Underpaid, Easy To Sack: Uk's Second Class Workforce

[Solvent Celt]

Back in the real world the unions, for many decades, opposed immigration... They may have also opposed some of the nationalist parties as these are often either rather right wing, or are frighteningly racist (e.g. BNP)

In the last 10 years I can't recall a union calling for a halt to mass immigration!

Here from the horses mouth...

our econmy (sic) and particularly public services would continue to need workers from abroad now and in the future

they must, on grounds of principle and of common sense, show a united front against any attempt to force race and immigration to the top of the agenda.

Thats from Dave Prentis head of UNISON.

Dave is also a member of the TUC general council, TUC executive committee and the Trade Union Labour Party Liaison Committee.

He is a member of the Labour Party's economy commission and the Labour Party joint policy committee. He is a director the Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR) and also Catalyst, two centre-left research bodies.

IPPR is forever pushing the marxist multicultural agenda.

[dubsie]

Its also why you need to be incredibly bearish about house prices because there are just not going to be the stable long term jobs around to support the huge mortgages required especially when you also take into account the offshoring of "middle class" jobs such as IT, and not just manual labour.

Yes I agree, it starts on the factory floor and then moves to services and support. We can't continue to lose these jobs at the rate we are and expect to keep our standard of living. However, I'm not sure we'll see the impact of this in our working lifes as this has being going on in the United States for some time and the middle classes still don't appear to be affected.

How this will impact on house prices will depend on the scale of insecurity felt across the job market. The fact is since the early 1980s people have done very well from property, I think this is about to change. People are not going to be making big bucks from there house for at least 10 years, so the house is going to have to be a home....which lets face it is what it should be. Property should not be seen as a way of making big bucks, it should be a long term investment.

The problem we all now face is our income has to support the mortgage and if the job market is insecure then millions face misery. This is turn will reduce retail spending and then the whole service sector economy starts to grind to a halt. With no manufacturing tax returns start to look slim and the labour government ups taxes to make the shortfall, they subequently will lose the next general election letting the Tories in.

The Tories will remedy the situation by reducing public spending and again millions of public sector workers will lose there jobs. The situation will be bleak for at least 10 years and I can't imagine even the conservatives being able to ride out more than one term.

Bascially if the job market starts to collapse then we in for at least 13 years of misery, to be honest I'm nearly 40 so I think I'd default on the mortgage and go and live in a caravan in the South of France. Life is just too important to waste working just for bricks and mortar, just as life is too important worrying about what might happen.

[drminky]

Yes - no stable jobs environment and you don't go spending every penny you have (and a shed load more via debt) in consumption. I don't care what anybody say a wealthy top 5% cannot and certainly has no intention of carrying the rest of the economy. Game over. This is am asinine polcidy from the get go detines to failure. The questinion is only how high a peak do we want to fall from, the peak this time round is very high indeed.

The Capitalist class wants to have their cake and eat it too. They want to drive down wages, but also need people to consume their products. Works well in isolation, but soon enough everyone is playing the same game, and where are the cashed up consumers going to come from? There's only one way forward..

Welcome to the empire of DEBT!

[Injin]

The Capitalist class wants to have their cake and eat it too. They want to drive down wages, but also need people to consume their products. Works well in isolation, but soon enough everyone is playing the same game, and where are the cashed up consumers going to come from? There's only one way forward..

Welcome to the empire of DEBT!

Hahha true.

And then the capitalist's want paying back!

Edited October 12, 2007 by Injin

[drminky]

Hahha true.

And then the capitalist's want paying back!

with what?

..pounds of flesh?

[Leonard Hatred]

Labour voters are dead-eyed drones anyway. You can take their pension, you can take their job and you can bomb thousands of innocent people, but as long as you give them an extra zero on the "value" of their home, they'll keep voting for you.

[Injin]

with what?

..pounds of flesh?

More debt!

hahahhaha

I shouldn't laugh, it's all going to end in untold misery for billions of people, but jesus it's so retarded I can't help but giggle.

