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

Trade Unions Race To Stop A 'race To The Bottom'

Recommended Posts

El_Pirata,

Amazing isn't it, now you need a little understanding of how regulation works and how standards in various disciplines (and legal reposnsibility, contract law, etc etc ) vary from country to country to understand the potentially truly monulmental dislocations this could cause.

I find it incredible that this has not poked its head over the parapet before. Here's a little more info.

http://www.cic.org.uk/activities/EUService...oHoL16Feb05.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Amamzing' - ditto.

There would be a major shift in our country if this happens, either way the Unions will be on their guard from now on and threatening action more often as they really are being pressed here.

As you all say, an interesting one to watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More info.

Oh, it includes estate agencies, :lol::lol::lol:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4698524.stm

great :D its about time they had some competition. i think opening up the market to anyone who can sell the houses cheaper and faster is better......

oh wait, i thought there was a housing shortage :blink: maybe then estate agents will close as there are no houses to sell.

gets me thinking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And who is the vanguard union now after the miners, print workers and dockers have been crushed, the biggest and strongest union in the UK now is in the public sector - UNISON.

You know the public sector workers we all hate now because of their huge pensions, salaries and cushy jobs.

Spooky isnt it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's funny how the idiot-left jumped on board the EU project after sniffing morsals of comfort in things like the social chapter. The EU has always been a laregly neo-liberal project to destroy protections won by workers and create a playground for international capital.

Straight bananas. Ha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Services Directive was being debated lat year and partly caused the French and Dutch (especially the French) to vote NO in the Consitution referendum. Remember all the stuff about the Polish plumbers?

It comes down to the marketisation of everything and the misguided belief that the market is always effecient and rational. The TUC are right to oppose this Directive IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking of stright bananas

From Newsnet...

www.monbiot.com

The Real Straight Banana

A coup against social Europe has been foiled - for the time being

by George Monbiot.

Published in the Guardian (March 08 2005)

There is a group of men and women which seeks to make life as difficult as possible for the progressives who support the European Union. They are members not of the UK Independence Party or the French National Front, but of the European Commission. Whenever we try to persuade our countrymen that the EU helps to raise our quality of life, defend human rights, protect the environment and ward off the market fundamentalism of the United States, they find some means of proving us wrong.

No one has wrongfooted us as deftly as a Dutchman called Frits Bolkestein. Until November, he was the EU's internal market commissioner. In January last year, he produced a directive which claimed to be harmonising rules across the Union, in order to make it easier to trade in everything from hairdressing to hospitals.

The Services Directive was promoted, as all such measures are, as a means of creating "millions" of jobs, and it is certainly possible that it could help stimulate the European economy. But it also appears to impose on member states a compulsory commercialisation of their public services, while destroying their ability to defend their people from corporate exploitation. It is - or was - due to have been approved by the end of this year.

The gremlin inhabits a few lines of text in the middle of the treaty, concerning something called "the country of origin principle". Companies, it says, "are subject only to the national provisions of their Member State of origin". Roughly translated, this means that a company based in one European country but working in another is bound only by the rules of the country in which it is based. If a construction firm whose offices are in Lithuania, for example, has a contract in the United Kingdom, it need abide only by Lithuanian law while working over here. The obvious result is that every enterprising corporation in Europe will relocate its headquarters to the place in which the laws are weakest.

And then it gets really weird. The state responsible for enforcing the rules - health and safety laws for example - will be the one in which the company is based, not the one in which it is working. If, for example, a Lithuanian construction company is forcing workers in the UK to use dodgy scaffolding, our own Health and Safety Executive won't be able to do a damn thing about it. Instead, the Lithuanian equivalent must send its inspectors over here, and, without local knowledge, hampered by any number of translation problems, seek to defend the lives of British workers.

Given the way such markets work, the company they are monitoring will, more likely than not, be a British one flying a Lithuanian flag of convenience. But if that company is threatening your safety on a building site in Brixton, you will be able to seek protection only by protesting to the authorities in Vilnius.

It's a formula, in other words, for a complete breakdown of the effective enforcement of the laws restraining corporations. The directive would, in the name of "bringing down barriers", raise such barriers for anyone trying to defend their rights that effective public complaint would become all but impossible. This, of course, is the point.

You have to read the entire text to understand what its effects will be. In the preamble, for example, it tells you that a "derogation" (meaning an exemption) from the country of origin rule should be possible for matters "related to the safety of services". But when you get to Article 19 you discover that a member state may obtain a derogation for safety issues "in exceptional circumstances only". I wouldn't like to be the trade union lawyer who tries to make use of that safeguard.

