Workers To Win Bank Holiday Rights

Originally Posted by me283

I take it you're not an employer either?Ah, words of wisdom from yet another theorist.

Are your posts designed to be quite so provocative. OK smart @rse, tell us about your business empire and the tough old REAL world of being an employer

You know what, I've been self employed for nearly four years, have spent the past 16 years working predominantly for and on behalf of small businesses so I, and others, are not just theorists. EDIT: What's a business lecturer if not a theorist incidentally?

And it was I who has already pointed out the benefits of being a good employer to business, because I've seen it first hand. Not giving BHs is not being a good employer.

Now if you've finished being quite so annoying........

[me283]

Originally Posted by zoombini

Exactly one point I was making, will my employer now give me an extra 8 days off?
Answer on a postcard, most likely to be NO.
__________________

Oh whatever... (the Incog approach D) )

Good point. In the interests of "equality", does that mean that EVERYONE will get an extra 8 days paid holiday? After all, that's what we are talking about here. People who originally signed a contract to say that they accepted 20 days paid holiday INCLUDING Bank Holidays will now get an extra 8 days. What about everyone else?

Originally Posted by me283

Good point. In the interests of "equality", does that mean that EVERYONE will get an extra 8 days paid holiday? After all, that's what we are talking about here. People who originally signed a contract to say that they accepted 20 days paid holiday INCLUDING Bank Holidays will now get an extra 8 days. What about everyone else?

EVERYONE will get 28 days paid leave. End of story. It's really not difficult to grasp.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by me283

In the USA, which might also be classed as "economically powerful and prosperous", the typical entitlement is 10 days plus Public Holidays.

The USA might also be classed as deeply divided with masses of people having no access to medical insurance, but that's allright as it makes good business sense?

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

EVERYONE will get 28 days paid leave. End of story. It's really not difficult to grasp.

And presumably our Tone will make sure that those who currently get more than 28 days will have theirs reduced? After all, that would be "fair"?
__________________

Originally Posted by danielf

The USA might also be classed as deeply divided with masses of people having no access to medical insurance, but that's allright as it makes good business sense?

Your point being? I actually think that's a different issue. But hey, let's find the country with the highest "typical" paid holiday entitlement and see how economically prosperous they are, shall we? The UK has survived this long with the current system, there is no need to change it. Not unless you want to win votes.

Originally Posted by me283

And presumably our Tone will make sure that those who currently get more than 28 days will have theirs reduced? After all, that would be "fair"?

I am beginning to question your sanity.
__________________

Not unless you want to win votes.

Or you're low paid. This issue affects the low paid, the disadvantaged who have been treated poorly. Now you may not (why am I saying may?!) have any sympathy with them, but some of, many of us do.

Anyway, your empire?

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

I am beginning to question your sanity.
__________________

Why? The idea seems to be that those who only get 20 days including Bank Holidays, should get 28 days. But who decides that 28 days is a "fair" number? Why not 25? Or 30? After all Andy, it seems that the idea is to make us all equally rewarded, why not say that EVERYONE, regardless of current entitlement, gets 28 days?

Originally Posted by me283

Why? The idea seems to be that those who only get 20 days including Bank Holidays, should get 28 days. But who decides that 28 days is a "fair" number? Why not 25? Or 30? After all Andy, it seems that the idea is to make us all equally rewarded, why not say that EVERYONE, regardless of current entitlement, gets 28 days?

The idea is to set a statutory minimum as I'm sure even you know.

Now then, your business empire?

[danielf]

Originally Posted by me283

Why? The idea seems to be that those who only get 20 days including Bank Holidays, should get 28 days. But who decides that 28 days is a "fair" number? Why not 25? Or 30? After all Andy, it seems that the idea is to make us all equally rewarded, why not say that EVERYONE, regardless of current entitlement, gets 28 days?

I think the issue is decency, rather than equality. A decent minimum standard, which is why Medical Insurance in the US is relevant to this discussion imo.

Incidentally, many Contintental European countries work less hours, and are not doing that badly economically.

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

The idea is to set a statutory minimum as I'm sure even you know.

Now then, your business empire?

The idea is to throw a benefit at people who may vote for you.

Empire is a strong word. But what about my business interests, which I have not discussed by the way?
__________________

Originally Posted by danielf

I think the issue is decency, rather than equality. A decent minimum standard, which is why Medical Insurance in the US is relevant to this discussion imo.