[Crash Buyer]

The Capitalist class wants to have their cake and eat it too. They want to drive down wages, but also need people to consume their products. Works well in isolation, but soon enough everyone is playing the same game, and where are the cashed up consumers going to come from? There's only one way forward..

Welcome to the empire of DEBT!

It has worked in the short term but inevitably lower real wages means lower economic demand and therefore recession (and probably deflation).

[Guest pioneer31]

Labour voters are dead-eyed drones anyway. You can take their pension, you can take their job and you can bomb thousands of innocent people, but as long as you give them an extra zero on the "value" of their home, they'll keep voting for you.

Agreed. Labour - the unthinking man's party.

You can also pull the most heinous stunts and as long as you trot out the old Tory scare stories - 15% IR's, boom and bust, wrecking the economy, high unemployment (even though it's higher now), they'll happily vote for you, again

Edited October 12, 2007 by pioneer31

[madasafrog]

Its a militant hot zone on here

I thought the posters on here had a good grasp of economics. You cannot pay everyone a £100k per year. Market forces have to determine wages.

The government has done a lot for the low pay and agency workers. In recent years there has been the Working Time Regulations of 1998 that have come into force that have protected the rights of the low paid workers and also agency staff. In these regulations it provides a number of rights including minimum pay and statutory holidays which is currently 24 days per annum and later rising to 28 in 2009, Each year the minimum wage increases.

You can bleat about BMW using 700 agency workers but if they could not be allowed the flexibility, they would simply take the whole manufacturing process elsewhere and then you would lose the 700 agency jobs plus the remaining thousands of permanent staff. Then you can also add in the jobs in surrounding companies that service the plant. On top of that, you can take away the jobs that are generated by the wealth that the plant brings to that region.

Just because someone works through an agency, it does not mean they are on less money and have less rights. Some places pay agency staff more than permanent staff but at other places, the agency staff earn more than the permanent staff and also have more rights.

This article is just from the unions perspective and is otherwise junk .

[Injin]

Its a militant hot zone on here

I thought the posters on here had a good grasp of economics. You cannot pay everyone a £100k per year. Market forces have to determine wages.

The government has done a lot for the low pay and agency workers. In recent years there has been the Working Time Regulations of 1998 that have come into force that have protected the rights of the low paid workers and also agency staff. In these regulations it provides a number of rights including minimum pay and statutory holidays which is currently 24 days per annum and later rising to 28 in 2009, Each year the minimum wage increases.

You can bleat about BMW using 700 agency workers but if they could not be allowed the flexibility, they would simply take the whole manufacturing process elsewhere and then you would lose the 700 agency jobs plus the remaining thousands of permanent staff. Then you can also add in the jobs in surrounding companies that service the plant. On top of that, you can take away the jobs that are generated by the wealth that the plant brings to that region.

Just because someone works through an agency, it does not mean they are on less money and have less rights. Some places pay agency staff more than permanent staff but at other places, the agency staff earn more than the permanent staff and also have more rights.

This article is just from the unions perspective and is otherwise junk .

Ironically, left alone, market forces will see everyone on the more or less the exact same wage.

[madasafrog]

Ironically, left alone, market forces will see everyone on the more or less the exact same wage.

How do you work that out?

[dubsie]

You can bleat about BMW using 700 agency workers but if they could not be allowed the flexibility, they would simply take the whole manufacturing process elsewhere and then you would lose the 700 agency jobs plus the remaining thousands of permanent staff. Then you can also add in the jobs in surrounding companies that service the plant. On top of that, you can take away the jobs that are generated by the wealth that the plant brings to that region.

This article is just from the unions perspective and is otherwise junk .

True to a degree but there has to be a balance, remove the rights completely and the country might as well not have an elected government as all the shots are being called by industry bosses.

