Workers To Win Bank Holiday Rights

Originally Posted by me283

That's an awful lot of generalisation.

Well I market small businesses. Do you? You see if you don't I'm not sure your opinion counts (based on the logic of your 'if you're not an employer' jibe).

But surely you can agree that the two million who will benefit will outnumber the small businesses? Yes, if a business goes down then people will lose jobs, but as with the minimum wage most businesses will ride this out. And as others have pointed out, if they cannot afford to give BH entitlement their businesses must be in pretty poor shape.

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

Well I market small businesses. Do you? You see if you don't I'm not sure your opinion counts (based on the logic of your 'if you're not an employer' jibe).

But surely you can agree that the two million who will benefit will outnumber the small businesses? Yes, if a business goes down then people will lose jobs, but as with the minimum wage most businesses will ride this out. And as others have pointed out, if they cannot afford to give BH entitlement their businesses must be in pretty poor shape.

I'm not the one generalising here.

Originally Posted by me283

I'm not the one generalising here.

Er OK, let's put my comments on the competitive advantage aside. What about the maths question?

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

Er OK, let's put my comments on the competitive advantage aside. What about the maths question?

You stated: "...but as with the minimum wage most businesses will ride this out. And as others have pointed out, if they cannot afford to give BH entitlement their businesses must be in pretty poor shape"

The first point you cannot be sure of; the second point is an unfair generalisation. Many small firms work to not much over breakeven in very competitive markets. Consequently, one bad debt can put them out of business. Similarly this potential legislation could do the same. That doesn't mean they are in poor shape, just very tightly run.

Originally Posted by me283

You stated: "...but as with the minimum wage most businesses will ride this out. And as others have pointed out, if they cannot afford to give BH entitlement their businesses must be in pretty poor shape"

The first point you cannot be sure of; the second point is an unfair generalisation. Many small firms work to not much over breakeven in very competitive markets. Consequently, one bad debt can put them out of business. Similarly this potential legislation could do the same. That doesn't mean they are in poor shape, just very tightly run.

Why do you always do the opposite of what I ask?!

OK, I take your point and yes it could be some very small businesses are adversely affected. But it is likely to be a very small minority. Whereas 2 million people.. (still no answer to the maths question)

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

Why do you always do the opposite of what I ask?!

OK, I take your point and yes it could be some very small businesses are adversely affected. But it is likely to be a very small minority. Whereas 2 million people.. (still no answer to the maths question)

Not sure what the "maths question" is. But I wonder where the figure of 2 million people comes from? Can you explain exactly what that figure relates to please?

Originally Posted by me283

Not sure what the "maths question" is. But I wonder where the figure of 2 million people comes from? Can you explain exactly what that figure relates to please?

http://www.tiscali.co.uk/jobs/featur...r_working.html TUC so you can bash them (has a higher figure). Of course as you just want to diss this Government and a proposal which will benefit the most disadvantaged in society, the stat came from the Government.

Presumably no stats can be used to support any argument on CF?

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

http://www.tiscali.co.uk/jobs/featur...r_working.html TUC so you can bash them (has a higher figure). Of course as you just want to diss this Government and a proposal which will benefit the most disadvantaged in society, the stat came from the Government.

Presumably no stats can be used to support any argument on CF?

Actually I can't read that link. And you can rant all you like, I merely asked what the figure related to. Perhaps you could explain?

Originally Posted by me283

Actually I can't read that link.

Women are main losers from Bank Holiday pay cut
As the majority of the workforce look forward to the Easter break, nearly three million workers - two thirds of them women - are likely to be facing a pay cut as their employer refuses to pay them for the Easter bank holidays.

A TUC analysis of official statistics shows that 2.7 million workers were not paid for the Easter Monday bank holiday last year. Of those who lost out, 1.7 million were women (64 per cent of the losers and 15 per cent of all women workers). One million (36 per cent) were men.

This is because it is legal in the UK for employers to treat bank holidays as a normal working day, and then send workers home without pay.

Many other people will be forced to take the Easter bank holidays as part of their minimum right to four weeks paid holiday. The UK is the only EU member state (excluding the accession nations) that allows employers to treat public holidays against the European minimum of four weeks paid holiday. The UK also gets three fewer bank holidays than the EU average.

And you can rant all you like

Why thank you

I merely asked what the figure related to. Perhaps you could explain? (snip)

In what sense related?

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

Women are main losers from Bank Holiday pay cut
As the majority of the workforce look forward to the Easter break, nearly three million workers - two thirds of them women - are likely to be facing a pay cut as their employer refuses to pay them for the Easter bank holidays.

A TUC analysis of official statistics shows that 2.7 million workers were not paid for the Easter Monday bank holiday last year. Of those who lost out, 1.7 million were women (64 per cent of the losers and 15 per cent of all women workers). One million (36 per cent) were men.

This is because it is legal in the UK for employers to treat bank holidays as a normal working day, and then send workers home without pay.

Many other people will be forced to take the Easter bank holidays as part of their minimum right to four weeks paid holiday. The UK is the only EU member state (excluding the accession nations) that allows employers to treat public holidays against the European minimum of four weeks paid holiday. The UK also gets three fewer bank holidays than the EU average.



Why thank you In what sense related?

Well, that only quotes on Bank Holiday - Easter Monday. And I find it very surprising that apparently nearly 3 million people don't get paid for that day. That would be about one in 10 or 15 adults? Strange. Oh well, like the articale says it's presently legal. Long may it remain so.

Originally Posted by me283

Well, that only quotes on Bank Holiday - Easter Monday.

I spotted that. Thought it gave some scale to the issue though.

And I find it very surprising that apparently nearly 3 million people don't get paid for that day. That would be about one in 10 or 15 adults? Strange.

OK, let's settle on 2 million then.

Oh well, like the articale says it's presently legal. Long may it remain so.

It won't.

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

It won't.

We shall see. But I hope it does. And for now it is law. SO let's just say that it's a good thing for the moment.