Common sense or ethically wrong

[blueinsa]

Net migration to the UK, , was estimated to be 258,000 in 2018. Doubt that figure will fall by a great deal anytime soon. It'll just introduce more beaurocracy and red tape and wasted time for businesses recruiting as well as the government.

It will introduce a fair system for everyone, regardless of where they are in the world wanting to come live and work in the UK is what it will do.

 

[Ban-jani]

Net migration to the UK, , was estimated to be 258,000 in 2018. Doubt that figure will fall by a great deal anytime soon. It'll just introduce more beaurocracy and red tape and wasted time for businesses recruiting as well as the government.

I really don’t understand what you mean about wasting time recruiting people for businesses.

Are you talking from a position of experience?

Red tape and bureaucracy too, why?

 

[blueparrot]

I really don’t understand what you mean about wasting time recruiting people for businesses.

Are you talking from a position of experience?

Red tape and bureaucracy too, why?

Any business facing an employee shortage now can just recruit from the EU for staff to come over next week. Going forward if they can't recruit locally and want to recruit from abroad if the job does't meet the 70 point requirement then those potential employees will need to apply for a visa to some government department. That's paperwork for the business, probaly at some expense , paperwork for some government department. What if it's refused is there an appeal process?

 

[Fame Monster]

That cap, I’m presuming is net (?), will still have us going towards a point of our infrastructure collapsing and the countryside disappearing.

I agree we still need it but it needs to come right down.

No that'd be for immigration so you'd have net migration at about 100-000-150,000 a year meaning some of the big infrastructure projects we've embarked on recently (HS2, Crossrail) probably wouldn't be needed quite so soon.

 

[Metal Biker]

Look forward to all your prices going up. I'll bet you voted for that. All your groceries, your council tax, your Nandos. And when you get there, your care home. £1,200 a week it is already in some parts. And it would have to go up even higher.

We'd all be earning more money as a result of getting rid of cheap labour, so we can pay for those increases. :)

It's kind of the whole point.

 

[Chippy_boy]

We'd all be earning more money as a result of getting rid of cheap labour, so we can pay for those increases. :)

It's kind of the whole point.

It's not the whole point.

The aspect you are missing is that if we simply pay ourselves more, to pay for our more expensive goods and services, which in turn makes our goods and services even more expensive... then no-one other than Brits will buy our overly expensive goods and services. And moreover, Brits will increasingly buy from abroad where these goods and services are available more cheaply. Goodbye English Coxes, hello French Golden Delicious. Goodbye Lloyds, hello Santander.

So our entire export business and balance of trade collapses and and with it, our economy.

We do not live in a bubble. The only way to sustainably pay ourselves more is to increase productivity and to do higher value work. i.e. get out of low paid work. Get machines to do it, or people from other countries who are prepared to do it for less. Your proposed "solution" does not and cannot work.

 

[BobKowalski]

The new immigration system will last about a year at which point it will be so full of holes and exemptions it won’t mean dick. I doubt the Govt has the competence to process or monitor this system any better than they do the current system.

The income threshold is dumb. Low paid is not necessarily low skilled. It also sends out the contradictory message that ‘shit jobs are ok for native Brits as the good jobs are reserved for immigrants’. The threashold is too high for areas like Scotland and NI. Countries like India will remain hostile and price for a trade deal will be relaxing the immigration rules. Main feature of a lot of trade deal is ease of movement for people as it ties in with liberalisation of trade. Not that we are seeking to liberalise trade with anyone so probably a bit moot.

 

[Metal Biker]

It's not the whole point.

The aspect you are missing is that if we simply pay ourselves more, to pay for our more expensive goods and services, which in turn makes our goods and services even more expensive... then no-one other than Brits will buy our overly expensive goods and services. And moreover, Brits will increasingly buy from abroad where these goods and services are available more cheaply. Goodbye English Coxes, hello French Golden Delicious. Goodbye Lloyds, hello Santander.

So our entire export business and balance of trade collapses and and with it, our economy.

We do not live in a bubble. The only way to sustainably pay ourselves more is to increase productivity and to do higher value work. i.e. get out of low paid work. Get machines to do it, or people from other countries who are prepared to do it for less. Your proposed "solution" does not and cannot work.

