|
Post by Shrewed on Oct 29, 2011 20:18:13 GMT 1
[ Now I wish I was in a position to award my self a 50% rise, but I like many others in the private sector have had to pull in the reigns, and guess what, for the last 4 months I have only pulled in a basic wage of £125 per week And yet in the past month you have still managed to fly half way round the world to such places as new zealand, thailand, bangkok and watched various high profile rugby world cup games? No wonder no one wants to progress in this country, it seems possible to live a jet set lifestyle on the minimum wage. Now i have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that you have earned every penny of your wealth and have earned the lifestyle you enjoy, good on ya i say, but it seems a little..........disingenuous to claim to be only taking home £125 per week yet still enjoy the lifestyle you do. Matron that's totally unfair I'm sure Downie gives all his employees 5 weeks paid leave.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2011 20:34:53 GMT 1
Correct again Ed, that's the law, in fact they get 28 days paid leave!
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Oct 29, 2011 20:52:03 GMT 1
I assume that Includes bank holidays?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2011 20:53:10 GMT 1
Yep!!
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Oct 29, 2011 20:56:10 GMT 1
So actually 20 days annual holiday!! How long were you if New Zealand, where do recommend I should visit next year?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2011 21:00:28 GMT 1
Nope, it's still 28 days, dress it up how you want, but suppose it suits your argument, New Zealand, was there for 31 days, as for your holiday!! Go where you want! Rhyl, anglesy anywhere really!
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Oct 29, 2011 21:06:24 GMT 1
My point on the Unions was not a dig in anyway merely highlighting a fact, are those Union members not losing their jobs Ed ? Did a certain Mr Crow not take a 12% pay rise last year ? He did, and so did the members he represents, therefore he is doing his job. It is a point you make with regularity but is non the cheaper as a consequence. David Prentice, the General Secretary of my union represents over a million people and employs thousands of others. What wages he earns is agreed by us and he can be replaced at anytime if he doesn't perform which is ceratinly not the case with those CEO's of multi national PLC's that are performing huge con tricks on the peoples of this country.
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Oct 29, 2011 21:07:14 GMT 1
Nope, it's still 28 days, dress it up how you want, but suppose it suits your argument, New Zealand, was there for 31 days, as for your holiday!! Go where you want! Rhyl, anglesy anywhere really! Actually was thinking more of punakakie, fox glacier, queenstown not sure Rhyl offers guite as much.
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Oct 29, 2011 21:24:21 GMT 1
He did, and so did the members he represents, therefore he is doing his job. Ahh the welcome return of the self righteous, hate - hate and hate again tactics. Could you please then state which figure between 50 and 12.5% is what could be considered as an acceptable pay rise...thanks Lenin.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2011 21:38:52 GMT 1
He did, and so did the members he represents, therefore he is doing his job. Ahh the welcome return of the self righteous, hate - hate and hate again tactics. Could you please then state which figure between 50 and 12.5% is what could be considered as an acceptable pay rise...thanks Lenin. It's pretty simple, be you a union leader or a CEO, you should get the same as your workers. If the company doesn't perform well enough to give the shop floor a good pay rise, then surely it hasn't performed well enough for the ceo to get a decent pay rise either. The bitterness starts when ceo's and share holders get big dividends, but those at the bottom get told the company can't afford a living pay rise, basically a pay but. Do you think that's fair mate?
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Oct 29, 2011 21:42:55 GMT 1
Don't really think it matters much what my answer is buddy, seeing as 99% of the world works in this way.
Your choice of North Korea is I do admit less appealing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2011 0:11:28 GMT 1
The biggest problem is that, as the Shropshire Tenor makes, there is no reasonable alternative to vote for in this country.
The result? The few whose political ideology actually gets in power. Millions who don't both voting at all and the remainder who squabble over the tit bits trying to claim one party is far fairer than the other when in reality they differ only marginally in the political spectrum.
I suspect the other disadvantage for those wanting a party to the left to rise from the ashes is that anyone with the get up and go to lead such a party with any such vigour is already motivated to run a business or be a top performer with a current business. Standing out from the crowd in a political sense doesn't pay well and so the cycle continues.
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Oct 30, 2011 10:29:29 GMT 1
The biggest problem is that, as the Shropshire Tenor makes, there is no reasonable alternative to vote for in this country. Agree entirely, you made this point a few years ago on a night trip to Bradford. I think the majority of us are unhappy with the party we voted for at present. Interestingly would we be better served with a set up akin to the Italians ?
|
|
|
Post by shrewsace on Oct 30, 2011 10:59:18 GMT 1
He did, and so did the members he represents, therefore he is doing his job. Ahh the welcome return of the self righteous, hate - hate and hate again tactics. Could you please then state which figure between 50 and 12.5% is what could be considered as an acceptable pay rise...thanks Lenin. Eh? There's a lot of stoking of hate from the current government. Look at their demonising of benefit 'scroungers',workplace 'shirkers', public sector 'bureaucrats', union 'barons' and of course the public sector workers getting 'gold plated' pensions at the expense of the hard working taxpayers in the private sector (no mention of the directors filling their boots then preaching wage 'restraint' to their workforce). Almost sounds like a government deliberately pitting different sections of society against each other. Divide and rule, eh? And let's not forget the 'fear and discipline' Oliver Letwin has prescribed for the public sector. Definitely no dodgy authoritarian overtones there... The size of the wage rise at the top is irrelevant. If the wage rise is 50% and the rest of the workforce are receiving rises broadly in line with this. It's the growing disparity between the super rich at the top and the rest of the work force which is the issue.
|
|