and allow the (UK)
company to remain viable against offshore competition with cheaper
labour.

snip

I really can't see the difference (however it may sound) between *not*
employing people over here and paying offshore workers to do it for
less (that you would if you did employ people to do it here) or
employing people happy and willing to work for less in the first
place?

Either way offshore people are getting paid and locals aren't and so
leaving the EU isn't going to change that as more money will be paid
to offshore workers instead.

At least then we can all get jobs on the minimum wage servicing the
robots they install to be able to afford to make the stuff here again.

Cheers, T i m

In message , at 10:27:01 on Sat, 17 Feb
2018, The Natural Philosopher remarked:
Even the people who promote the AGW meme obviously dont take it
seriously. They rush around in big cars and jets, have beachfront
houses* and oppose the one cost effect means of reducing CO2
emissions* - Nuclear power - by legislating it beyond economic viability.

And they refuse to engage in debate, instead using playground
tactics* like calling people 'deniers' - thereby demonstrating
they are afraid* of and ashamed of the real science.

Its really all a bit pathetic and childish isn't it Roland?
*
*Your response is, yes. Too many straw men.

The only straw man is the one you just invented right there.
*Losing your touch, I see.
Motre ad homonems and straw men.

Really Roland, you are the best adverstisement for climate
scepticism I have seen on this NG., You hsave no coherent arguments,
just sneers and denoalism and add hominems.
I'm merely reflecting back what I see coming from you.

No, Roland, you are merely projecting your own psyche on others

As I'm not ashamed of the real science, that seems unlikely.
--
Roland Perry

On 17/02/2018 12:15, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 11:51:05 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

snip

The labour market used to determine wages, but when there is an influx
of workers into the work force who consider the minimum wage many times
their expectation,

But what of those companies who wouldn't exist were it not for those
people willing (and able) to survive on such wages?

Then they would have to employ the French model where employment costs a
company 30% more in taxes than a UK company. As a result they invest
more. There's no need, of course, if cheap labour can do work that could
otherwise be mechanised.

A local company
employed about 30 people, some were immigrant / migrant workers and on
whatever wage the Co considered (as you say) appropriate for those
roles. Then the minimum wage came in, first 50% of the staff were laid
off and then the company went down the pan. So, you could say that in
that case the minimum wage cost everone their jobs, even the managers
and owners etc.

They would have moved to more profitable and productive businesses.

Maybe they should have asked those working if they wanted to carry on
with a job on low wages, or have no job at all?

The thing is, if you are working 10 miles away for minimum wage or a
short walk away for less, you could still *actually* be better off
getting less than the MW.

Agreed, and in-work benefits tend to disregard work-costs.

Brexit happens.

Whatever that is.

The referendum?

On 17/02/2018 11:49, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
On 17/02/2018 10:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
pamela wrote:
On 18:20 16 Feb 2018, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
I refused to join "the union", I didn't want them to have sole
negotiating rights over *my* terms and conditions.

Ah - right. Not many large companies would be willing to negotiate
new terms with every single employee on perhaps an annual basis.

That's exactly how it works in most companies I have been in. I take it
your experience is different. It was the lack of individualised
assessments which made me leave the public sector.

In a large company, it's going to make the HR department even larger.
Adding to non productive overheads. And opening up the much bigger
possibility of favouritism, etc.

Why would it be the HR department?
Its the line managers that know what a person can do and is doing.
The HR department only has to check procedures are being done as
required and the law is being complied with.

And this line manager is going to set the salary of each and every person
on a regular basis? Secretly, I assume? Or are you going to make these
figures available to the workforce?

Is you wage a secret or do you tell everyone what it is?


And I can imagine you jumping up and down if you discovered
someone doing the same job was better paid than you...

That was an almost inevitable consequence of individual pay. In some
cases people doing a better job would be paid less than someone else
doing a worse job. It depended on what salary you initially
negoatiated and how important it was to retain that person.

You think a large organisation is going to negotiate the starting
salary of everyone individually too? Even the bog cleaners?

No, but do you expect the union to negotiate every individuals salary?

Where did I even imply that? Sounds like you've not understood much of
this.

More like you don't understand paying workers for what they do rather
than what the union defines as the job.


There is a big difference between skilled staff and semi skilled staff
like cleaner, sound technicians, train drivers, car assembly workers,
etc. Once you have worked as a skilled worker come back and let us know.

Another jealous of my job, eh? Love to know what you consider a skilled
job.

I don't consider anything that requires a few weeks training as skilled.
At best its semi-skilled.

I would like to know what you think is skilled.

You appear to think that a semi-skilled job like driving a tube is worth
more than say a nurse because it happens to be boring. The answer to
that is to advertise it and see how many applicants you get and choose
some suitable staff.




No reason not to reward someone who is exceptional at a job individually.
But to have individual saleries for everyone would be a nightmare.

You seems to be very jealous of what some earn in jobs you can't possibly
know. I wonder why?


You seem to think every worker is the same and should be treated the
same as the worst one.

Perhaps you would employ poor workers to do a job. I'd not. It's a recipe
for disaster - saving a few quid. But I'd guess you'd think that ideal.

This results in no incentive to do a good job and
standards fall and the company goes bust.

All I see is the sort of resentment the likes of pamela shows. Being more
worried about what others earn than just getting on with the job.

If you pay the minimum (legal or the union rate) to everyone the good
employees will leave and get jobs elsewhere and you are left with the
dross. At this point you may as well give up and invest you money
somewhere else rather than the company as you aren't going to get
anything back.

Thus speaks a good Tory. Who hasn't a clue about working as part of a
team. Everyone just out for themselves. Keep well in with your manager to
have the best pay in the department.


I can assure you we worked as a team. You have no idea about how many
engineers worked on SystemX to make it work.

