UK General Election

You might want to look at what happened to the Cadbury plant at Bourneville a few years ago. Shipped to Poland lock stock and barrel and the workforce made redundant, all to squeeze another couple of per cent profit for the principal investors. The factory site is now a housing development.

We're going backwards.
 
MikeG said:
Yeah, sorry, but there are definitely areas where health and safety has gone mad, and a careful roll-back wouldn't harm anyone's actual health or safety.
Click to expand...

There may be cases where the pendulum has swung too far, all I can say is that every time I have looked into one of these hysterical stories I have found it to be a wilful misrepresentation of reasonable legislation.

My favourite was the story about how the EU were planning to ban British barmaids from showing their cleavage. Would you like to guess what the actual proposed legislation was intended for in that case?
 
Darat said:
It does seem that for some reason British employers' representatives, whether political or trade bodies struggle to understand why the UK has a productivity "problem". As a class they seem to be very bemused, after all they have followed the old adage "The beatings will continue until morale improves" and still people won't put that "extra" effort in!
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure productivity isn't a result of lack of effort by workers so much as a lack of investment by employers. People with the latest kit can make more widgets than people using a hammer and anvil, figuratively speaking. In this, I'm with you rather than agin you.
 
Rolfe said:
You might want to look at what happened to the Cadbury plant at Bourneville a few years ago. Shipped to Poland lock stock and barrel and the workforce made redundant, all to squeeze another couple of per cent profit for the principal investors. The factory site is now a housing development.

We're going backwards.
Click to expand...

My point wasn't about the Cadbury plant, it was about Bournville, the enlightened worker's village/ new town, provided by the Cadbury brothers.
 
Pixel42 said:
There may be cases where the pendulum has swung too far, all I can say is that every time I have looked into one of these hysterical stories I have found it to be a wilful misrepresentation of reasonable legislation.

My favourite was the story about how the EU were planning to ban British barmaids from showing their cleavage. Would you like to guess what the actual proposed legislation was intended for in that case?
Click to expand...

This thread will quickly get diverted if we get onto H&S excesses. I'd join such a thread if anyone could be bothered with such a rehash.
 
Pixel42 said:
I'm not seriously suggesting there will be a return to Dickensian working conditions, but once we're out of the EU I foresee a gradual rolling back of a lot of protections in the name of "being competitive". The whole bogus "health and safety gone mad" narrative has been preparing otherwise sensible people into accepting such a roll back for decades.

I certainly hope that our need to continue to trade with the EU will mitigate it, but it's important to remember what life was like for ordinary people before "health and safety went mad". It's never a bad idea to read some Dickens.
Click to expand...

I distinctly remember everyone getting in a pickle at my work when they introduced the working time directives.

Especially the managers.
 
MikeG said:
My point wasn't about the Cadbury plant, it was about Bournville, the enlightened worker's village/ new town, provided by the Cadbury brothers.
Click to expand...


And is anything of that nature likely to be built by anyone in the 21st century?
 
MikeG said:
Yeah, sorry, but there are definitely areas where health and safety has gone mad, and a careful roll-back wouldn't harm anyone's actual health or safety.
Click to expand...
I can appreciate given your profession you are probably subject to hell of health and safety regulations can you provide examples of the "gone mad"?
 
Pixel42 said:
There may be cases where the pendulum has swung too far, all I can say is that every time I have looked into one of these hysterical stories I have found it to be a wilful misrepresentation of reasonable legislation.

My favourite was the story about how the EU were planning to ban British barmaids from showing their cleavage. Would you like to guess what the actual proposed legislation was intended for in that case?
Click to expand...

I asked Google. :o

It was risk assessment for skin cancer and EU commission considered handing out sun cream was an entirely acceptable approach.

"Hands off our barmaids' boobs," squealed The Sun. "The EU has declared a crackpot war on busty barmaids – by trying to ban them from wearing low-cut tops. Po-faced pen pushers have deemed it a health hazard for bar girls to show too much cleavage. And in a daft directive that will have drinkers choking on their pints, Brussels bureaucrats have ordered a cover-up. They say barmaids run a skin cancer risk if they expose themselves to the sun when they go outside to collect glasses."

We have no such intentions, replied the EU, even as The Sun launched a Save Our Jugs campaign. "Of course, bar managers can always use their common sense by handing out sun cream."

http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt...aid-bosoms-the-u-k-s-crazy-anti-eu-food-myths

Euroskepticism is built on lies and deceit. That tells us volumes about it. There are problems with EU, but the only logical answers are the opposite of what Euroskeptics propose.

