Originally Posted by arden forester:

Originally Posted by :
It's easy

Sometimes yes sometimes no. I've been a career advisor and seen the inner workings of the system. some people are seen as a commodity. Interesting though when those that thought they wouldn't be on "gardening leave" get a spot of it. They change their tune fairly quickly!

Slave labour? I mean literally that! Those at the bottom - exploited foreign workers - and hotel, restaurant, cleaning, and other types on impossible performance targets. Minimum wage yes. Exploitation no. Simple.

Which would you prefer? A thieving person or someone decently paid. On economics alone it must be better.

Like all these policies, the minimum wage does not address the hard core of people who won't obey the rules. Knife amnesties and gun amnesties - who doesn't hand their weapons in? Criminals. Knife crime went up after the last amnesty.

The exploitation you describe is largely unaffected by minimum wage laws. Those exploited foreign workers you describe - they're illegal immigrants outside the system. They can't go to the council and say 'I'm being exploited' because they shouldn't be over here earning in the first place. So quite frankly I have little sympathy for them. There is a system in place for economic migrants. Either go through it, or choose to put yourself outside the system and suffer the consequences. We should not be punishing a majority of businesses because a minority of businesses fail to address worker's rights.

Decent pay does not end theft, create loyalty or boost productivity. We need only to take a look at the public sector to confirm that. The average public sector wage is higher now than the average private sector wage. Public sector wages have risen by at least double the rate of inflation since 1997. A doctor can take home £100,000 a year. The NHS costs us twice what it did 8 years ago. And the result? A drop in productivity, low staff loyalty, high turnover and corruption and graft at all levels.
[Rep]

I'm not talking about illegal immigrants, something this government is incapable of dealing with. I'm talking of those legally here on work permits where deaths, like the cockle pickers, had to occur before the government realised illegal activity was going on. In the west Midlands we don't have enough bus drivers so the company has gone to Poland to get some! All legal. But if the Polish drivers accept lower UK wages (which may be higher than in Poland) then the labour market becomes more skewed. If you got a load of IT workers in from Poland and your industry nosedived on the wage front, is that something to take on the chin? I'm for paying decent wages for a fully worked job. Not smoking breaks, shopping jaunts and "my Gran's just died!"

Like a lot of the ping-pong on this forum, I tend to think we may have some thinking in common, but are approaching things from different quarters! :wink:
[Rep]

Originally Posted by arden forester:
I'm not talking about illegal immigrants, something this government is incapable of dealing with. I'm talking of those legally here on work permits where deaths, like the cockle pickers, had to occur before the government realised illegal activity was going on. In the west Midlands we don't have enough bus drivers so the company has gone to Poland to get some! All legal. But if the Polish drivers accept lower UK wages (which may be higher than in Poland) then the labour market becomes more skewed. If you got a load of IT workers in from Poland and your industry nosedived on the wage front, is that something to take on the chin? I'm for paying decent wages for a fully worked job. Not smoking breaks, shopping jaunts and "my Gran's just died!"

Like a lot of the ping-pong on this forum, I tend to think we may have some thinking in common, but are approaching things from different quarters! :wink:

I think you're right. As I said in my earlier posts, I'm not fundamentally opposed to the idea of a minimum wage - I can see its value. I agree with you that there are people who abuse the system and that checks should be in place. However I'm opposed to its existence for one reason - that it rapidly becomes a big stick which unions use to beat business in their eternal war against us. It has gone that way already, with the TUC demanding £8/hr, £10/hr, £12/hr - their argument being 'Tesco made £2Bn so business can afford it'. I have trouble even thinking down to that level of fiscal ignorance.

If we got a load of IT workers in from Poland on low wages, I would be surprised if my business was affected. I've a very loyal client base because I'm reasonably priced, honest and I don't speak geek. :-) But I can see what you mean. In theory it might affect me. What it might make me do is start up one of the other business ideas I've been developing over the last couple of years - completely different market and different focus - so maybe it'd be a good thing!
[Rep]

Thing is, not everyone has the brains you do. Some people simply were not born with masses of brain power, but they make for excellent labourers for example.

Why should these people accept a wage that has been driven into the ground, by other rich brainy people allowing a free for all in their area of work?

Are they supposed to accept their lot in life? Can you really blame some of these types for saying sod the system, I'm going to turn to crime?
[Rep]

Originally Posted by mkpdavies:
Thing is, not everyone has the brains you do. Some people simply were not born with masses of brain power, but they make for excellent labourers for example.

Why should these people accept a wage that has been driven into the ground, by other rich brainy people allowing a free for all in their area of work?

Are they supposed to accept their lot in life? Can you really blame some of these types for saying sod the system, I'm going to turn to crime?

The minimum wage doesn't create a good living for everyone. Let me give you a very vague example.

If I run a fruit farm, and I need to employ 100 fruit pickers a day, for 8 hours a day, at £2 an hour, that'll cost me £1,600 in labour. If the minimum wage comes in at £4 an hour, my daily labour costs are now £3,200. Am I going to keep 100 fruit pickers? Only if the going's good. What's more likely is I'll shed some of the staff and put my prices up.

I'm not saying this is the case for everyone, I just wanted to show in a very approximate way how the minimum wage can create unemployment. I believe it has done that, in conjunction with worker rights legislation, maternity and paternity laws, HSE meddling and a general failure by the government to stop annoying business. The figures for unemployment bear me out.

I don't think they're likely to turn to crime. I think they're most likely to go and sponge off benefits. Considering we have more people on benefits than ever, I think I'm probably right.
[Rep]

Yes if the benefits are there to scrounge of course they will take the easy option. Maybe both.

Problem is, the camels back is going to bust sooner or later, then the benefits will dry up.

Pain awaits this country.


As I said before though, I think small business especially, should have much more freedom to decide, indeed they should be exempt.
[Rep]

Originally Posted by Soddball:
I must admit that I would question the inclusion of the minimum wage.

I put in the minimum wage because I want to live in a society where there is some correlation between moral value and reward. I fully accept that the free market economy is unbeatable at creating wealth, but there is currently zero correlation between reward and merit.

For example Premiership footballers earn more that nurses. Nurses have a high moral value, but a low economic value. Footballers have a lot of money, but arguably a negative moral value.

I don't think that society should owe somebody a living, but I do think that if somebody is prepared to make a contribution, they should get enough to live on.

Incidentally, I also think that the current welfare system is immoral, because it rewards dysfunctional behaviour. For example it rewards people for not making a contribution, for not taking responsibility for their children, and for not making financial plans for their future.
[Rep]