At first sight the country of origin principle looks odd. The purpose of the internal market reforms was surely to engineer a single set of standards across the whole European Union. This rule, in theory, could lead to 25 different sets of standards being applied in the same country. But when you read the briefings produced by the corporate lobbyists in Brussels, you realise that it will indeed harmonise standards - at the lowest levels to be found anywhere in the European Union. Once corporations have moved their nominal addresses to the countries with the weakest rules (just as ship owners register their vessels in Panama or Liberia), the countries with stricter laws will discover that to stay in the market they must drag their own standards down to match the weakest ones.

Bolkestein's timing was almost perfect. He pre-empted the outcome of four other European proposals, which between them might have defined and protected essential public services and produced a single (reasonably high) set of standards for agency workers and migrant labourers. He launched, in other words, a kind of coup against social Europe.

It has caused a massive rumpus in almost every member nation, but not in the capital of Europhobia. Here in the United Kingdom, while entertaining our customary panics about the banning of church bells, corgis and curved bananas, we remain ignorant of the real threats to our sovereignty. That's the trouble with Eurosceptics: they're never around when you need them.

But last week, with no help from our own champions of self-determination, all hell broke out in Brussels. Charlie McCreevy, the new internal market commissioner, admitted that the current services directive is "not going to fly" and suggested of Bolkestein that "another commissioner might have approached [this issue] in a different fashion" - which is about as rude as any Eurocrat has ever been about another.

Of course, it's not over yet. The corporations and their supporters have gone beserk. The Financial Times, which has consistently ignored or misrepresented the concerns of the directive's opponents, thundered that McCreevy had "cravenly sounded the retreat before battle had even formally commenced". Malcolm Harbour, a British Conservative MEP, accused the commission of disrupting democracy. (Funny, isn't it, how the Tories' concerns about sovereignty evaporate when a policy is good for big business?) Peter Mandelson, our gift to the rest of the Union, has urged the Commission not to "retreat in the face of illegitimate pressures", by which he appears to mean the people of Europe.

Directives like Bolkestein's test the European enthusiasm of anyone with an interest in social justice to breaking point. For those of us who recognise that absolute sovereignty is impossible in the face of globalisation, and that ours is not a choice between alignment and isolation but a choice between alignment with Europe or alignment with the United States, his proposal suggests that we might as well give up: either way we get market fundamentalism. Men like him, and Mandelson, and Jose Manuel Barroso, have done a far better job of sabotaging the European project than any number of Kilroys and Le Pens.

Their proposal will doubtless resurface, and when it does the people of these benighted islands owe the rest of the EU a little more public vigilance and solidarity. But for now, though we played no part in it, we can celebrate a rare victory for an old ideal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Globalisation and the great levelling of pay and conditions is going to happen anyway in one form or another. Bring it on and lets all quickly become peasants and slaves on our way to the bottom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

B*******

Sometimes I think we're being tested to see how far can be be pushed.....

We are being pushed back to Victorian working conditions but this time we will have things like

ID cards to keep the rabble in line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all part of the object of the people that wish to create a european state.

They know fine well we think of our own countries at the moment so are implimenting things to change this so eventually we dont

1. increase inflow and outflow of residence status with european boundaries, thus diluting indigeonous populations.

2. equalise pay over all countries

3. create uniform laws and conditions of employment.

Everything is being done to dilute nationalism in all countries part of the european union, to change our perspective on who our neighbour realy is.It is to create a new usa.

And only then when it feels normal to have people living all around you from all diffrent countries ie states, will they feel in a position to put the vote for a united states of europe in place.

This is why i have joined the bnp

Its the only party actually standing up against this europeanisation being fostered on us by dirty back door tactics by people with a vested long tern agenda.

slowly slowly catchy monkey is what there up to

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's one of the EU's few good ideas. If Europe has a future it's not as 25 semi-segmented micro markets. The net effect for the UK would probably be quite good as we have, despite GB's best efforts, a permissive environment for business and a strong services sector.

The political and cultural centre of gravity has shifted significantly east and this is just another waypost in Old Europe's long and slow decline.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A major planned demo that's worrying the powers that be, and a some clever lobbying and.....

1045 CET: It looks as though the biggest group in the parliament is withdrawing its support from the crucial compromise which would allow nation states to impose their own restrictions on companies setting up businesses from abroad. I bumped into an old union contact on the way to the big demo which will be starting soon, and asked him: "Are you winning?" He said: "We have already won." It's just a question of whether the compromise is now coming apart.

1000 CET: The delicately cobbled together deal between the left and right is coming under intense pressure. Many German CDU members are angry about the compromise with the socialists. There are lots of British conservatives who think that the deal makes the proposals worthless. There's a joint news conference later this morning with the leader of the EPP, Hans-Gert Poettering and the UK's Malcolm Harbour, the conservatives who brokered the deal. It may not be an especially harmonious occasion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 302 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

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.