There does need to be a min wage and it needs to be enforced properly. If you're too soft then industry will simply walk all over your country. Britain now has one of the most poorly trained work forces in Europe, there's simply no point spending millions training temp staff.

Germany is still the worlds biggest exporter yet the boast some of Europes strongest employment laws, you're argument is flawed in many ways.

[nowthenagain]

Workers in Britain are vastly overpaid.

If they weren't then we wouldn't attract migrant workers in the numbers we have.

Go to Lithuania if you want to see underpaid workers.

******ing unions.

[dubsie]

Workers in Britain are vastly overpaid.

If they weren't then we wouldn't attract migrant workers in the numbers we have.

Go to Lithuania if you want to see underpaid workers.

******ing unions.

You're having a laugh surely, Lithuania is like comparing UK to Sudan. Wages have to reflect living costs, and that includes housing.

[madasafrog]

True to a degree but there has to be a balance, remove the rights completely and the country might as well not have an elected government as all the shots are being called by industry bosses.

There does need to be a min wage and it needs to be enforced properly. If you're too soft then industry will simply walk all over your country. Britain now has one of the most poorly trained work forces in Europe, there's simply no point spending millions training temp staff.

Germany is still the worlds biggest exporter yet the boast some of Europes strongest employment laws, you're argument is flawed in many ways.

We have similar employment laws. What i am saying is that we dont go any further with employment laws or this country will drive even more business overseas. I work in this sector and have seen it first hand over the last 20 years so i would rather trust my own argument

[THE BALD MAN]

Workers in Britain are vastly overpaid.

If they weren't then we wouldn't attract migrant workers in the numbers we have.

Go to Lithuania if you want to see underpaid workers.

******ing unions.

With house prices at the current levels how can any one be overpaid?

[THE BALD MAN]

Its a militant hot zone on here

I thought the posters on here had a good grasp of economics. You cannot pay everyone a £100k per year. Market forces have to determine wages.

The government has done a lot for the low pay and agency workers. In recent years there has been the Working Time Regulations of 1998 that have come into force that have protected the rights of the low paid workers and also agency staff. In these regulations it provides a number of rights including minimum pay and statutory holidays which is currently 24 days per annum and later rising to 28 in 2009, Each year the minimum wage increases.

You can bleat about BMW using 700 agency workers but if they could not be allowed the flexibility, they would simply take the whole manufacturing process elsewhere and then you would lose the 700 agency jobs plus the remaining thousands of permanent staff. Then you can also add in the jobs in surrounding companies that service the plant. On top of that, you can take away the jobs that are generated by the wealth that the plant brings to that region.

Just because someone works through an agency, it does not mean they are on less money and have less rights. Some places pay agency staff more than permanent staff but at other places, the agency staff earn more than the permanent staff and also have more rights.

This article is just from the unions perspective and is otherwise junk .

I have worked in a multinational and the first place they sack people is the UK because it is easy and cheap and no one makes a fuss

[dubsie]

We have similar employment laws. What i am saying is that we dont go any further with employment laws or this country will drive even more business overseas. I work in this sector and have seen it first hand over the last 20 years so i would rather trust my own argument

We don't have similar employment laws to Germany, You try and make someone redundant in Germany....cost you a fortune. Temp workers can only work two contracts before the company has to make an offer of employment. National insurance covers unemployment up to 50% of your salary.

[northern numpty]

That really is a very horrific thing to say.

Boarder was only making a valid point that many people may agree with.

I'm tempted to report you.

Not really........statement was a bit bold and blinkered, valid in your opinion does not make it so.

[t350t]

You can bleat about BMW using 700 agency workers but if they could not be allowed the flexibility, they would simply take the whole manufacturing process elsewhere

This is what I could never figure out about the housing boom..

We were told house prices were rising because of supply/demand, but if we're over-crowded doesn't that just create an incentive for businesses to relocate to cheaper, less over-crowded areas of the world?

I'm a programmer and I know my work could, in principle, be done anywhere in the world. Foreigners dont even have to come to the UK to take my job - so just why are houses so expensive ?

