Tony_Teacake Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, Aidan Ap Word said: 20k is 12% increase? So you were on 160k a year? And now on 180k per year. Your income is so high it is - literally - off the charts? Well, you have to pay for all the emojis somehow, I guess. And he bought a flat in a deprived area. https://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/66328864/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Social Justice League Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Most jobs in 2024 are non jobs. Just a waste of time, so most people/slaves are better off on the dole, or working in a voluntary sector that actually adds value to society. Earning worthless fiat for a zombie company that should have bit the dust f4cking decades ago........is a waste of a life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VancouverGuy Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 41 minutes ago, deerohdeer1 said: As much as there is some hyperbole on this thread I wouldn't describe 10,000,000 18-64 that are economically inactive as 'full employment' buddy. Q4 last year the UK unemployment rate was 4.2% - anything less than 5% is what economists refer to as "full employment". Anyone who wants a job can get one currently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insane Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 3 minutes ago, VancouverGuy said: Q4 last year the UK unemployment rate was 4.2% - anything less than 5% is what economists refer to as "full employment". Anyone who wants a job can get one currently. I wonder how those figures would alter if we did not have people working 16 hours a week and having their pay made up with Tax Credits? We currently have armies of people job sharing. If Tax Credits were scrapped and one job sharer was forced to do the job full time it would free up the second person sharing the job , they would then need to find a full time job. The figures would change. There are also many on the sick who are not counted as unemployed, huge amounts of people who have private pensions who have not reached state pension age but given up working or looking for work. The employment rate is not as rosy as it looks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChangeIsCast Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 4 hours ago, burk said: Met a mate for pint beginning of the week who's a site manager, he reckons construction is done at present, site he's on is finishing up end of this month, the other two sites that were to come out the ground this year are on hold. Not looking good..... #stewysachatboticlaimmyfivepounds What sector is he in? Construction is a very broad sector, with various unrelated sub-sectors. House and commercial building is on it's arse, which isn't a surprise, but that's only a very small sub-sector of the 'construction industry'. Nuclear, defence, utilities, and rail are all still very busy. Nuclear and energy is particular have gone nuts, and there are wide spread and pretty severe staff shortages with lots of big projects kicking off. Salaries and rates getting pushed higher as projects compete for skills, in 16 years I've never seen so much competition for people. So although certain sub-sectors are dead, across the construction sector as a whole, it's uneven, with some sectors (above) booming, others not so much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deerohdeer1 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, VancouverGuy said: Q4 last year the UK unemployment rate was 4.2% - anything less than 5% is what economists refer to as "full employment". Anyone who wants a job can get one currently. 4.2% of economically active individuals are unemployed. So yes add them to the 10,000,000 others unemployed aged 18-64. Anyone who worked 1 hour per week in the previous 2 weeks is considered 'employed' officially also so add those people in. But yes there's a job out there for everyone, I'm sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellow Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 4 hours ago, VancouverGuy said: Steady on there gents .... the UK unemployment rate is still at effectively "full employment". The last three months have seen a big ramp up of job cut announcements. Remember, most of these are just the announcements of an intent to cut jobs over varying timeframes and are not immediately dumping workers onto the unemployment figures. Also remember that, even if the redundancy process starts today, it must go through a four week consultancy period and each terminated employee must be given a statutory week's notice for each year of service which must complete before the laid off employee can sign on the dole (even if paid as gardening leave). Then consider the redundancy payments paid out which many people would rather run down or use up existing savings before suffering the indignity of signing on and becoming an unemployment statistic. Only when all of the above has played out will the knock on effects of reduced spending from the unemployed start hitting the wider economy and lead on to further job losses. Sure, many will get a new job relatively quickly but most will likely end up on a lower salary (unless their name is Stewy of course). Then there's a few months of forbearance before defaulting homeowners get repossessed or choose to sell up due to reduced income. Then there's the knock on effects of the defaults on the whole banking system which further deteriorates the economy and on it goes towards deflationary collapse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Stars_Are_Aligning Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 