Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
hilltop

Presumption In Favour Of Uk Nationals

Recommended Posts

In a hotly contested job for an academic (Arts and Humanities) job, the appointment went to a young-ish person from the Antipodies.

The other, British, candidates could not have been far behind.

The University is largely sustained by public funds.

So no European consideration and hardly a job on which our economic survival depends.

Time to impose a duty to favour our own unless the employer can answer a test of real need or advantage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best person for the job.

Protectionism is generally agreed to be a bad idea. Globalisation is generally agreed to be a good idea.

That, like it or lump it, is the modern world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And add to our unemployment costs. And add to our loss of self-confidence.

When the difference is marginal, put it to a stricter test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Best person for the job.

Protectionism is generally agreed to be a bad idea. Globalisation is generally agreed to be a good idea.

That, like it or lump it, is the modern world.

A British worker would not have the same level of opportunity in the Antipodes. The immigration criteria are much stricter in Australia and New Zealand than in the UK. The British worker is therefore at a disadvantage and does not compete for jobs on an equitable basis.

The logical conclusion is that the Antipodean countries can be net 'exporters' of unemployment to the UK when they have surplus workers. This is also the case for the vast majority of other countries in the world.

Globalisation is only "a good idea"when everybody plays by the same rules. This is rarely true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A British worker would not have the same level of opportunity in the Antipodes. The immigration criteria are much stricter in Australia and New Zealand than in the UK. The British worker is therefore at a disadvantage and does not compete for jobs on an equitable basis.

The logical conclusion is that the Antipodean countries can be net 'exporters' of unemployment to the UK when they have surplus workers. This is also the case for the vast majority of other countries in the world.

Globalisation is only "a good idea"when everybody plays by the same rules. This is rarely true.

yeh, but we've got to show everyone we're 'better'

Thats why we've got to pay through the nose for petrol while everyone else uses more

Thats why we've got to bend over backwards for islamists, while even 'secular' islamic countries dont.

Whether it actually benefits the majority is besides the point, the leftists have decided thats how it is and there will be no further discussion of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeh, but we've got to show everyone we're 'better'

Thats why we've got to pay through the nose for petrol while everyone else uses more

Thats why we've got to bend over backwards for islamists, while even 'secular' islamic countries dont.

Whether it actually benefits the majority is besides the point, the leftists have decided thats how it is and there will be no further discussion of it.

As uemployment rises, so will the need for the uk to have a serious debate on what is best for the uk and its people.

the globalisation argument, should also be looked at, as we are not operating on a level playing field, with wages in countries eg china exporting goods cheaper than they are made in the uk, putting us at a disadvantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Parry aka GOD
Best person for the job.

Protectionism is generally agreed to be a bad idea. Globalisation is generally agreed to be a good idea.

That, like it or lump it, is the modern world.

Trouble is the UK is globalist whilst the rest of the world is protectionist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In a hotly contested job for an academic (Arts and Humanities) job, the appointment went to a young-ish person from the Antipodies.

The other, British, candidates could not have been far behind.

The Aussie/Kiwi will be streets ahead. Much less likely to whinge and slack if things aren't fair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In a hotly contested job for an academic (Arts and Humanities) job, the appointment went to a young-ish person from the Antipodies.

The other, British, candidates could not have been far behind.

The University is largely sustained by public funds.

So no European consideration and hardly a job on which our economic survival depends.

Time to impose a duty to favour our own unless the employer can answer a test of real need or advantage?

Yes I agree Liebours policies have helped lead to a completely unsustainable situation in this area.

I presume you'd agree that Gordon the Moron talking about 'British jobs for British workers' was another cheap soundbite with no meaning like so much else from this pathetic government?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Aussie/Kiwi will be streets ahead. Much less likely to whinge and slack if things aren't fair.

yeah! an aussie be like 'yeah fair dinkum mate' and we be all 'gosh thats not fair' and they be like 'bonzer mate' and we be all like 'moan moan moan'

seriously - the permanently, chipper, upbeat Antipodean is one of the most over exaggerated stereotypes there is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Time to impose a duty to favour our own

The British Isles were initially uninhabited by humans. Everyone in the UK is descended from an immigrant.

Almost all Australians and Kiwis are of British descent. Many of their British ancestors were transported for offences that would not even merit incarceration now. A horrendeous abuse of humans rights.

So basically a few of the millions of victims of British abuse want to come home again.

Back in the 21st Century - Personal experience is that Antipodeans make very productive and co-operative colleagues in IT.

If I'm less productive/intelligent/experienced than foreign workers, then thats a problem for me to resolve. Its not the govt's job to tip the scales in my favour.

On the other hand, neither should they make it easy for foreigners to take British jobs....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking of immigration (and I don't care who comes here as long as they pay tax...we have too many of 'our own' who don't, we should deport them and keep the workers instead), who is holding the book on whether Baroness Nu Liebour Scotland gets prosecuted for employing that illegal immigrant she 'didn't know about'. I understand that ignorance is not considered a defence in this area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah! an aussie be like 'yeah fair dinkum mate' and we be all 'gosh thats not fair' and they be like 'bonzer mate' and we be all like 'moan moan moan'

seriously - the permanently, chipper, upbeat Antipodean is one of the most over exaggerated stereotypes there is.

Having talked to an ozzie visiting the UK recently, apparently no one says "fair dinkum" except their equivalents of chavs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Aussie/Kiwi will be streets ahead. Much less likely to whinge and slack if things aren't fair.

I think you've only met their exports (who tend to be pretty good as you say).

Take a long trip over there and see if you feel the same afterwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In a hotly contested job for an academic (Arts and Humanities) job, the appointment went to a young-ish person from the Antipodies.

The other, British, candidates could not have been far behind.

The University is largely sustained by public funds.

So no European consideration and hardly a job on which our economic survival depends.

Time to impose a duty to favour our own unless the employer can answer a test of real need or advantage?

Not 100% confident about the following, you should check all this with someone who knows employment law but ...

I was under the impression that the job has to go to an EU national, unless the employer can prove there was no suitable candidate. I think they will need to do this to get the work permit/visa.

Now it may be that although you thought the candidates were similar one had skills/experience in areas that the EU nationals didn't and the employer can present a good case as it why the EU candidate wasn't chosen. This is relatively easy in a University environment, where skills can be very specific to individuals. If so, your original claim, that all candidates are pretty much identical, is invalid.

I think that very often in academic departments the candidate is known and internally "approved" before the job is even advertised. By tailoring the job advertisement to the very specific skills of a particular candidate employers can be highly selective about who they take on.

I suspect that if there was not any significant difference between the candidates as you suggest then the rejected EU national would have the right to take the department to an employment tribunal. The EU nationals should also examine carefully why they were rejected, as the reason has to be an appropriate one.

If you know the rejected candidates I would suggest that they discuss the situation with someone who knows something about employment law, as if they really had the same skills/experience as the overseas candidate they may have a case for compensation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Aussie/Kiwi will be streets ahead. Much less likely to whinge and slack if things aren't fair.

I knew some right whinging ******* aussies when I lived in Japan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   287 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.