Re: Business (sole trader) has undergone a monitoring visit from the CIF pension sche
I think I'm getting it. When you said 'everyone went into this with their eyes open', you didn't really mean everyone - is that it? You meant 'everyone except the employees of ssap16's brother's company' or something like that - have I got it now
This is of course the standard IBEC/PD tactic of attempting to divert attention from the core issue by creating a war of name-calling and labelling. If expecting employees to get the pension payments to which they are legally entitled is considered to be 'simplistic 1920's style socialist views', then mea culpa - I'm guilty, and proud to be.
Right, I’ll explain it again for the hard of understanding.
I have already stated my views on what ssap 16’s brother has done; it was wrong and he deserved whatever he gets. My comments were made on the more general point made by MOB that when employees are complicit in, or the instigators of, underhand practices it is neither reasonable nor logical to treat them as victims of their employer. These are two separate issues but as with many threads here on AAM a specific post can lead into a more general discussion.
I am neither a member of, nor have I any association with, IBEC or the PD's. I have no idea why you seek to introduce yet another red herring into the discussion.
I do not think that expecting employees to get the pension payments to which they are legally entitled is considered to be 'simplistic 1920's style socialist views', I do consider trying to pigeon-hole everyone into a “worker” or “boss” identity is totally outdated and in this day and age just plain stupid and therefore a 'simplistic 1920's style socialist views'.
It’s time to recognise that in a country with a will regulated labour market, an educated workforce and full employment it’s possible that employees can, in some cases, call the shots. That’s the point that MOB made and the point that I commented on. Read the thread, read what has been said and read it in context. I do not support any employer abusing their position and screwing over their employees to line their own pockets and neither do most employers. That is not to say that your point that many of the employees in the building industry are non-nationals and need extra protection is not correct but it does not negate the more general point about complicity by many within the industry.
There are not two moral classes in this country, or any country, where the pure of heart “workin’ man” get abused by the big bad evil fat-cat bosses. Sorry if that doesn’t sit well with your deeply flawed political philosophy up there on the moral high ground but as with most things reality is more complicated than that.