McHrozni
 
McHrozni said:
I asked Google. :o

It was risk assessment for skin cancer and EU commission considered handing out sun cream was an entirely acceptable approach.

"Hands off our barmaids' boobs," squealed The Sun. "The EU has declared a crackpot war on busty barmaids – by trying to ban them from wearing low-cut tops. Po-faced pen pushers have deemed it a health hazard for bar girls to show too much cleavage. And in a daft directive that will have drinkers choking on their pints, Brussels bureaucrats have ordered a cover-up. They say barmaids run a skin cancer risk if they expose themselves to the sun when they go outside to collect glasses."

We have no such intentions, replied the EU, even as The Sun launched a Save Our Jugs campaign. "Of course, bar managers can always use their common sense by handing out sun cream."

http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt...aid-bosoms-the-u-k-s-crazy-anti-eu-food-myths

Euroskepticism is built on lies and deceit. That tells us volumes about it. There are problems with EU, but the only logical answers are the opposite of what Euroskeptics propose.

McHrozni
Click to expand...
Yep.

The legislation under discussion was obviously aimed at workers who spend many hours in the hot sun, eg agricultural workers in the southern Mediterranean. It was a small part of legislation that covered things like ensuring people who worked with lasers were provided with eye protection. Because of the bogus Sun story (believe it or not readers who swallowed it actually went to Brussels and picketed in protest) that part of it was dropped. So employers who require workers to stay out in the sun all day are still under no obligation to provide them with any protection whatsoever. When you consider how many lives lost to skin cancer this legislation might have prevented it suddenly doesn't seem quite so funny.
 
McHrozni said:
Could one of our resident Brits weigh on this news? Thanks :)

https://www.thecanary.co/2017/04/23/young-people-nasty-surprise-sleeves-theresa-may/

Theresa May might be in store for a nasty surprise from young people in the UK. Huge numbers of them are registering to vote. And if they actually cast their ballots, they could have a massive impact on the outcome of the general election.

McHrozni
Click to expand...

There has definitely been a concerted effort on social media to get young folk to register to vote. I think I saw a number in the region of 50,000 registered in one day recently.

Whether it'll have an impact remains to be seen. So many variables to work through - how many will actually vote? which constituencies are they in? who are they going to vote for?

The Tories had about a 2m vote lead over Labour last GE so it probably won't affect the popular vote. The question would be whether there is sufficient in marginal constituencies to affect the situation with seats.

I imagine the likely effect is somewhere in the middle.
 
McHrozni said:
Could one of our resident Brits weigh on this news? Thanks :)

https://www.thecanary.co/2017/04/23/young-people-nasty-surprise-sleeves-theresa-may/

Theresa May might be in store for a nasty surprise from young people in the UK. Huge numbers of them are registering to vote. And if they actually cast their ballots, they could have a massive impact on the outcome of the general election.

McHrozni
Click to expand...

I wouldn't trust anything that comes from that leftist (virtual) rag, described by Private Eye as a 'pisspoor Corbynite clickbait factory'.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
There has definitely been a concerted effort on social media to get young folk to register to vote. I think I saw a number in the region of 50,000 registered in one day recently.

Whether it'll have an impact remains to be seen. So many variables to work through - how many will actually vote? which constituencies are they in? who are they going to vote for?
Click to expand...

We can deduce some of that from information within the article. From the link above:

But the impact of this registration will only happen if people actually turn out to vote. In 2015, 70% of young people registered to vote. But only 43% actually voted.

This implies about three in five will turn out to vote. I'd reckon that unusually high registration drive also implies a higher voter participation as well, but that's nothing more than speculation.

As for who they will vote for, a high turnout of non-voters just about never favors the incumbents. If the numbers are true the greatest beneficiaries will most likely be Labour and LibDems. The question is how much benefit will they glean, it could easily be a dud, less than voter apathy of regular voters will be.

The Tories had about a 2m vote lead over Labour last GE so it probably won't affect the popular vote. The question would be whether there is sufficient in marginal constituencies to affect the situation with seats.

I imagine the likely effect is somewhere in the middle.
Click to expand...

The real question, I think, is how strong the effect will be. The youth vote could be doubled from past elections (to 86%). That could well be tectonic for British politics. Whether it is achievable or not I have no idea.

McHrozni
 
baron said:
I wouldn't trust anything that comes from that leftist (virtual) rag, described by Private Eye as a 'pisspoor Corbynite clickbait factory'.
Click to expand...

OK thanks, I thought it was something like that from the style it is written :)

McHrozni
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom