UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

What's all this nonsense about workers' rights?

Exactly who is going to take which rights away from workers? This is al smoke and mirrors.

What we don't want is the imposition of artificial "rights" for the sake of levelling the playing field so that France's restrictive practices can prevail.

How is it exactly nonsense? Whatever rights we have under EU law could be eroded away when we leave. They might not, the rights might even get better, but they could get worse and calling that nonsense is uncalled for.

[jfman]

Everyone forgets the compelling left wing Labour agenda got over 40% last time out!

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Mythica

How is it exactly nonsense? Whatever rights we have under EU law could be eroded away when we leave. They might not, the rights might even get better, but they could get worse and calling that nonsense is uncalled for.

All completely irrelevant. The core issue is who decides for us? UK or France and Germany? Labour likes the EU in that aspect, in that they and the unions can exert their will, without the inconvenience of democracy getting in the way. On the other, they dislike the EU because it puts restrictions on State Aid. That is why so many senior Labour figures are conflicted over the EU.

If the EU was ever to introduce something that was actually beneficial to businesses, they wouldn't want anybody else to introduce it. The aim is to put the same restrictions on EU businesses, that the French and Germans put on their own businesses. They don't want anybody else to have an economic advantage over them.

The real danger thing is that, as always with the EU, a simple statement becomes ever wide reaching. It becomes a backdoor method to impose all sorts of things that were never agreed to in the first place. Before long they are imposing the same levels of tax, and even healthcare systems, eg goodbye zero VAT on food, goodbye NHS.

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by nomadking

All completely irrelevant. The core issue is who decides for us? UK or France and Germany? Labour likes the EU in that aspect, in that they and the unions can exert their will, without the inconvenience of democracy getting in the way. On the other, they dislike the EU because it puts restrictions on State Aid. That is why so many senior Labour figures are conflicted over the EU.

If the EU was ever to introduce something that was actually beneficial to businesses, they wouldn't want anybody else to introduce it. The aim is to put the same restrictions on EU businesses, that the French and Germans put on their own businesses. They don't want anybody else to have an economic advantage over them.

The real danger thing is that, as always with the EU, a simple statement becomes ever wide reaching. It becomes a backdoor method to impose all sorts of things that were never agreed to in the first place. Before long they are imposing the same levels of tax, and even healthcare systems, eg goodbye zero VAT on food, goodbye NHS.

Not irrelevant to the point I was responding to.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Mythica

Not irrelevant to the point I was responding to.

An example of a nonsense employment law, is the required notice period and consultations for redundancy. When a business goes completely bust, there is no possibility of any notice, and the taxpayer is expected to pick up the bill for payments for that.
Link

Depending on your situation, you can apply to the government for:

• a redundancy payment
• holiday pay
• outstanding payments like unpaid wages, overtime and commission
• money you would have earned working your notice period (‘statutory notice pay’)

The core principles(check your dictionary) shouldn't be, "what is nice".

[Mythica]

Originally Posted by nomadking

An example of a nonsense employment law, is the required notice period and consultations for redundancy. When a business goes completely bust, there is no possibility of any notice, and the taxpayer is expected to pick up the bill for payments for that.
Link

The core principles(check your dictionary) shouldn't be, "what is nice".

You've missed the point to what I was replying to.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Mythica

Not irrelevant to the point I was responding to.

An absolute irrelevance against the point you made!

I have to laugh at the English though, when you consider Old Boy incorrectly calling Jeremy Corbyn a terrorist sympathiser, surely the right of the Palestinian people or Irish people to govern themselves is the same?

If other people's blood is the price to pay in an armed cause so be it. Indeed, research shows that the English won't mind violence if it delivers Brexit. It's a queer paradox.

---------- Post added at 20:25 ---------- Previous post was at 20:20 ----------

Originally Posted by nomadking

An example of a nonsense employment law, is the required notice period and consultations for redundancy. When a business goes completely bust, there is no possibility of any notice, and the taxpayer is expected to pick up the bill for payments for that.
Link

The core principles(check your dictionary) shouldn't be, "what is nice".

That law isn't a nonsense. There's a difference between redundancy and your employer no longer existing.

If you can't understand that you aren't in a position to competently discuss this subject.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Mythica

How is it exactly nonsense? Whatever rights we have under EU law could be eroded away when we leave. They might not, the rights might even get better, but they could get worse and calling that nonsense is uncalled for.

But (in honour of your handle), the threat is mythical.
Eroded? In what way? What rights do you fear to be taken away? Worse rights would obviously not be welcome.

Remainers use the big wide terms which might impress shallow people - but it's nonsense.



---------- Post added at 20:28 ---------- Previous post was at 20:27 ----------

Originally Posted by nomadking

All completely irrelevant. The core issue is who decides for us? UK or France and Germany? Labour likes the EU in that aspect, in that they and the unions can exert their will, without the inconvenience of democracy getting in the way. On the other, they dislike the EU because it puts restrictions on State Aid. That is why so many senior Labour figures are conflicted over the EU.

