More records broken by Labour.

[Mottie]

Well, Rachel was right with her further and faster promise, wasn’t she. Further and faster into the shït!

UK unemployment rate hits near five-year high as wage growth slows

The Office for National Statistics said the figures reflected "weak hiring activity", with unemployment among 16 to 24-years-olds now at 16.1%.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Murdochcat]

In fairness to Reeves she did go on about growth - but it seems the growth she is delivering is the wrong type

 

[motorbiking]

Growth in the benefits bill, growth in unemployment.

Labour the party of working people

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

Yet they're still going ahead with all the increased employment "rights", which will make things far far worse.

I run a small one-man business. I've considered expanding it, employing people, getting premises etc. It could work. It had been at the back of my mind for a few years. Since labour landed, absolutely no way whatsoever. I'd end up with someone on sick leave from day 2 with some form of imaginary sadness and another claiming wrongful dismmissal as I said something in the wrong tone of voice. I'm a tiny microcosm of what's going on across the country.

The NI rises was a direct tax on jobs, taking an extra £600++ per employee from companies, the outlandish minimum wage rises made things worse, now they're making companies terrified of the consequences of hiring anyone at all.

Labour have never understood unintended conequences. For every right-sounding action there's an equal and opposite economic reaction.

Recession time.

 

[Mottie]

I'd end up with someone on sick leave from day 2 with some form of imaginary sadness

When Mrs Mottie left her NHS typist job last year she was replaced by a 21 year old male who, by sheer coincidence, was a member of the same happy clappy church as one of the managers. He lasted two weeks before chucking a sickie. He’s still on sick leave now and he started last October.

 

[motorbiking]

Unfortunately I also had to hire outside the U.K. due to the planned changed.

I’d support lowering it back to 12 months from 2 years, but day 1 is nonsense. Makes us the toughest in Europe. Even Germany has 5 months.

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

They've amended the rights to unfair dismissal from day one to 6 months fairly recently, in place of the current 2 years. But sickness and paternity leave is still from day one instead of from 2 years. Which is just bonkers, it's a chancers' charter.

I'd say 12 months would be a sensible compromise for all rights, 2 years is too long. But as ever nobody's in favour of a sensible middle-ground.

I remember being a young 20-odd year old. Had my own flat, getting low pay, struggling. I was offered a job at about a 20% pay rise. I did take it, but a factor against it was that I'd lose my employment rights for 2 years from moving. I did consider not making the move and getting the pay rise as I'd lose my rights. The probationary period does feel insecure when you're the one in it.

 

[fillyboy]

Just read that a yougov survey shows 6 out of 10 voters don't trust Starmer.

I suspect they surveyed noseall 4 times.

 

[MNW67]

The analysis shows that part of this is a statistical anomaly, because more people are actively looking to work. One of the big criticisms under the Tories was the number of people who were economically inactive. Labour seem to be addressing that, but the flip side is that in the short to medium term that shows up in the figures as higher unemployment. A very interesting development.

 

[MNW67]

I think it's too early to tell.

There are signs that productivity is finally starting to pick up after stagnating under the Tories. If Labour's changes are leading to a more productive workforce then, in the short term, unemployment would be expected to rise.

So, we have a double whammy of more people wanting to work because of better conditions. And employers having to modernise and become more productive. And both these factors lead to a short term rise in the unemployment statistics, whilst the economy adjusts to a new baseline.

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

The analysis shows that part of this is a statistical anomaly, because more people are actively looking to work.

Perhaps this is news to a sweet innocent socialist... You don't seem to know that to get employment you need both employees and employers!

There are plenty of potential employees. But employers are running a mile due to this government's crazy policies.

 

[Ivor Windybottom]

I think it's too early to tell.

There are signs that productivity is finally starting to pick up after stagnating under the Tories. If Labour's changes are leading to a more productive workforce then, in the short term, unemployment would be expected to rise.

So, we have a double whammy of more people wanting to work because of better conditions. And employers having to modernise and become more productive. And both these factors lead to a short term rise in the unemployment statistics, whilst the economy adjusts to a new baseline.

You have a very creative imagination when it comes to dreaming up excuses for failure.

 

[MNW67]

You have a very creative imagination when it comes to dreaming up excuses for failure.

I totally understand your scepticism.

But I am trying to look at the whole issue objectively, applying first principles. As regards the two issues I raised, that an increase in productivity and more people entering the workforce are bound to increase the unemployment rate in the short term, do you at least agree with the theoretical basis.

 

[aveatry]

Don't worry the usual lot will be along shortly to tell us that its all going to plan and to suck it up boyo.

 

[MNW67]

Perhaps this is news to a sweet innocent socialist... You don't seem to know that to get employment you need both employees and employers!

There are plenty of potential employees. But employers are running a mile due to this government's crazy policies.

But looking at it objectively. The big criticism of the UK economy under the Tories was that productivity was stagnant and that too many people were economically inactive.

We now have a situation where fewer people are economically inactive and productivity is increasing. So, both problems, on the face of it, are being fixed. Objectively, that has to be a good thing, surely?