The CE mark, is it still required?

[JohnD]

Have a look for honest, unbiased advice in here

 

[ericmark]

I do like the corner shop which seems to be open all hours, and most seem to be run by immigrants, I also want my teeth looked after again most dentists who will work for NHS wages are immigrants. As to if it's correct to take highly trained people away from the country that trained them is another question.

But what does upset me is to see immigrants getting preferential treatment, when I worked on the building of T5 workers from the UK had to find accommodation and this was the hardest part of working away, but those from abroad were given accommodation in a specially built block. The same also happens when we go abroad we are provided with accommodation we are not required to find it for our selves. OK in Hong Kong it was only found for so many weeks then we had to find our own. But the main thing which stops UK people moving to get a job is finding some where to live.

It is a skill finding accommodation I worked Wales and West on BT exchanges fitting a new access system ready for 2000, and it was not how to fit the system which was hard, but where to stay. In some areas I spent hours ringing around to find somewhere within budget, I was allowed £25 per night which was rather hard to find places within that price.

Now with other jobs I have been put up in hotels, and likely it cost the firm less as I was not spending hours when I should have been working looking for somewhere to live. In one town I felt like Harry Potter when I found my bed room was under the stairs.

 

[Kmurphy]

Sigh

 

[ban-all-sheds]

those from abroad were given accommodation in a specially built block.

Given by whom?

In a block built by (paid for) by whom?

 

[ericmark]

The employer, the point is the employer does not treat Expat labour and Indigenous labour in the same way. Even away labour and local labour is often treated different. Working away from home one wants to work all the hours one can while away, then have a time at home, the law does limit today how many hours with non continuous processes but the types of jobs where away labour is used are often continuous processes anyway. Once one starts to pour concrete then it has to be completed and if things go wrong it can extend the time but stopping and restarting is simply not on. So long working hours are often part of the job.

But when the shift is complete being bused to a accommodation block where your meal is waiting for you, and your room has been tidied and bed made for you is very different to driving to accommodation making your own meal and cleaning your own room.

This is nothing to do really with EU it is the same world wide. The working practice will often have 12 hour shifts for a long period then a "holiday" when you return home for a long week end, or even a week or month depending on the distance travelled and cost and time needed to travel home.

It really does not matter if the worker is from Scotland or Poland when working in London he is working away from home. But the work deal is very different the Polish will not get the same "Wage" as the Scottish guy it will likely be less, but he will get in the deal accommodation, laundry, travel, and other perks. In some cases they are ripped off as the perks are calculated well above real cost.

In the UK tied houses have in the main gone, and although now repealed the truck act stopped payment in kind. But it has not really worked, when I have worked on many jobs we were forced to eat in works canteens so we are forced to buy from the company we work for. But if all is provided then chasing work is easy. But if you have to find somewhere to live then it is much harder. I know in UK I used a caravan and I was breaking rules staying in the caravan in the winter where the sites did not have all year round licence in Bristol my caravan was actually hidden inside a barn.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

I seem to recall a former senior Tory talking (in a positive, admiring way) about how when his father couldn't find work he got on his bike and went looking for it.

If you think it's OK for someone from Ponders End to do that, but it's not OK for someone from Prague to do it then you are a racist. You are discriminating against the unemployed carpenter from Croatia in a way which you do not discriminate against the unemployed bricklayer from Bromsgrove.

You are a racist.

This is a real eye-opener; I have never heard that as a definition of racism before. Are you saying that foreigners should have as equal a chance of getting British jobs as native British people?

It is not racism to give priority to British people for British jobs. Racism is the belief that other races are inferior to your own.

 

[EFLImpudence]

This is a real eye-opener; I have never heard that as a definition of racism before.

Well, racism is not the correct word when referring to Europeans but you know what is meant.

Are you saying that foreigners should have as equal a chance of getting British jobs as native British people?

You obviously disagree but if the best person for the job is chosen then why should that not happen? Big business is not going to employ less suitable people just because they are home-grown.
That businesses may pay foreign workers less is another matter but has happened throughout history and if illegal today then why is nothing done about it?

It is not racism to give priority to British people for British jobs. Racism is the belief that other races are inferior to your own.

If the true definition of and reason for what was happening is racism (e.g. black people) then to do that is illegal.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Are you saying that foreigners should have as equal a chance of getting British jobs as native British people?

Are you saying that Lancastrians should not have as equal a chance of getting jobs in York as native Yorkshiremen?