In article ,
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
The best way would probably be to deliberately make the vehicle
inoperative, stick on the hazard lights, then you can claim you broke
down. Pull out an HT lead, then you can try to start it without success.

You have a car with an HT lead? How very quaint.

--
*Remember, no-one is listening until you fart.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 17/02/2018 12:54, pamela wrote:
On 11:51 17 Feb 2018, Fredxx wrote:

On 16/02/2018 17:42, pamela wrote:
On 14:49 16 Feb 2018, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
pamela wrote:

It's so nice to be reminded of the benefits we have today of
prosperity, industrial peace, low unemployment, unvictimised
customers, cheaper goods and reliable services (except those
where unions still operate).

Yup. Great to see so many being exploited by minimum wage and
zero hours contacts etc so you can lounge at home and have cheap
deliveries.

I don't think someone on minimum wage is exploited. They are low
paid and personally I would struggle to maintain my lifestyle on
it.

What is sad if that the minimum wage was necessary and with so
many on minimum wage.

The labour market used to determine wages, but when there is an
influx of workers into the work force who consider the minimum
wage many times their expectation, Brexit happens.

That logic is false. If the minumum wage is scarcely enough to live
on then it is not provide enough to save money to repatriate to
family in another country.

It provides enough cash for the immigrant worker to share a room, or a
'lodge' if working seasonally on a farm. Some farmers setup a temporary
village, much to the chagrin of local planning. If the worker works 50
or 60 hours a week, it's a simple matter to send the lion share of wages
home.

You haven't thought this through, or more importantly, don't want to.

On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 12:44:50 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 17/02/2018 12:15, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 11:51:05 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

snip

The labour market used to determine wages, but when there is an influx
of workers into the work force who consider the minimum wage many times
their expectation,

But what of those companies who wouldn't exist were it not for those
people willing (and able) to survive on such wages?

Then they would have to employ the French model where employment costs a
company 30% more in taxes than a UK company. As a result they invest
more.

In mechanisation you mean, doing away with workers?

There's no need, of course, if cheap labour can do work that could
otherwise be mechanised.

Human labour presumably that unlike the robot line, does need to buy
food, fuel, clothes and therefore pay taxes?

A local company
employed about 30 people, some were immigrant / migrant workers and on
whatever wage the Co considered (as you say) appropriate for those
roles. Then the minimum wage came in, first 50% of the staff were laid
off and then the company went down the pan. So, you could say that in
that case the minimum wage cost everone their jobs, even the managers
and owners etc.

They would have moved to more profitable and productive businesses.

Not if they were unskilled potentially. I wonder how many of those
workers are currently costing you more via their benefit payments?

Maybe they should have asked those working if they wanted to carry on
with a job on low wages, or have no job at all?

The thing is, if you are working 10 miles away for minimum wage or a
short walk away for less, you could still *actually* be better off
getting less than the MW.

Agreed, and in-work benefits tend to disregard work-costs.

Yup.

Brexit happens.

Whatever that is.

The referendum?

Ah, sorry, I thought you were referring to something that was actually
going to provide some real solutions! ;-)

Do you really think that 'running away' from the EU *is* the only
solution to all you feel is wrong?

I mean, they have said the idea is we can 'manage' those coming into
the country better when we are out of the EU (well, the 50% we aren't
already doing) and so we will either have to hope there will still be
those who want to come here to work (with the 'right' skill sets of
course) or we are going to be buying loads of robots (made in the Far
East by their workers) and pretty fast.

But what of the jobs that can't be automated, what if people don't
want to come to this country to do them, we have to put the wages up
to attract them, costing us even more money and making us even less
cost efficient / viable?

I'm guessing you have a plan though ...

Cheers, T i m

pamela wrote:

On 11:49 17 Feb 2018, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
On 17/02/2018 10:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
pamela wrote:
On 18:20 16 Feb 2018, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
dennis@home wrote:
I refused to join "the union", I didn't want them to have
sole negotiating rights over *my* terms and conditions.

Ah - right. Not many large companies would be willing to
negotiate new terms with every single employee on perhaps an
annual basis.

That's exactly how it works in most companies I have been in.
I take it your experience is different. It was the lack of
individualised assessments which made me leave the public
sector.

In a large company, it's going to make the HR department even
larger. Adding to non productive overheads. And opening up the
much bigger possibility of favouritism, etc.

Why would it be the HR department?
Its the line managers that know what a person can do and is
doing. The HR department only has to check procedures are being
done as required and the law is being complied with.

And this line manager is going to set the salary of each and every
person on a regular basis? Secretly, I assume? Or are you going to
make these figures available to the workforce?

Assessment does really work like that. I am surprised you haven't
come across this. After leaving the public sector, I had such
assessements for perfomance and pay every year for almost all of my
working life whichever company I worked it. They were done on eon
one and were confidential.

A very few companies hav experimented with publishing staff salaries
to the workforce but I personally wouldn't like it.

At least one scandinavian country publishes everyone's tax return. This
may well reduce nepotism, corruption and sex discrimination.


--

Roger Hayter

On Sat, 17 Feb 2018 12:53:36 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 17/02/2018 11:49, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Another jealous of my job, eh? Love to know what you consider a skilled
job.

I don't consider anything that requires a few weeks training as skilled.
At best its semi-skilled.


The BBC training courses for operators and engineers took about 2
years. Starting off with a 13 week basic course at Wood Norton, about
a year of on station training another course of about 6 weeks, another
year on station and then a final course of a few weeks. You had to
pass tests on each course and were continually assessed during the on
station sections. If you weren't good enough you would be
"terminated", and people were occasionally, although the selection
before you started training was quite good in weeding out unskilled
people.

If you think that good operators are unskilled, then you are
completely wrong. (Of course you're presumably saying this as a wind
up.)