If the EU was ever to introduce something that was actually beneficial to businesses, they wouldn't want anybody else to introduce it. The aim is to put the same restrictions on EU businesses, that the French and Germans put on their own businesses. They don't want anybody else to have an economic advantage over them.

The real danger thing is that, as always with the EU, a simple statement becomes ever wide reaching. It becomes a backdoor method to impose all sorts of things that were never agreed to in the first place. Before long they are imposing the same levels of tax, and even healthcare systems, eg goodbye zero VAT on food, goodbye NHS.

Spot on.

[jfman]

"If the EU ever introduce anything beneficial to businesses".

Frictionless trade to 500 million potential customers?

Giving your staff 4 weeks annual leave and a maximum 48 hour week (why not employ more people if you need more yours) are presumably minor incidental benefits of the EU.

[Carth]

Seems a complete waste of time discussing it to me.

We're still in the EU, along with all the rights people mention, but there are already businesses that have, or are in the process of, changing workers contracts so premium time is reduced and bank holidays are compulsory working.

Pretty sure most workers involved aren't happy at those changes, can they complain to the EU?

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

"If the EU ever introduce anything beneficial to businesses".

Frictionless trade to 500 million potential customers?

Giving your staff 4 weeks annual leave and a maximum 48 hour week (why not employ more people if you need more yours) are presumably minor incidental benefits of the EU.

Frictionless trade existed before the EU, and exists outside of it. The thousands of EU rules mean it isn't as frictionless as they make out. The "friction" just occurs away from the borders.


In the real world of business, it's not easy to simply employ more people. If you want to make it easier, one thing you would have to do is allow Zero hour contracts.


The Working Time Directive is a classic example of the EU imposing something by the backdoor. The UK had an exemption from it, but is was imposed by the backdoor on Health & Safety grounds. If the EU was truly interested in H&S then it would have to impose restrictions on what people did outside those work hours. It's a more than a bit silly to have a maximum working week, when you can still take up another job or even a hobby that is quite physically and mentally demanding.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

"If the EU ever introduce anything beneficial to businesses".

Frictionless trade to 500 million potential customers?

Giving your staff 4 weeks annual leave and a maximum 48 hour week (why not employ more people if you need more yours) are presumably minor incidental benefits of the EU.

You've made a selective misrepresentation. Nomad's sentence was:

"If the EU was ever to introduce something that was actually beneficial to businesses, they wouldn't want anybody else to introduce it. The aim is to put the same restrictions on EU businesses, that the French and Germans put on their own businesses. They don't want anybody else to have an economic advantage over them."

i.e. by introducing 4 weeks annual leave and a maximum 48 hour week across the EU, they wanted to ensure that the level playing field was maintained - something anti-competitive. "Luckily" we gained an opt-out.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nomadking

Frictionless trade existed before the EU, and exists outside of it. The thousands of EU rules mean it isn't as frictionless as they make out. The "friction" just occurs away from the borders.


In the real world of business, it's not easy to simply employ more people. If you want to make it easier, one thing you would have to do is allow Zero hour contracts.


The Working Time Directive is a classic example of the EU imposing something by the backdoor. The UK had an exemption from it, but is was imposed by the backdoor on Health & Safety grounds. If the EU was truly interested in H&S then it would have to impose restrictions on what people did outside those work hours. It's a more than a bit silly to have a maximum working week, when you can still take up another job or even a hobby that is quite physically and mentally demanding.

Frictionless trade did exist before the EU, and outside of it, however it is a time consuming process and like all capitalist trades involve give and take.

I'm appalled you wish to remove the hard earned protections of workers rights. However it's not unexpected. Nobody compels anyone to undertake work or hobbys.

If you have a business model that can't pay a fair wage, for contracted working hours, and guarantee annual leave you simply do not have a credible business model. You deserve to fail - not have the Government rewrite employment law for you.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

[COLOR="Blue"]You've made a selective misrepresentation. Nomad's sentence was:

"If the EU was ever to introduce something that was actually beneficial to businesses, they wouldn't want anybody else to introduce it. The aim is to put the same restrictions on EU businesses, that the French and Germans put on their own businesses. They don't want anybody else to have an economic advantage over them."

i.e. by introducing 4 weeks annual leave and a maximum 48 hour week across the EU, they wanted to ensure that the level playing field was maintained - something anti-competitive. "Luckily" we gained an opt-out.

If we could exceed said benefits I’d be at the front of the queue. However they have no legal standing in the absence of a prevailing Act of Parliament.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Mr K

LibDems for you then OB?

They've got an excellent solution for Brexit, then we can all concentrate on the real issues facing us instead of wasting our lives on this irrelevance.

Yes, disregard what the majority think and carry on!

What is the significance of 'Democrat' in 'Liberal Democrat?'. How dare they criticise Boris for going back on 'his promises'! How cynical can you get?