You don't seem to get it.

If you favour British people over German, or discriminate against Germans because they are German, then you are discriminating against them because of their "race".

It is not racism to give priority to British people for British jobs.

Yes it is.

And it is illegal.

Racism is the belief that other races are inferior to your own.

It is also racial discrimination.

 

[Doggit]

Well - maybe I am wrong, and feel free to correct me, but I have the impression that you voted to leave. Given that one of the reasons, and for many the major reason, they did so was to "regain control of our borders" then what you voted for was to stop the people who work the hardest from being able to come here

Sorry BAS, but I'm not sure if you read the posts properly, or like some others on this site, just wait to pounce to prove your point.

I wanted to vote to stay, but Camerons inept "re-negotiation showed we would soon become subjects of the EU, so I felt that I has no choice tut to vote to leave to regain control because we are being governed by unelected officials from the EU, and uncaring politicians in this country. I am a second generation immigrant, and would never deny anyone that's prepared to work hard, the right to come here and work. But I also have the right to say no thanks to those who come looking for handouts, or those that show violence and disregard to those who give them sanctuary, because we are a small country, and we are being overwhelmed, and someone has to stand up and say "no more" to the way we are being treated.

And preferring to give a job to a British person rather than a foreigner is called protectionism, not racism, and whilst it's not much better than racism, it's something done the world over, so please get off your high horse with a one track mind.

 

[EFLImpudence]

If I may:

I am a second generation immigrant,

Oh dear, some might say you are guilty of sheer hypocrisy and complete lack of awareness.

and would never deny anyone that's prepared to work hard, the right to come here and work.

My family has been here for hundreds of years - possibly, as far as any can say, for ever - should I be entitled to a job before you?

But I also have the right to say no thanks to those who come looking for handouts, or those that show violence and disregard to those who give them sanctuary, because we are a small country, and we are being overwhelmed, and someone has to stand up and say "no more" to the way we are being treated.

What would think if I said you are not entitled to use 'we' yet?

And preferring to give a job to a British person rather than a foreigner is called protectionism, not racism, and whilst it's not much better than racism, it's something done the world over, so please get off your high horse with a one track mind.

It's still poor business if you do that regardless of suitability.

 

[Doggit]

Oh dear, some might say you are guilty of sheer hypocrisy and complete lack of awareness.

Why, I'm not against immigration if someone wants to work, so exactly where's the hypocricy?

My family has been here for hundreds of years - possibly, as far as any can say, for ever - should I be entitled to a job before you?

So's my mothers family, I have a Greek father, so which half of me do thinks in the wrong. But no, neither of us is entitled to a job, you need to earn it on merit. Or is it that YOU think you're entitled to a job before me.

What would think if I said you are not entitled to use 'we' yet?

I would say that you come across as a racist.

It's still poor business if you do that regardless of suitability.

I wouldn't disagree you with you on that point, but I was trying to show BAS the correct word to use.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

I felt that I has no choice tut to vote to leave to regain control

So I was not wrong - you did vote to leave.

Camerons inept "re-negotiation showed we would soon become subjects of the EU

In what way?

Can you show some official, and definite, plans? Or are are you for some reason believing the sh*te published in the likes of the Daily Bile?

so I felt that I has no choice tut to vote to leave to regain control because we are being governed by unelected officials from the EU

In what way? I think you'll find that the laws we have in the UK are the ones passed by the UK legislature.

Unelected? Less than 25% of the electorate said they wanted the current government to be in power, but they claim that they have a mandate for their ideologically driven dismantling of the Welfare State.

Unelected? We had as PM a man who was not elected by us to do that job from 2007 to 2010, and soon we'll have another one (or woman).

Unelected? Every year thousands of Statutory Instruments come into effect with little or no scrutiny by our elected representatives, and anyone who doubts the insidiousness of this should remember that they are not all tweaks to how much insulation you should have in your loft - recently significant new laws have been introduced using them, including benefit cuts which were not in the Conservative manifesto and so cannot be said to have a mandate from even 24% of the electorate.

Unelected? The House of Lords?

Unelected? An hereditary Head of State?

Unelected? There is indeed a lot wrong with the "democracy" of the EU, but then there is also a great deal wrong with the "democracy" of this country. A bit of reading about the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Act and "skeleton Bills" should chill the blood of anybody who believes in democracy.

A problem with democracy in the EU is no more of a reason to leave it than the problem with ours is a reason to emigrate.

and uncaring politicians in this country

Now that is true.

