[Politics] The General Election Thread

[Pretty pink fairy]

Let's get back to basics and Victorian work houses
37 hour week works for me although sometimes its 25 hours....... Marvalous
Regards
DF

 

[Baldseagull]

Somewhere in there I think we concur. A shorter working week is a great ideal, any target/ promise of a 32 hour week is fanciful propaganda right now.

**** me you are hard work, you have just been shown a number of examples where it has been beneficial to all, and yet you call it fanciful propaganda. Of course it is not going to be possible for every job, same as 9 to 5 is not suitable in every role, but that does not mean it should not be the norm, and that working 60 odd hours a week is seen as being a two man effort.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Do those on here looking for a four day week expect to be paid the same as now which for most is five days. If so a 20% pay rise ..payable by employer?
Or are they that well off they can live on 80% of their wage ?

Whatever your job entails on that fifth day, I hope its not maths.

The two possible correct answers, are:

1. It represents a 25% pay rise (if measured by salary / days worked)

2. It represents no pay rise (the salary remains unchanged)

 

[blue-shifted]

Labours proposals seem to me to be joined up

Shorter working weeks = In effect higher wages = better quality of life but higher employer costs = excellent that companies making billions will distribute more for their employees, but some which aren’t will go to the wall = more unemployment = more people needing to cross skill more commonly = more accessible adult education is taken up.

 

[Bozza]

Shorter working weeks = In effect higher wages

Only if the sole measure of employee contribution is how long they've been sitting at a desk, not what they've accomplished whilst they've been there.

 

[blue-shifted]

You seem to have conveniently avoided the spending promises and the question of how they will be paid for. And to compare Scandinavia to the far left policies of Momentum is frankly ridiculous.

I will save you the bother of answering.

Like many dreamers, JC &. Co will tell you about increased productivity, better tax incomes, more trade with the rest of the world. The reality is the ‘never, never’. To the uninitiated that is the practice of ‘I will never have to actually pay it back as my increased income will cover it’. That has been proven time and time and time again to be absolute balderdash, for people in the street and for governments peddling fantasies.

Mate, I don't want to get involved in the stressy lets have a go at each other nature of this thread, but I reckon it would be pretty simple for you to look through the signature social and taxation policies of the sort of progressive northern European governments being talked about, then have a look at labours manifesto, (ok not released yet, but the last one will be a decent guide) have a look at if you still think Corbyn's policies are far to the left of these.

I don't think you'll be able to find much evidence that they are.

I'm no momentum member and I might not vote labour, but some of the ways Corbyn and his policies are reported are frankly ridiculous and none of us are immune to the sort of subconscious bias the right wing press has been attempting to instill in us.

 

[blue-shifted]

Only if the sole measure of employee contribution is how long they've been sitting at a desk, not what they've accomplished whilst they've been there.

I'd say that most jobs you can't hack 20% off the working week and still retain the same level of productivity. If you work in a call centre or a barbers or a supermarket checkout or pretty much any other job, 20% less time, means to the employer that they need 20% more staff. I have no problem with that. Maybe there are some jobs, where a refreshed mind means you can work 20% quicker. Most employers are scrambling around for productivity improvements of 1%, so i'll guess not many. If I dropped a day a week and found a 20% productivity improvement, I'd expect some serious questions from my manager as to why I was so slow before. In any case the 4 day week would soon become a norm and people would suggest a 3 day week would be more efficient

 

[beorhthelm]

**** me you are hard work, you have just been shown a number of examples where it has been beneficial to all, and yet you call it fanciful propaganda. Of course it is not going to be possible for every job, same as 9 to 5 is not suitable in every role, but that does not mean it should not be the norm, and that working 60 odd hours a week is seen as being a two man effort.

the contradiction highlights a flaw. its may be good idea in principle, some times, for some businesses, but may not be applicable or beneficial in all business and industries. the examples tend to be in salaried knowledge working roles where a lot of work is not necessarily on company time anyway. does this translate to hourly paid work, factories or service sector where people need to be present? fewer hours mean more jobs, good in theory but with a shrinking workforce, is this viable?

 

[beorhthelm]

and in the "who can borrow the most" league, Greens have gone into the lead with £91bn a year for 10 years. thats just on green policy, Odin only know what else they'll spend.

 

[Gwylan]

I reckon it would be pretty simple for you to look through the signature social and taxation policies of the sort of progressive northern European governments being talked about, then have a look at labours manifesto, (ok not released yet, but the last one will be a decent guide) have a look at if you still think Corbyn's policies are far to the left of these.

I've pointed before that the last Labour manifesto wasn't greatly different from the one offered by the centre-right government in Germany. Anyone who thinks that Corbyn is a far-left politician is really not someone with much knowledge of politics - Labour's policies are pretty mainstream in Europe (and for more centrist than Labour's manifestos in the 80s)

I'd say that most jobs you can't hack 20% off the working week and still retain the same level of productivity.