So we continue to have this economic gap between the rich and poor?

How else do you propose we give people on poorer wages the opportunity to live a more productive lifestyle, when you factor in that everyone is different, has different skill sets, outlook and goals? How do you get those of us currently on the lowest wage the chance to earn more and live a comfortable life like others currently enjoy? We're prepared to work and do those jobs, but not to be exploited for cheap wages just to keep profits high. We helped earn those profits, we're asking for a small slice of that pie.

I'm genuinely interested (and don't say "get a better job..")

 

[west didsblue]

How in the name of smeg is Johnson "unelected"?

He was chosen to run the party, held an election, and the majority of voters voted for MP's of a party which they fully understood he would be leader of.

Who said anything about Johnson?

 

[Metal Biker]

Any business facing an employee shortage now can just recruit from the EU for staff to come over next week. Going forward if they can't recruit locally and want to recruit from abroad if the job does't meet the 70 point requirement then those potential employees will need to apply for a visa to some government department. That's paperwork for the business, probaly at some expense , paperwork for some government department. What if it's refused is there an appeal process?

Or... they could make their business employment more attractive for those in the local pool of potential employees.

 

[Metal Biker]

It will introduce a fair system for everyone, regardless of where they are in the world wanting to come live and work in the UK is what it will do.

Maddening, isn't it.

"End the exploitation of businesses using migrants for cheap labour"

"This is disgraceful! Who else will serve us our coffee and sandwiches in Pret*!? Am I now going to have to pay people a DECENT WAGE!? Despicable notion!"


*It's shocking how useful this quote has been on here.

 

[blueparrot]

Or... they could make their business employment more attractive for those in the local pool of potential employees.

The local pool isn't big enough. It's also a lot of seasonal work in my area.

 

[Chippy_boy]

So we continue to have this economic gap between the rich and poor?

How else do you propose we give people on poorer wages the opportunity to live a more productive lifestyle, when you factor in that everyone is different, has different skill sets, outlook and goals? How do you get those of us currently on the lowest wage the chance to earn more and live a comfortable life like others currently enjoy? We're prepared to work and do those jobs, but not to be exploited for cheap wages just to keep profits high. We helped earn those profits, we're asking for a small slice of that pie.

I'm genuinely interested (and don't say "get a better job..")

Shame about your last sentence because that is my answer. Why do you dismiss it, as a matter of interest?

So we continue to have this economic gap between the rich and poor?

Inevitably and unavoidably.

Sometimes there simply are no easy solutions. I wish it were otherwise, but there are some unfortunate circumstances in life which sometimes it is simply impossible to avoid. You pay people too much (per unit of output, compared to other countries) and you become uncompetitive and it is self-defeating. You pay people too much for doing low value work and then that means you have to burden - through higher prices or higher taxation - other people more. Burdening further those people who want to invest, to innovate to be entrepreneurs and rewarding the opposite, is not sustainable. It leads to declining wealth and standards of living for all, as per post war Romania, Poland, Yugoslavia, Albania etc etc.

Ultimately, AI and robotization will be the answer, but only when we have true global alignment of economies and global coordination. Prior to that, increased automation will simply be used to drive down labour costs and prices of goods and services. Because the world is competitive.

So if you are in a low-paid unskilled job and have aspirations, then get some skills and get a better job. It's as simple as that really.

 

[Metal Biker]

The local pool isn't big enough. It's also a lot of seasonal work in my area.

So the response to creating a bigger pool is to pay those migrating to do the job the lowest wages affordable?

 

[Ban-jani]

Any business facing an employee shortage now can just recruit from the EU for staff to come over next week. Going forward if they can't recruit locally and want to recruit from abroad if the job does't meet the 70 point requirement then those potential employees will need to apply for a visa to some government department. That's paperwork for the business, probaly at some expense , paperwork for some government department. What if it's refused is there an appeal process?

Well recruitment is my area of expertise as my job is literally to deliver it, at managerial level, at large scale, into mostly large but also some small clients.

My team sources candidates from graduate level up to Managing Director. Two of our biggest clients are a global retail company and a financial services giant.

So I know what I’m talking about.

