Totally agree!
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] *** Labour Party Annual Conference, 23-25 September 2018, ACC Liverpool ***
- Thread starter Moshe Gariani
- Start date
Totally agree!
Gritt23
New member
It's not about model's it about coming out and convincing me that you are appalled by what I expect you to be appalled about, and not just dance around the subject because you don't have the balls to call someone out.
Correct. Aside from unions there are works councils. This is the key difference to most other countries. They are in the process of setting one up in the Frau’s place of employment. It’s been interesting to hear about it. They are incredibly common and you have legal rights to set one up in any business above a certain size. They have been around for decades as well. https://www.german-way.com/german-workers-councils-demystified/
Gritt23
New member
The flip-side is, if they manage the business poorly (and it doesn't sound like they've had a happy time doing it) then it will be the staff that also suffer by not earning enough, or perhaps losing their jobs, or working conditions may be sub-optimal. Therefore they do have a vested interest in how the company is run and where money is invested. It may be that this particular company already has full dialogue with the employees, but it is never guaranteed anywhere and thus a place in the management structure is the important thing here, more than the share of the profits. For that part of the equation, many companies will already have profit-sharing schemes in place in the form of bonuses, and a shareholding would merely serve to formalise this. [and perhaps they wouldn't have suffered so much stress in building up the business if they'd have had more hands to help them?]
It all seems very sensible, but tricky to enforce it though without coming across all socialist-commie, although I guess that boat has already sailed
But the business hasn't been managed poorly, what I've described is just the realities of owning, managing and growing a business. If it was easy, everyone would be doing it, but it's not, you take a massive risk, often have to provide personal guarantees, and it's hugely stressful.
Incidentally, they do reward staff through bonuses, when we do well as a business, which I believe is the right way to go, but to just have a rule that says everyone must hand over a % of their hard-earned company to the staff because we say you must, is just wrong in my book.
Gritt23
New member
But "go with the people over Brexit" is currently to Leave. That's the only true measure we've had, because that is the only vote we've had.
How would you word the vote over the deal? Would it be to accept or reject the deal? Or do you believe the "People's Vote" is to vote on Brexit again, now that everyone has had time to think, and see how this plays out?
Trouble I see with either of these, is that I understand us to be leaving in February 2019. Not sure we can say the last minute, "nah sorry, changed our mind, can we stay now?" Also, I would imagine the "deal" is being done right up until the last minute, therefore, I'm not sure where the window for any such vote is.
And finally, if we are leaving in February, then all a "People's Vote" could be is to accept the Deal, or reject the deal, and the latter would mean we leave with No Deal. Labour have already said they will honour the vote to leave, so my guess is that the detail of their "People's Vote" could only be on leaving with, as Noel Edmunds would say, "Deal or No Deal." But there won't be enough time for any such vote anyway, as we'll still be negotiating the finer points in January, leaving no time anyway. Then Jezza isn't forced to ever explain how this vote would have worked, and can just throw his arms up in exasperation that the Tories denied us all the People Vote, which he would have given us, without ever having the embarrassment of explaining that this vote can never deliver what he's left people to believe it would.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,303
...For that part of the equation, many companies will already have profit-sharing schemes in place in the form of bonuses, and a shareholding would merely serve to formalise this. [and perhaps they wouldn't have suffered so much stress in building up the business if they'd have had more hands to help them?]
It all seems very sensible, but tricky to enforce it though without coming across all socialist-commie, although I guess that boat has already sailed
its not about sharing profit though, as you note this is common already. it is sharing the equity, capital of the company regardless of profitability. some seem to forget that the reward of share owners have a risk, the capital they invested in the company and the profits are the reward of that risk. this is transfer of the capital ownership.
Blue Valkyrie
Not seen such Bravery!
Prediction :
No deal Brexit.
Parliament collapses the Government because of this rank incompetence.
General election.
Labour win.
Economy collapsing and flatlining.
Emergency joining of EFTA and EEA.
Life back to normal.
No deal Brexit.
Parliament collapses the Government because of this rank incompetence.
General election.
Labour win.
Economy collapsing and flatlining.
Emergency joining of EFTA and EEA.
Life back to normal.