Edited October 12, 2007 by t350t

[Malarkey]

http://money.guardian.co.uk/news_/story/0,,2175750,00.html

The government will face a challenge from unions tomorrow over the impact of migration on Labour's core working-class voters. The use of agency workers, most of them migrants, to drive down the pay and conditions of British workers is the sort of contentious issue the Labour leadership hoped to prevent being aired at the annual party conference but unions have decided to force the issue with a "contemporary" resolution demanding action.

Controversial new rules passed by the party yesterday, aimed at ending embarrassing defeats for the leadership, mean that such resolutions will not be allowed after this year and this year's will not to go to a vote. The government is adamant that the flexibility provided by agency workers has been a vital part of Britain's economic success. But the T&G section of Unite the Union is still expected to open tomorrow's debate by saying that the plight of more than a million agency workers is "the single biggest issue facing the country today" and is causing serious racial tension.

The Guardian has obtained submissions made to government by the leading unions which catalogue the replacement of traditional jobs with cheaper, casualised and often migrant labour in most industrial sectors. We publish a sample from them below, which show how radically the British workplace has altered since Labour came to power. Their evidence also alleges exploitation of migrants and racial tension as a two-tier workforce has emerged. A growing number of industrial disputes in the UK in the last year have been linked to the use of agency workers.

Unions will demand tomorrow that agency staff are given the same employment rights as permanent staff, to protect both local and migrant workers. Without new legislation, they say, they fear the death of the real job. More than 120 backbench Labour MPs who are under pressure from a rise in far-right nationalist parties in their constituencies have backed efforts to bring in equal rights through a private member's bill.

So far the Labour government has taken a lead in blocking a new directive in Europe on agency working. It has supported the view of the employers' federation the CBI that the effect on employment overall would be damaging. "If the government caves in to union pressure for a new EU law, hundreds of thousands of jobs will be put at risk, unless Gordon Brown at least insists on a qualifying period of a year before full rights apply," CBI deputy director general John Cridland said earlier this month.

The battle lines are being drawn. Derek Simpson, general secretary of Unite's Amicus section told us: "The epidemic of agency employment threatens both our economic and social fabric. Its effects are being felt in every industry in every region in the country."

The T&G section of Amicus, which has made recruiting migrant workers as members a priority, agreed. "The number of those directly employed is falling and the numbers of agency workers, overwhelmingly migrants on poorer conditions, are growing," deputy general secretary Jack Dromey said. "It's fuelling racial divisions. But the enemy is not the migrant, it's the exploitation. There should be equal treatment to protect everyone."

A&P shipbuilders, Tyneside

A&P, which has just won an MoD contract to refit a Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship, recruits agency workers, mainly Polish, via a company it part owns. The workers are paid £5 an hour less than permanent staff and can have contracts terminated with a day's notice. A subcontractor to A&P is said to use migrants at all grades except managerial. A&P did not respond to requests for comment.

Dawn Group meats

At the South Wales Dawn Pac meat plant, Unite Amicus say between 500-600 Polish migrants are employed through an agency, and that local staff have been steadily replaced in the last three years by agency workers on poorer terms and conditions. Agency workers are employed on zero hours contracts but have to do long shifts on the minimum wage, and have their travel and accommodation costs deducted by the agency.

At the Bedford plant, which packs meat for the major supermarkets, the T&G section of Unite says workers, many of them Polish, were forced to take a pay cut of 20% down to the minimum wage or lose their jobs earlier this year. The Dawn Group declined to comment.

BMW cars

Two thirds of the 700 shop floor workers at BMW's Hams Hall engine-making factory in Birmingham are local agency staff. They are paid up to £5 an hour less than permanently employed workers doing the equivalent job and have fewer benefits. Some temporary staff have more than five years' experience with the company, according to the union.