Whilst you are right sometimes companies who cannot find talent in the UK opt for people in the EU but it’s a lot further down the list of options and it happens far less often than you think.

Organisations can sponsor anyone from around the world, as it stands, as long as they can prove they have exhausted the UK job market. This won’t change.

I can count maybe on two hands how many people I’ve recruited who were living in the EU and moved over to the UK for the role. This is out of hundreds, maybe thousands of jobs we have filled over the years.

Hiring Managers are almost always dead set on hiring local talent and it’s only incredibly niche jobs that are needed from Europe.

You can move to the UK and literally stay under this and work if you - speak English 10pts, have a job offer 20pts, job has skill level 20pts, it’s in a category where the UK has shortages 20pts. That’s the magic 70.

Salary doesn’t have to come into it and that will cover nurses and care workers as they are a skill that is in shortage.

Holding a PHD gives you points, and you get double for a PHD in STEM.

We already make it difficult for people to come who don’t meet similar criteria, outside of the EU and this is just being extended to Europe.

I seriously doubt this will be impacting my industry significantly.

 

[Ban-jani]

No that'd be for immigration so you'd have net migration at about 100-000-150,000 a year meaning some of the big infrastructure projects we've embarked on recently (HS2, Crossrail) probably wouldn't be needed quite so soon.

Needs to be sub 50k net imo

 

[Metal Biker]

Shame about your last sentence because that is my answer. Why do you dismiss it, as a matter of interest?

Sometimes there simply are no easy solutions. I wish it were otherwise, but there are some unfortunate circumstances in life which sometimes it is simply impossible to avoid. You pay people too much (per unit of output, compared to other countries) and you become uncompetitive and it is self-defeating. You pay people too much for not doing much and then that means you have to tax the people who do more, more. Taxing further those people who want to invest, to innovate to be entrepreneurs and rewarding the opposite, is not sustainable. It leads to declining wealth and standards of living for all, as per post war Romania, Poland, Yugoslavia, Albania etc etc.

Ultimately, AI and robotization will be the answer, but only when we have true global alignment of economies and global coordination. Prior to that, increased automation will simply be used to drive down labour costs and prices of goods and services. Because the world is competitive.

Because believe it or not there are many job sectors of society which people dismiss as a worthy profession yet utilise these services everyday and lament when "machines" takes the jobs of people because they don't do it as well.

Robotization is all well and good, but what do you do with the workforce whose job positions are now redundant? "Get a better job!" Doing what? It's a ludicrous defence. Why do you dismiss businesses paying their employees slightly more so it is above the current cost of living?

 

[BobKowalski]

Think we are about 6 months away from Patel going full Pol Pot and declaring ‘Year Zero’ :)

‘Priti Patel has claimed staff shortages under the government's new immigration system could be dealt with by training the 8.5 million who are economically inactive But @BBCRealityCheck finds that many of these people are students, carers, sick or retired’

http://bit.ly/2wn2uST

 

[blueinsa]

Think we are about 6 months away from Patel going full Pol Pot and declaring ‘Year Zero’ :)

‘Priti Patel has claimed staff shortages under the government's new immigration system could be dealt with by training the 8.5 million who are economically inactive But @BBCRealityCheck finds that many of these people are students, carers, sick or retired’

http://bit.ly/2wn2uST

Its the same group that would be on a tenner an hour building wind turbines for grumpy grandad mate ;-)

 

[Metal Biker]

So if you are in a low-paid unskilled job and have aspirations, then get some skills and get a better job. It's as simple as that really.

Shame about your last sentence...

And how do you go about getting better skills when such avenues cost money and time, which most younger people don't have?

How do you earn a decent living in the meantime whilst attaining these skills? The problem with attitudes like this is that people still think it's the 1960's, mistakenly thinking you could walk out of one well paying job and walk into another the same day.

I currently am learning a new skill and it's costing me money and more importantly time, time I could be using to earn at my current employer. Is it going to increase my wages? Not likely, because it'll still pay only the living wage, as most jobs these days do. This blase attitude about the current state of employment just demonstrates how out of touch a lot of people are with employment for younger people.

I mean come on! "It's simple?!" You cannot honestly accept that to be the case.