27 minutes ago, fellow said: The last three months have seen a big ramp up of job cut announcements. Remember, most of these are just the announcements of an intent to cut jobs over varying timeframes and are not immediately dumping workers onto the unemployment figures. Also remember that, even if the redundancy process starts today, it must go through a four week consultancy period and each terminated employee must be given a statutory week's notice for each year of service which must complete before the laid off employee can sign on the dole (even if paid as gardening leave). Then consider the redundancy payments paid out which many people would rather run down or use up existing savings before suffering the indignity of signing on and becoming an unemployment statistic. Only when all of the above has played out will the knock on effects of reduced spending from the unemployed start hitting the wider economy and lead on to further job losses. Sure, many will get a new job relatively quickly but most will likely end up on a lower salary (unless their name is Stewy of course). Then there's a few months of forbearance before defaulting homeowners get repossessed or choose to sell up due to reduced income. Then there's the knock on effects of the defaults on the whole banking system which further deteriorates the economy and on it goes towards deflationary collapse. Good post 👍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orb Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 32 minutes ago, fellow said: Then there's a few months of forbearance before defaulting homeowners get repossessed or choose to sell up due to reduced income. Then there's the knock on effects of the defaults on the whole banking system which further deteriorates the economy and on it goes towards deflationary collapse. So the bank moves more goalposts - inter-generational mortgages, 5x salary lending per salary, more rounds of forbearance, and ultimately a tax-payer bailout. It's never ending.... until it ends. But when will that be? Everything is remarkably resilient/adaptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burk Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 hour ago, TheChangeIsCast said: What sector is he in? Construction is a very broad sector, with various unrelated sub-sectors. House and commercial building is on it's arse, which isn't a surprise, but that's only a very small sub-sector of the 'construction industry'. Nuclear, defence, utilities, and rail are all still very busy. Nuclear and energy is particular have gone nuts, and there are wide spread and pretty severe staff shortages with lots of big projects kicking off. Salaries and rates getting pushed higher as projects compete for skills, in 16 years I've never seen so much competition for people. So although certain sub-sectors are dead, across the construction sector as a whole, it's uneven, with some sectors (above) booming, others not so much. Residential the last 6 years, when I worked with him before that it was industrial/ commercial units. He was quite down after speaking to couple of recruiters, I'll mention those sectors you've highlighted next time I see him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChangeIsCast Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 5 minutes ago, burk said: Residential the last 6 years, when I worked with him before that it was industrial/ commercial units. He was quite down after speaking to couple of recruiters, I'll mention those sectors you've highlighted next time I see him. Yeah worth a mention to him for sure, there is a massive recruitment drive going on particularly with nuclear. People from all different kinds of sectors and backgrounds on my project at the moment such is the drive to get good people in. It's apparently the number one strategic priority at my place, to get people in through the door in order to cope with the pipeline of work. Hydrogen is bit more early stage but several multi-billion £ projects in the NW and North Wales have just been green lit (all smaller constituent parts of HyNET), and there's big scheme going on in the NE I believe too, but that's a few years behind. But worth keeping an eye on, as it will provide a lot of job once it gets going in earnest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnno1167 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 3 hours ago, Insane said: I wonder how those figures would alter if we did not have people working 16 hours a week and having their pay made up with Tax Credits? We currently have armies of people job sharing. If Tax Credits were scrapped and one job sharer was forced to do the job full time it would free up the second person sharing the job , they would then need to find a full time job. The figures would change. There are also many on the sick who are not counted as unemployed, huge amounts of people who have private pensions who have not reached state pension age but given up working or looking for work. The employment rate is not as rosy as it looks. Yep.. full employment is not what it used to be . In the 90’s, travelling around the uk, the roads were quiet in the day. Everyone at work . Now it’s busy all day . Ok, anecdotal only .. but does make you wonder how many people do work ? Or, how many real jobs are there to go around ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkHorseWaits-NoMore Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 9 hours ago, Stewy said: I got made redundant...finished on a Friday...new job for 12% (20k) more started the following Monday. It's booming for the right people in the