Britain outside the EU

[jfman]

Got a good laugh today with strong SW1 vibes as the Guardian ran an article about “desperate” families without an au pair thanks to Brexit.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...out-eu-workers

Haven’t we got homeless, unemployed who would be grateful for the opportunity to get a free roof over their heads, free food and can provide childcare for the minimum wage?

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by jfman

Got a good laugh today with strong SW1 vibes as the Guardian ran an article about “desperate” families without an au pair thanks to Brexit.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...out-eu-workers

Haven’t we got homeless, unemployed who would be grateful for the opportunity to get a free roof over their heads, free food and can provide childcare for the minimum wage?

Sure the drug and alcohol issues won't impact on the posh people's kids in the slightest, mind you they're letting prisoners out on day release to fill gaps so maybe some of the less touchy/ fiddlier ones could be perfectly placed

[Carth]

All part of the 'leveling up' thing . . . but in this case it's 'leveling down' to match the North

Originally Posted by jfman

Got a good laugh today with strong SW1 vibes as the Guardian ran an article about “desperate” families without an au pair thanks to Brexit.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...out-eu-workers

Haven’t we got homeless, unemployed who would be grateful for the opportunity to get a free roof over their heads, free food and can provide childcare for the minimum wage?

Apparently not.

”Why would a British national want to go and live in another British national’s home?” says Shackell. “There’s no benefit for them; there’s no cultural enrichment.”

There’s also the small matter of 30 hours work a week for about £100 ‘pocket money’. I suspect they must be applying an absurdly high cash equivalent value to the au pair’s box bedroom in order to avoid a minimum wage violation.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Chris

Apparently not.

There’s also the small matter of 30 hours work a week for about £100 ‘pocket money’. I suspect they must be applying an absurdly high cash equivalent value to the au pair’s box bedroom in order to avoid a minimum wage violation.

Suspect those who want an au pair want it for the exploitative value, in which case I’m satisfied to see them go without. If they can’t afford childcare they should cut their cloth accordingly and make ends meet like everyone else.

There’s no point propping up the property market with borrowing against two wages that aren’t sustainable.

Originally Posted by jfman

Suspect those who want an au pair want it for the exploitative value, in which case I’m satisfied to see them go without. If they can’t afford childcare they should cut their cloth accordingly and make ends meet like everyone else.

There’s no point propping up the property market with borrowing against two wages that aren’t sustainable.

A friend (a British national, astonishingly) did au pairing in London after leaving school for a couple of years. She had a fair few stories to tell afterwards. Suffice it to say, I have very little sympathy with anyone ‘struggling’ because they’re no longer able to exploit European teenagers while they go about insisting that starting a family never really changed them.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

Suspect those who want an au pair want it for the exploitative value, in which case I’m satisfied to see them go without. If they can’t afford childcare they should cut their cloth accordingly and make ends meet like everyone else.

There’s no point propping up the property market with borrowing against two wages that aren’t sustainable.

However, if your suspicion is incorrect, than the rest of your theorem falls away.

Are you suggesting that if they can't afford childcare, they shouldn't resort to employing an au pair?

My parent were very hard working non-rich people who both needed to work to provide for me and my sister and themselves. So they hired a live in au pair (several over the years) which met the objectives of both the au pair and the family.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

However, if your suspicion is incorrect, than the rest of your theorem falls away.

Are you suggesting that if they can't afford childcare, they shouldn't resort to employing an au pair?

My parent were very hard working non-rich people who both needed to work to provide for me and my sister and themselves. So they hired a live in au pair (several over the years) which met the objectives of both the au pair and the family.

British jobs for British people, unfortunately.

The move to a high wage economy means mass exploitation like this has to be removed.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

British jobs for British people, unfortunately.

The move to a high wage economy means mass exploitation like this has to be removed.

Is the au pair system "mass exploitation"? From my family's experience, the au pair received a weekly wage, was given free board and lodging and was pretty much part of the family.

For those who may post Google tales of exploitation, there are significant links that detail the contrary.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Is the au pair system "mass exploitation"? From my family's experience, the au pair received a weekly wage, was given free board and lodging and was pretty much part of the family.

For those who may post Google tales of exploitation, there are significant links that detail the contrary.

If there’s a childcare job there they can pay the minimum wage like everyone else. If there isn’t a job there then so be it.

I’m not going to have sympathy for them, even if I read about their desperation in the Guardian. If we want to have jobs undercut by cheap foreign labour then that isn’t Brexit.

We can’t pick and choose who we let in on the basis of what suits metropolitan elites.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

If there’s a childcare job there they can pay the minimum wage like everyone else. If there isn’t a job there then so be it.

I’m not going to have sympathy for them, even if I read about their desperation in the Guardian. If we want to have jobs undercut by cheap foreign labour then that isn’t Brexit.

We can’t pick and choose who we let in on the basis of what suits metropolitan elites.

I forgot to mention that the au pair's family paid for the English lessons - and the results were very good. Au pair is not a job; they receive value from their attachment to the family and, although I'm not surprised at the bad egg families, I doubt that there is mass explotation.

Anyway, all very moot because there's no au pair visa and UK people don't need to learn English.

[papa smurf]

Many migrants heading for UK die after boat sinks

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59406355


A number of migrants headed for the UK have drowned in the Channel near Calais after their boat sank, the French government has said.

French prime minister Jean Castex said the shipwreck was a "tragedy", adding those who died were victims of "criminal smugglers".

Police say 27 people have died, AFP news agency has reported.

The PM is to chair an emergency Cobra meeting this afternoon in response to the deaths, his spokesman said.


Channel horror as more than 27 migrants drown hours after shock French police pics emerge
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world...rossing-rescue

French and British authorities are conducting a rescue operation in the Channel by air and sea.

[Pierre]

It’s a difficult one, I have sympathy with the French, they’re under no obligation to prevent migrants leaving France.

But then there are photos of French police watching migrants leave and board boats to their deaths.

So no obligation, but a responsibility……….

Those are two different locations - different beaches (one sand, one pebbles).

Pretty shitty reporting by the Mail/Express/etc. - no actual evidence to support that the Gendarmerie were watching people get into boats; the video is just cut scenes.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...h-Channel.html

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Those are two different locations - different beaches (one sand, one pebbles).

Pretty shitty reporting by the Mail/Express/etc. - no actual evidence to support that the Gendarmerie were watching people get into boats; the video is just cut scenes.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...h-Channel.html

Ok then, here’s another.

Is that the same beach with the police vehicle there in shot? The point that you didn’t address , why would you? Instead of responding to it you’d rather obfuscate it. The French may not have an obligation, but they’re happy to see them sail off to drown. Not a moral high ground to take.