Please present a reasoned argument showing how leaving the EU (which can't be reversed for several decades) is a better way to respond to uncaring politicians than voting them out in elections which happen 10x as frequently?

And please show how leaving the EU will actually bring about a change in how caring our politicians are. NB - swapping one set of uncaring unrepresentative elites for another doesn't count.

I am a second generation immigrant, and would never deny anyone that's prepared to work hard, the right to come here and work.

You've thrown your lot in with, and given enormous succour to, people who do want to do just that.

Also, as EU migrants are more likely to work than UK nationals, and much more likely to work than migrants from outside the EU, please present a reasoned argument showing how leaving the EU so that we can "control who comes in" is actually going to improve things. I wonder what you will all do when the only chance we have of getting a trade deal which does not crucify us is to continue to allow freedom of movement anyway.

But I also have the right to say no thanks to those who come looking for handouts

Please tell us how many of those there really are. Feel free to provide actual facts, not re-hashed tabloid lies.

or those that show violence and disregard to those who give them sanctuary

Please show how being an EU member stops us from applying our laws to people who break them here if those people are not UK citizens.

because we are a small country, and we are being overwhelmed

No and no - you sound like you actually believe the tabloid lies.

and someone has to stand up and say "no more" to the way we are being treated.

The way we are being treated is down to our government(s), not the EU.

It was madness and an act of disgusting selfishness to vote to leave the EU as a protest against our government.

And preferring to give a job to a British person rather than a foreigner is called protectionism, not racism, and whilst it's not much better than racism, it's something done the world over, so please get off your high horse with a one track mind.

No - it is racism.

If you discriminate against someone because of their race, or because they are foreign, that is exactly what it is.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Oh dear, some might say you are guilty of sheer hypocrisy and complete lack of awareness.

Why, I'm not against immigration if someone wants to work, so exactly where's the hypocricy?

You want to deny others that which your Father has enjoyed.

My family has been here for hundreds of years - possibly, as far as any can say, for ever - should I be entitled to a job before you?

So's my mothers family, I have a Greek father, so which half of me do thinks in the wrong. But no, neither of us is entitled to a job, you need to earn it on merit. Or is it that YOU think you're entitled to a job before me.

On merit - unless you arrived last week.
I am afraid you are confusing my retorts with your original comments.
Isn't what you originally wanted that jobs should go to those who had been here the longest?

What would think if I said you are not entitled to use 'we' yet?

I would say that you come across as a racist.

Accepting the wrong definition of the word; is that not what you are saying to those who have just arrived?

It's still poor business if you do that regardless of suitability.

I wouldn't disagree you with you on that point, but I was trying to show BAS the correct word to use.

I thought you wanted the jobs to go to the British before Non-British.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Are you saying that foreigners should have as equal a chance of getting British jobs as native British people?

Are you saying that Lancastrians should not have as equal a chance of getting jobs in York as native Yorkshiremen?

You don't seem to get it.

No, I don't sorry! I don't understand your argument and it looks like you don't understand mine, so I'll leave it at that; no offence intended or taken.

 

[ericmark]

I remember my dad telling me how he came back from the war and a dilutee was doing an engineering job in the local steel works where my mother lived and he went in and insisted he was given that job, it was his right to have the job as he had served an apprenticeship. The fact the dilutee had being doing the job for 3 or 4 years during the war made no difference my dad had done an apprenticeship so the job was given to my dad.

I think that was totally wrong, but that is what people going to fight were promised, on return if they did return they would walk back into their old jobs, fact my father had not worked in the steel works before the war did not stop him demanding the job after the war. At that time trade unions were really trade unions and if the union said you were not good enough for the trade then you didn't work in that trade, it was a closed shop.

To allow free movement of labour in many ways is good, My nieces have done just that, they both work in Germany and they think it was totally wrong to move the goal posts without allowing them to vote. People in Gib could vote but not British that had worked for over three years abroad in other EU countries. Not allowing them to vote was totally wrong, and we know had they been allowed to vote then we would have a remain result.

My nieces are British and they can trace their family back for 100's of years all British but not allowed the vote. Timing is everything, had this vote been in 1988 I would not have been allowed to vote, because I was at that time in the Falklands, but I had not emigrated I was always intending to return to UK. My family was all in the UK.

I have always chased the work, OK not on my bike, I used a paraffin budgie, but stopping me voting because I have chased the work is wrong.