Incidentally, many Contintental European countries work less hours, and are not doing that badly economically.

And some aren't doing too brilliantly. Again, the point is?

[danielf]

Originally Posted by me283

And some aren't doing too brilliantly. Again, the point is?

I suppose you just made my point: a correlation between average holiday allowance and strength of the economy is likely to be spurious.

Originally Posted by me283

The idea is to throw a benefit at people who may vote for you.

In the interests of justice I can cope with the electioneering. Better than the negative and antagonsitic stuff the Tories are chucking out (but that's for another thread). And as I've said many a time, I'm no fan of New Labour generally, but this works for me and, oh, did I mention, TWO MILLION LOW PAID WORKERS (sorry that capitalising is catching)

Empire is a strong word. But what about my business interests, which I have not discussed by the way?

Your silence is noted. I'm interested why you keep dissing people who oppose you because they are not employers. So......?

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

In the interests of justice I can cope with the electioneering. Better than the negative and antagonsitic stuff the Tories are chucking out (but that's for another thread). And as I've said many a time, I'm no fan of New Labour generally, but this works for me and, oh, did I mention, TWO MILLION LOW PAID WORKERS (sorry that capitalising is catching)

Your silence is noted. I'm interested why you keep dissing people who oppose you because they are not employers. So......?

Ah "justice"... and who decides what is "just"? Perhaps 20 days including Bank Holidays is "just", but many people are lucky? And "LOW PAID"? Presumably they are on at least the minimum wage, as set by the government, so technically not paid too lowly?

I have had to run businesses; it's all too common for people who haven't or don't, to come out with comments like "Just pay them more" or "Just give them more time off". It's not that simple.
__________________

Originally Posted by danielf

I suppose you just made my point: a correlation between average holiday allowance and strength of the economy is likely to be spurious.

And as has been pointed out, we have a reasonably strong economy. This will not exactly do much to promote it. As I said before, it won't bring it to it's knees either.

Originally Posted by me283

Ah "justice"... and who decides what is "just"? Perhaps 20 days including Bank Holidays is "just", but many people are lucky? And "LOW PAID"? Presumably they are on at least the minimum wage, as set by the government, so technically not paid too lowly?

Yes, LOW PAID. If you think a fiver an hour is generous then you're on another planet. And you'll find that the Government is trying to determine what's just. And looks like they have a fair amount of support. Notice the Tories aren't making too much of a kerfuffle.

I have had to run businesses; it's all too common for people who haven't or don't, to come out with comments like "Just pay them more" or "Just give them more time off". It's not that simple.

Does run mean own? I've been a senior manager in a £60m t/o company, run a PR department in a small business..... Sounds to me that your experience as an 'employer' is no different so stable the high horse. And try and think what it must be like to be on the bottom rung of the pay scale as an employee (with little opportunity) and to not be given BH. Your attitude is out of the Ark. Bring back sweatshops anyone?



And as has been pointed out, we have a reasonably strong economy. This will not exactly do much to promote it. As I said before, it won't bring it to it's knees either.[/QUOTE]

[me283]

Originally Posted by andyl

Yes, LOW PAID. If you think a fiver an hour is generous then you're on another planet. And you'll find that the Government is trying to determine what's just. And looks like they have a fair amount of support. Notice the Tories aren't making too much of a kerfuffle.

Does run mean own? I've been a senior manager in a £60m t/o company, run a PR department in a small business..... Sounds to me that your experience as an 'employer' is no different so stable the high horse. And try and think what it must be like to be on the bottom rung of the pay scale as an employee (with little opportunity) and to not be given BH. Your attitude is out of the Ark. Bring back sweatshops anyone?



And as has been pointed out, we have a reasonably strong economy. This will not exactly do much to promote it. As I said before, it won't bring it to it's knees either.

[/QUOTE]

Who mentioned generous? The government deem it sufficient, that's what counts.

And yes, "run". I have been a senior manager in the world's 147th largest company (at the time). I have also held senior posts in companies with turnover of more than 1 billion Euros. Prior to that, I was a director/shareholder of several companies, so yes technically I did "own" and "run". (Care for some cream on your humble pie?). In my youth I was on the "bottom rung" of the pay scale, and I worked my butt off to climb the ladder. My attitude is one of "you get what you earn", not one of "let's be nice to everyone". Opportunities should be EARNED.