right place. ✓✓✓ <- found you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frugal Git Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 (edited) 5 hours ago, Insane said: I wonder how those figures would alter if we did not have people working 16 hours a week and having their pay made up with Tax Credits? We currently have armies of people job sharing. If Tax Credits were scrapped and one job sharer was forced to do the job full time it would free up the second person sharing the job , they would then need to find a full time job. The figures would change. You know tax credits HAVE been scrapped yeah? And anyone who is still on it will be taken off it in 2024. Most have been migrated to UC by now. UC is no cakewalk in terms of hours etc - unless you can qualify for LCWRA, recipients will be hassled mercilessly. It is however still an active disincentive to work more and better yourself if you're on it. It's *worse* than tax credits in some very meaningful ways in terms of being a trap. The savings taper is a particularly contentious way to keep people from betterment. Anyway, these 'armies of people' are conduits of public funds to listed companies and landlords, through shite wages and rent floors. And that's probably by design, so I wouldn't expect it to change. The only thing that will be done is to demonise and demoralise the funnels of said funds further. Edited February 8 by Frugal Git Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insane Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 4 minutes ago, Frugal Git said: You know tax credits HAVE been scrapped yeah? And anyone who is still on it will be taken off it in 2024. Most have been migrated to UC by now. UC is no cakewalk in terms of hours etc - unless you can qualify for LCWRA, recipients will be hassled mercilessly. It is however still an active disincentive to work more and better yourself if you're on it. It's *worse* than tax credits in some very meaningful ways in terms of being a trap. Well they both hinder people who need full time work that don't qualify for them. I was made redundant at 49 and told by the job centre that I was too expensive to employ even though I was willing to work for minimum wage. They explained that low paying jobs only wanted part time workers who had their money made up by tax credits. That is why I have always said what would the job market look like without them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frugal Git Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Insane said: Well they both hinder people who need full time work that don't qualify for them. I was made redundant at 49 and told by the job centre that I was too expensive to employ even though I was willing to work for minimum wage. They explained that low paying jobs only wanted part time workers who had their money made up by tax credits. That is why I have always said what would the job market look like without them. That ship has long since sailed. You'll need full time work now to make it workable to be on the system without being continuosly sanctioned or hassled unless you have much more specific circumstances. Yet the shit wages remain. Ok, minimum wage is now 23k. Whoopy doo. I'll ask a question with no judgement, and no right or wrong answer : Who should wr 'blame' for the system? The government and policy makers or the people on it who were acting rationally? As you said - the jobs themselves being advertised were like that. The companies themselves realised they could pay minimum wage, and the state topped it up, so no incentive for them to do more - especially as that obviously leads to larger profits. If they also worked out that they had to advertise 16 hour jobs to make that happen, then of course it's their 'fiduciary responsibility to maximise shareholder value' to do that too. Gordon brown of course is one, but the Tories I believe f**king love this system too, despite what they say. It's manna from heaven for their primary customers. Noone wins either way except shareholders. Edited February 8 by Frugal Git Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insane Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 20 minutes ago, Frugal Git said: Who should wr 'blame' for the system? The government and policy makers or the people on it who were acting rationally? As you said - the jobs themselves being advertised were like that. The companies themselves realised they could pay minimum wage, and the state topped it up, so no incentive for them to do more - especially as that obviously leads to larger profits. If they also worked out that they had to advertise 16 hour jobs to make that happen, then of course it's their 'fiduciary responsibility to maximise shareholder value' to do that too. The Government who implemented the system and the current Government who carry it on. The companies are going to take advantage the people who it fits for are going to take advantage you cannot blame them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petetong Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 5 hours ago, VancouverGuy said: Q4 last year the UK unemployment rate was 4.2% - anything less than 5% is what economists refer to as "full employment". Anyone who wants a job can get one currently. Those figures have been a complete fabrication since the 1980's ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughjass Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 No Mention of the Barratts Redrow tie up 100s of posts at risk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regprentice Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 12 hours