BMW's Swindon plant is currently recruiting around 100 agency workers, including migrants. At the Cowley plant in Oxford, there are 1,200 agency workers, including migrants, out of a total workforce of 4,700.

BMW says that it needs large numbers of agency workers to manage fluctuations in demand and run its operations "with greater flexibility" and in areas with high employment. Agency workers have opportunities to become fully employed.

St Ives printing

At its book division in Suffolk, unions say around 20 migrant agency workers are used on lower pay and less favourable conditions. The agency supplies the migrants with accommodation and transport and Hungarian workers have reported having to pay back large debts to the agency to cover their costs in coming to the UK.

At its factory in Andover, Hampshire, which prints leading magazines, up to a quarter of the workforce is agency labour. Migrants reported being bussed in for three hours from north London and being expected to work 15-hour shifts (since reduced after complaints to 12 hours). They have also complained of degrading practices in which supervisors require agency workers to put peas in a cup for every bundle of work they complete and demand they work faster.

A spokesman for St Ives said the company was confident that it "complies with relevant legislation relating to temporary workers and that they are fairly treated".

Trinity Mirror printing

Most of the agency staff at the Newcastle newspaper printing site are African migrants on lower rates of pay. According to the union many of them cover night shifts after studying or working all day elsewhere. Health and safety reps have raised concerns about lack of safety training and safety footwear.

At Trinity's Watford site, eastern European migrants have lower rates of pay than other workers. Union reps have complained that managers fuel tension between the migrants and local staff.

A spokesman for Trinity Mirror said the company used agency workers to fill a number of positions at its sites and was "satisfied with the excellent service they provide". He added that all agency workers received appropriate health and safety induction.

Quebecor World printing

Quebecor World is used by Guardian News and Media group to print its Observer magazines and other products.

Unite Amicus says that the company has steadily replaced its permanent workforce in unskilled areas with agency workers. Some 90 Poles and Lithuanians are currently working long shifts for significantly less pay than permanent staff, according to the union.

Quebecor commented: "Unemployment in the local area is low and they receive the local market rate of pay, which is above the statutory minimum wage. They work no more hours per shift, sometimes less, than our direct employees. A number have subsequently taken up direct employment with Quebecor."

Corus steel

At Corus's Teesside steelworks, self-employed agency labour is recruited on zero hours contracts and can be laid off without notice. At its Rotherham steel site, Polish agency workers are paid the same rates as permanent workers but do not receive the same benefits in overtime, sick and holiday pay. Corus employs 23,500 workers directly in the UK. Between 5,000 and 10,000 agency workers are thought to be used across the company.

A spokeswoman said Corus is aware that contracting companies use agency labour but it does not support the use of zero hours contracts and has received no complaints about contractors' terms and conditions.

Harper Collins books

Unite Amicus claims that originally 10 agency workers were brought in to the Glasgow warehouse/distribution site short term, but the numbers grew, so that after three months about 50 agency staff were being used. At peak periods up to 120 agency workers are now used, they say, the majority of them Poles, out of a workforce of approximately 300. The union successfully balloted for strike action over the issue of agency workers and overtime payments earlier this month and the dispute was settled earlier this month.

A HarperCollins spokeswoman said: "It is common practice within the publishing industry, and right across the distribution business, to use agency staff to respond to peak periods and fluctuating schedules. HarperCollins has always used temporary staff to provide the flexibility demanded by the business."

Coca Cola, Wakefield

Coca-Cola has been using an agency to recruit Polish workers to do quality checking for £5 an hour less than local workers. They do not have the pension, profit-sharing, and sick-pay benefits negotiated for permanent staff. A spokeswoman for Coca-Cola said that around 40 agency workers were used at its Wakefield site but that its dependency on agency workers had decreased in the last year. She said that their pay was in line with local rates for agency workers and that the disparity with its own direct employees at Wakefield arose because those staff were on the high end of the pay scale for food manufacturing. It also restricts the areas in which agency workers can be used so that it can maintain its health and safety record, she said.