Pretty much every company that has experimented with a 4-day week has reported a big boost in productivity. Microsoft Japan found that productivity increased by 40% when it implemented it

 

[Chicken Run]

I've pointed before that the last Labour manifesto wasn't greatly different from the one offered by the centre-right government in Germany. Anyone who thinks that Corbyn is a far-left politician is really not someone with much knowledge of politics - Labour's policies are pretty mainstream in Europe (and for more centrist than Labour's manifestos in the 80s)



Pretty much every company that has experimented with a 4-day week has reported a big boost in productivity. Microsoft Japan found that productivity increased by 40% when it implemented it

Agreed but after 20 years people would want a three day week[emoji23]

 

[KZNSeagull]

Early 2000s. Recent enough for you?

When they were following the Conservative budget plans as promised in the 1997 election. Once Gordon Brown changed approach, spending went from 35% of GDP in 2000/01 to 47% in 2009/10.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Agreed but after 20 years people would want a three day week[emoji23]

And if, a further 20 years down the line, it was proven that through new working methods, processes and structures, productivity could be maintained, within a 3 day week, why shouldn't they want that?

Western capitalist society has its attitudes to the work / life balance all wrong.

 

[Baldseagull]

the contradiction highlights a flaw. its may be good idea in principle, some times, for some businesses, but may not be applicable or beneficial in all business and industries. the examples tend to be in salaried knowledge working roles where a lot of work is not necessarily on company time anyway. does this translate to hourly paid work, factories or service sector where people need to be present? fewer hours mean more jobs, good in theory but with a shrinking workforce, is this viable?

Forgive me, but is that not what I said?

Productivity is not going to increase in every job, but I bet most would on a per hour basis. For me, when I was Bricklaying, more went down in the morning than the afternoon, so maybe a shorter working day, as opposed to shorter working week would work better, but I still think a presumption of 32 hours being the norm is no bad thing, even if some roles would then be paid less per week, it might be a bit uncomfortable in transition, but I think most people would be happier in the end. No one ever said on their death bed "I wish I spent more time at work".

 

[Bold Seagull]

When they were following the Conservative budget plans as promised in the 1997 election. Once Gordon Brown changed approach, spending went from 35% of GDP in 2000/01 to 47% in 2009/10.

Spending is a different graph to the debt as a % of GDP. Any road they were re-elected on a new manifesto in 2001 so your argument doesn't stack up, and of course 2009/10 was post global financial crash when GDP fell dramatically so of course % of public spending went up even though the actual spend may have gone down.

 

[Farehamseagull]

And if, a further 20 years down the line, it was proven that through new working methods, processes and structures, productivity could be maintained, within a 3 day week, why shouldn't they want that?

Western capitalist society has its attitudes to the work / life balance all wrong.

This.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

I've pointed before that the last Labour manifesto wasn't greatly different from the one offered by the centre-right government in Germany. Anyone who thinks that Corbyn is a far-left politician is really not someone with much knowledge of politics - Labour's policies are pretty mainstream in Europe (and for more centrist than Labour's manifestos in the 80s)



Pretty much every company that has experimented with a 4-day week has reported a big boost in productivity. Microsoft Japan found that productivity increased by 40% when it implemented it

Funniest statement of the General election campaign so far ... Corbyn was to the left of Michael Foot and his choice of Shadow Chancellor has the stated goal of bringing down capitalism FFS

 

[Rodney Thomas]

When they were following the Conservative budget plans as promised in the 1997 election. Once Gordon Brown changed approach, spending went from 35% of GDP in 2000/01 to 47% in 2009/10.

There was a big global economic crisis between those two figures

 

[hans kraay fan club]

If you work in a call centre or a barbers or a supermarket checkout or pretty much any other job, 20% less time, means to the employer that they need 20% more staff.

More.

If each staff member works 20% less hours, (assuming the same total number of hours must be maintained), then the employer needs 25% more staff.


*show your working*
In the example workplace, there are 20 shifts per week that must be filled.
Currently 4 staff members each fill 5 shifts.
If you cut each person's responsibilities to 4 shifts, you require 5 staff members.

Increase from 4 to 5, is 25%

 

[Bold Seagull]

Funniest statement of the General election campaign so far ... Corbyn was to the left of Michael Foot and his choice of Shadow Chancellor has the stated goal of bringing down capitalism FFS

Given your commitment to rooting out all forms of discrimination, surprised you haven't posted Tory Peer Lady Warsi's statement who says "Tories still failing to tackle 'racism at every level". Maybe that just passed you by and the 15 or so Tory councillors found to be posting islamaphobic and racist comments through social media, or do you only focus on alleged anti-semitism?