ago, fellow said: The last three months have seen a big ramp up of job cut announcements. Remember, most of these are just the announcements of an intent to cut jobs over varying timeframes and are not immediately dumping workers onto the unemployment figures. Also remember that, even if the redundancy process starts today, it must go through a four week consultancy period and each terminated employee must be given a statutory week's notice for each year of service which must complete before the laid off employee can sign on the dole (even if paid as gardening leave). Then consider the redundancy payments paid out which many people would rather run down or use up existing savings before suffering the indignity of signing on and becoming an unemployment statistic. Only when all of the above has played out will the knock on effects of reduced spending from the unemployed start hitting the wider economy and lead on to further job losses. Sure, many will get a new job relatively quickly but most will likely end up on a lower salary (unless their name is Stewy of course). Then there's a few months of forbearance before defaulting homeowners get repossessed or choose to sell up due to reduced income. Then there's the knock on effects of the defaults on the whole banking system which further deteriorates the economy and on it goes towards deflationary collapse. Also consider that many large employers want to keep cuts under 20 so they dont have to engage with unions and follow collective redundancy rules. Many employers structure rolling redundancies every month or quarter, ive seen some structure redundancy announcements by department or even by team to keep the numbers as small as possible. I believe these are the majority of redundancies but you dont see them in headlines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellow Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 14 minutes ago, regprentice said: Also consider that many large employers want to keep cuts under 20 so they dont have to engage with unions and follow collective redundancy rules. Many employers structure rolling redundancies every month or quarter, ive seen some structure redundancy announcements by department or even by team to keep the numbers as small as possible. I believe these are the majority of redundancies but you dont see them in headlines. Good point, and many will also be cutting job numbers by not replacing staff as they leave / retire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spyguy Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 20 hours ago, Housepricecrash91 said: I've not seen the job market this bad in quite some time, I think it could be kaput for the UK soon. The market is good if you want to be paid £25k per year, but mid-senior roles have dried up... Not good, people who've signed up to a £2.5k per month mortgage will be sweating in the coming months... wondering when their company will be pulling the trigger on redundancies. Even if they survive the first wave, the second wave will follow the next quarter, and then the third wave the quarter after that. Just get another job I hear? Well you can't service a £2.5k mortgage and leased BMW on a £25k per year salary This could have all been avoided with some foresight! I think the UK job market is going thru some massive structural changes. You are seeing the secular death of retail, as a lot moves online. You are also seeing the high London/SE HPI distort the job market as people jus tdecide is not worth it. Also, you are seeing the finsec - a sector which employed a massive number of people from ~85ish to ~2007ish - carrying on shrinking. I gio to small town which used to have 3 to 4 banks ,employing a total of ~100 odd people. None of these banks exists. Ditto life insurance cos - a massive employer in most large towns. No, as they were a con,. dead. I have a feeling that most mortgages will need to be loaned on the 1x-1x local wages. As the risk of losing a well paying job is too high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nome Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 18 hours ago, HousePriceTooHigh said: It is kind of nuts that min wage will be 23-24k full time this coming tax year.... And yet plenty of jobs requiring qualifications, a degree, whatever barely pay much more than that Not mention that Shazza from the estate with her semi-feral offspring will be pulling in the equivalent of that in benefits, and if she times her breeding programme correctly she can remain doing that for 30 years or more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insane Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 1 minute ago, nome said: Not mention that Shazza from the estate with her semi-feral offspring will be pulling in the equivalent of that in benefits, and if she times her breeding programme correctly she can remain doing that for 30 years or more. Nope she can't do that anymore you can only claim for 2 children now. If she has one later in life as the first ones age to adulthood she won't get any more money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nome Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 1 minute ago, Insane said: Nope she can't do that anymore you can only claim for 2 children now. If she has one later in life as the first ones age to adulthood she won't get any more money. Really? Can you provide a link to that? I've not seen anything that says you've got a lifetime limit of 2 kids as far as bennies are concerned. And even if there is I'm sure there's all manner of loopholes in place to negate it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.