Chep UK pallet suppliers

The company is part of a transnational corporation that leases wooden pallets to large manufacturers for retail distribution systems. The T&G says it has dismissed 70 permanent employees nationally and replaced them with Polish agency workers. The union believes they are paid £6 an hour compared to £9.40 per hour paid to direct labour.

A spokesman for Chep UK said that it was not company policy to replace UK employees with agency workers but that it needed agency workers to respond to peaks and troughs in demand from customers and necessarily had a constant turnover of staff.

"Agency workers provide that flexibility which is why they are being used more and more in all sectors across the UK," he said. The nationality of workers and how much they were paid was down to the agencies, he added.

Poultry sector

The largest supermarket poultry slaughtering and packing factories in the UK are increasingly dependent on low-paid migrants employed through agencies, the T&G says. The sector is dominated by three companies: Grampian, Moy Park and Bernard Matthews.

The union accuses the industry of using agency labour to bypass normal employer obligations, giving examples from Grampian and Moy Park to the Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. It believes over a third of agency workers in the sector have been working for more than six months but as well as being paid less for the same work, they lose out on sick and holiday pay, it says. The union claims that at some sites up to half the workforce can be migrants from agencies.

But the companies dispute the figures. Grampian says its chicken business employs almost 4,000 people, of which 6.7% (264 people) are agency labour. It says it uses migrant agency workers "to complement its core workforce at times of peak production, for short-notice cover, and in areas where it has become difficult to recruit due to low levels of unemployment and the rural nature of facilities." Some 1,400 union members took strike action in April at Grampian factories over pay, the use of agency workers and cuts in pensions.

At Moy Park poultry factories, agency workers, most of them migrants, are paid the minimum wage and not only receive less money than permanent workers doing the same jobs but miss out on sick pay and holiday, according to the union. Moy Park said it needed agency workers to cover peaks in demand and because there was a shortage of local workers. Some 350 agency staff have joined Moy Park since January and more than 600 in the past 18 months, a spokesman said. He added that the company met all the requirements of EU law and the ethical trading code in independent audits.

Construction sector

Large numbers of agency workers, many migrants, are classed as "self-employed", work on zero hours contracts, are paid below agreed industry rates and have hidden costs deducted from pay for accommodation and transport, according to unions. Tax avoidance is rife, and employers use subcontracting chains and self-employment to avoid their obligations, according to the construction union Ucatt. Large numbers of agency workers are found on all major infrastructure projects, it says.

[/quote

Brilliant post. Sadly I really think that there will be no turning back and that things are going to get much worse for many in this country. Ref wages, employment terms, housing and social provision. IE education, health etc.

This stems from realistic rather than a pessimistic viewpoint.

[madasafrog]

I have worked in a multinational and the first place they sack people is the UK because it is easy and cheap and no one makes a fuss

I am an employer and it is not cheap and not easy. People do make a fuss and there are people out there that make their living by taking companies to court for not getting jobs they applied for under "age/sex/race discrimination"

[madasafrog]

This is what I could never figure out about the housing boom..

We were told house prices were rising because of supply/demand, but if we're over-crowded doesn't that just create an incentive for businesses to relocate to cheaper, less over-crowded areas of the world?

I'm a programmer and I know my work could, in principle, be done anywhere in the world. Foreigners dont even have to come to the UK to take my job - so just why are houses so expensive ?

Its a big incentive to go overseas which is why many of them already have and there are a lot more doing so on a weekly basis. There are many household names that have done so recently........HP, Peugeot, Dyson, plus there is a list of companies you would have never heard of but are well known in engineering and manufacturing. How often do you phone a call centre from overseas? They say we dont export anything these days.....but we certainly have exported a lot of jobs

[ae589]

Thats from Dave Prentis head of UNISON.

The unions do seem to be serving 2 masters.

By the way, is there someone else with a 'Stop the BNP' avatar, or have I just never noticed the second stop, or have you been hit on the head and switched sides?