Last edited:
Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
Okay then - I think that's known as the all mouth no trouser model
Visual with little substance, I'll give you a shout when I am next verbally abused. I am sure you will get it all resolved for me.
What I'm saying is that the ONLY reason I would even consider voting Labour with this lot running the show is for them to offer a second Brexit vote, because in my opinion that whole process is going to wreck our economy. I don't think 5 years of Corbyn-led socialism will do an awful lot of good either, but IMO that is far easier repaired than Brexit. So I'm simply giving the only reason why I'd vote for them.
My wider observation is exactly the same as yours - we simply don't really know what they stand for on anything, as they are wrapped up in policy-free, woolly rhetoric. In fact to highlight this fact, I'll bet that on the issue of their Brexit position, we are no nearer understanding what they stand for after this conference than we do now. And that is despite the McDonnell bluster this morning where he waffled on about democratically handing the party back to its members.
- Aug 7, 2003
- 7,795
Just more and more "vote winning" promises to lump on top of free University education and the repayment of student debt. All very noble on paper, but completely unworkable and unfinanceable unless, of course, the worlds biggest diamond mine has just been found in Islington North. Corbyn & Co are desperate to win power, not for the many, but for the few, the few being them.
- Dec 7, 2017
- 224
Having run a company that gave out chunks of shares to its employees it is also not nearly as easy as it sounds to find a "fair" solution.
Give 10% of your company to your employees? Great, they're happy.
Then you hire someone new. Give them shares as well? But then either the % ownership of your existing employees goes down, and they are no longer happy, or your employees in aggregate have more than 10%.
And what happens when the employee leaves after six months? Does the company get the shares back, does the ex-employee keep them? What if they leave after two years? Five?
Want to take in outside investment? The % ownership of your employees goes down to below 10%. Do you have to give them more shares to get it back up to 10%, even though their existing shares are now worth more money thanks to the investment?
An employee wants to sell their shares. But you're a private company. Do you have an obligation to purchase the shares back? At what price?
Rewarding employees is part of the balance of running a company; too much and they get rich and leave (or bankrupt you), too little and they get poor and leave. It's a delicate business, and not one that particularly suits having a poorly-thought out government diktat as a requirement.
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
£500 a year in dividends? That's a lot of free shares being given away. What about employees of companies that don't pay dividends? Is he going to force them to pay one? Typical conference bs policy soundbite that won't go anywhere.
Mellor 3 Ward 4
Well-known member
I'd suggest that any 'tax incentive' from the Labour Party is highly unlikely, seeing as their last manifesto pledged to increase CT to 26%
Dorset Seagull
Once Dolphin, Now Seagull
This is the whole point for me. Large companies start as small companies generally started by an individual or small number of individuals. This means that there are risk takers ie business starters, and those that take no risks ie employees. It seems that most left wing supporters seem to resent the risk takers from reaping any kind of reward for taking the risks, and creating jobs, in the first place. As you mention there is a lot of stress and family pressures involved in building a business and so the rewards should be forthcoming. If the poor downtrodden worker wants the same rewards as the entrepreneur then they need to take the risks and start their own business rather than expect other people to do it for them.
Free university education is a Labour policy, repayment of student debt is not.
Pavilionaire
Well-known member
- Jul 7, 2003
- 30,570
I agree. In many respects employees have never had it so good with a whole host of EU rights, National Minimum Wage, National Living Wage, auto-enrolment pension contributions. Wealdgull is spot on re the logistical nightmare of maintaining 10%, communicating with shareholders throughout. Labour's proposals would mean a lot more red tape.
And is there any evidence that workers - or employers - want this policy?
This is exactly the sort of nonsense that turns business off from the Labour Party.
Gritt23
New member
Not at all, it's about showing some courage in your convictions. It's not me who can't shake the anti-semitism tag in my party, so there must be something he is doing wrong, or are you just going to say it's all the media's fault?
Horton's halftime iceberg
Blooming Marvellous
I don't understand why their adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance terms is the media fault.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,303
prehaps it was there insistence not to adopt it for a few months was the problem?
clippedgull
Hotdogs, extra onions
Point of Order!
Conference runs until 26th September (not 25th as titled) when Jeremy will give his speech
Conference runs until 26th September (not 25th as titled) when Jeremy will give his speech