Workers To Win Bank Holiday Rights - Page 12

paulyoung666 · 01-04-2005, 17:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by me283

Hi Paul,

Thats the whole point of the proposed legislation. Currently some peopl are given, typically 20 days paid leave per annum; in some cases Bank Holidays must be taken out of this, or worked. The proposal is that there be a minimum 20 days paid leave by law, PLUS Bank Holidays as additional paid leave.

As can be seen by the earlier post, this would severely damage small businesses who, contrary to popular opinion, cannot just "swallow" such additional costs.

yeah , sorry , long day / week

Shaun · 01-04-2005, 17:53

The thing is if HM had to put his prices up to cover the extra cost so would every other company providing the same service, hence no overall loss.

me283 · 01-04-2005, 18:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun

The thing is if HM had to put his prices up to cover the extra cost so would every other company providing the same service, hence no overall loss.

Apart from the fact that he may be compating against other larger companies, who could spread the cost a little better. I would imagine it would hit a small company pretty hard if 50% of the workforce suddenly becam entitled to an effective 40% increase in paid leave.

Shaun · 01-04-2005, 18:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by me283

Apart from the fact that he may be compating against other larger companies, who could spread the cost a little better. I would imagine it would hit a small company pretty hard if 50% of the workforce suddenly becam entitled to an effective 40% increase in paid leave.

Isn't that the nature of the beast with small companys?

me283 · 01-04-2005, 18:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun

Isn't that the nature of the beast with small companys?

No. Why should it be? Many small companies are founded by individuals who put their savings and/or homes on the line. Quite often people do this and don't exactly make a fortune. So when some fool tries to win a few votes, and in so doing ends up making life harder for someone who has had the balls to make a go of it himself, why is that fair?

Shaun · 01-04-2005, 18:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by me283

No. Why should it be? Many small companies are founded by individuals who put their savings and/or homes on the line. Quite often people do this and don't exactly make a fortune. So when some fool tries to win a few votes, and in so doing ends up making life harder for someone who has had the balls to make a go of it himself, why is that fair?

Life's not fair (but we can try to help those that have the ****ty end of the wedge). The reason it's the nature of the beast is because larger company have the economies of scale that let them spread the hit out.... just as you said, smaller companies don't, its inherent in the system. If you reread my other post and then yours you'll see you just made my point for me.

me283 · 01-04-2005, 19:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun

Life's not fair (but we can try to help those that have the ****ty end of the wedge). The reason it's the nature of the beast is because larger company have the economies of scale that let them spread the hit out.... just as you said, smaller companies don't, its inherent in the system. If you reread my other post and then yours you'll see you just made my point for me.

Sorry, crossed wires. It is sad but true that legislation such as this invariably hurts those who can least afford it.

Shaun · 01-04-2005, 20:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by me283

Sorry, crossed wires. It is sad but true that legislation such as this invariably hurts those who can least afford it.

No wonder were at cross purposes, who exactly are you talking about here?

me283 · 01-04-2005, 22:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shaun

No wonder were at cross purposes, who exactly are you talking about here?

I think it will severely damage small businesses.

01-04-2005, 22:22

It is low paid workers who can't afford it.

There is a reason why people opt to be small business people, part of which is the expectation of a better life than us wage slaves. I do admire entrepreneurs because it takes guts to jack in a job and do your own thing. And I agree that small businesses should be supported (which they are in a variety of ways - free advice, possibility of grants, looser regulation as laws which apply to bigger business often exempt small business....). But that doesn't mean you can treat your staff badly.

me283 · 01-04-2005, 22:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

It is low paid workers who can't afford it.

There is a reason why people opt to be small business people, part of which is the expectation of a better life than us wage slaves. I do admire entrepreneurs because it takes guts to jack in a job and do your own thing. And I agree that small businesses should be supported (which they are in a variety of ways - free advice, possibility of grants, looser regulation as laws which apply to bigger business often exempt small business....). But that doesn't mean you can treat your staff badly.

If someone feels they are being treated badly they can always leave the job.

01-04-2005, 22:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by me283

If someone feels they are being treated badly they can always leave the job.

Not that easy in the low paid sector (I think I may have said this before!) but if we're playing that game, if some small business person is unhappy with the new statutory holiday entitlement, they can always sell up.

me283 · 01-04-2005, 22:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

Not that easy in the low paid sector (I think I may have said this before!) but if we're playing that game, if some small business person is unhappy with the new statutory holiday entitlement, they can always sell up.

Somewhat less of a choice for them, methinks. Nice try though.

01-04-2005, 22:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by me283

Somewhat less of a choice for them, methinks. Nice try though.

I was just using your logic and extending it. I was trying to point out that low paid workers cannot switch jobs easily and so......

And let's not forget two million low paid workers will benefit against how many small (would have to be very small) who can't cope with this change.

And as for competing with big business, small business have a competitive edge in terms of lower overheads, greater responsiveness and the ability to deliver personal service (for which people will pay a little more). Well good small businesses do.

me283 · 01-04-2005, 22:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by andyl

I was just using your logic and extending it. I was trying to point out that low paid workers cannot switch jobs easily and so......

And let's not forget two million low paid workers will benefit against how many small (would have to be very small) who can't cope with this change.

And as for competing with big business, small business have a competitive edge in terms of lower overheads, greater responsiveness and the ability to deliver personal service (for which people will pay a little more). Well good small businesses do.

That's an awful lot of generalisation.