Evidently, in some remote corner of Cuba, today is April Fool's day.
Capitalists are so dumb, they actually have to rescued by unions and labour parties, from their own demise.
The guy only wanted a day off for his granny's funeral. Now he's being told to be grateful, he's not scratching a living from the deserts of Sudan.Okay, so it's the decline in Unions and not AI, Automation, the opening up of Southeast Asia and containerisation that has lead to increased wealth inequality in developed countries. Is that what you are saying?
By the way, global capitalism has raised 3 billion people out of poverty in the last 30 years, something socialism abjectly failed to do in the previous 80. If your version of wealth inequality only extends to white people then you are correct. If it includes everyone then you are way off the mark.
You also fail to understand that wealth is created so when Bill Gates gets richer it's not because someone else has got poorer.
But most of all you fail to understand that for the vast majority of people in the world income is what matters, not wealth.
If I'm in negative equity of €200k on my house and earn €175K a year my net wealth is lower than a subsistence farmer in Sudan. In that scenario do you think I'm poorer?
No, he wanted a paid day off to go to the funeral.The guy only wanted a day off for his granny's funeral.
Who said that?Now he's being told to be grateful, he's not scratching a living from the deserts of Sudan.
Who said that?It's an interesting concept though. The idea that wealth is not important,
Who said that?that we be grateful for what we get, as long as we're not homeless or starving.
No it's not, it's American Capital in China. That redistribution of Capital where it can get the greatest return on Labour is what lifted them out of poverty. It's also the reason real incomes in the West have stagnated for the last 40 years. Now with AI and robotics labour is needed less and less to use capital to create wealth.The biggest success story on dragging people out of poverty, in recent times,is the Communist Party of China.
The Labour movement played an important role in Europe around the same time the women's suffrage movement was looking for voted for women. Both served their purpose. One knew it and went away. The other ended up like the pigs in Animal Farm.Before that, it was the Labour movements of Europe.
So where are the Unions when people are really being exploited? I don't see them helping sex workers or domestic workers from non-EU countries. I just see them sucking more money from the State coffers for middle to high earners in already very protected jobs. Holding a gun to the head of the sick and vulnerable to get more and more money isn't what they were meant to be about.I think there’s still a role for unions in today’s economy. Most employers are fair-minded but there a still a number of unscrupulous ones who take unreasonable advantage of workers. This is borne out by some of the WRC adjudication findings.
The trouble with the union movement in this country is that there are far too many of them, they’re inefficient and they don’t really have the organisational capacity to make any meaningful difference.
Jim Larkin would be all in favour of it. He was a very unpleasant person. His son was a much more effective Union leader and a far more reasonable person.Collectively, the union movement should be an instrument for social progress but it’s indisciplined structure has allowed it to be used as cover for extremists who’ll go to the ends of the earth fighting for things like ‘your right’ to get paid for attending your granny’s funeral.
Jim Larkin must be spinning.
That’s my point. That’s the sort of function a good union movement should be providing.So where are the Unions when people are really being exploited? I don't see them helping sex workers or domestic workers from non-EU countries.
Okay, so they aren't doing anything, just suggesting that someone else does something. Got it, thanks.The ICTU submission on the review of section 4 (purchase of sex) of Criminal law (Sexual Offences) was submitted to government last September.
It includes the following aids and welfare supports for women wanting to exit the sex industry
"includes (renewable) temporary residence
permits, help with housing, freedom from tax debt, financial aid, access to medical and mental
health services and education and training supports. It is widely understood that the primary
motivation for entry into prostitution for those that are not trafficked is financial, to alleviate dire
poverty usually, and therefore no legal change will see results in reducing the numbers of women in
prostitution unless it is accompanied by substantial measures to alleviate this poverty and social
exclusion. "
ICTU policy and proposals for Domestic workers protections can be found here.
[broken link removed]
In fairness, IBEC does much the same.Okay, so they aren't doing anything, just suggesting that someone else does something. Got it, thanks.
Yep, but IBEC doesn't claim to be some instrument for social reform. They, like all Trade Unions, are a vested interest group whose function is to further the interests of their paying members. Nothing more, nothing less.In fairness, IBEC does much the same.
IBEC do all that but they’re not slow to try to convey the impression that they’re acting in the national interest. No less disingenuous at times than their union counterparts.Yep, but IBEC doesn't claim to be some instrument for social reform. They, like all Trade Unions, are a vested interest group whose function is to further the interests of their paying members. Nothing more, nothing less.
The function of a Union is to get as much money for as little work at the lowest standards possible, for their members.
The function of IBEC is to get as many handouts for it's members while they pay as little tax as possible and operate to the lowest standards possible.
When vested interest groups have too much power, or when they are misrepresented as something else by a media which is all in that vested interest group, they damage society at large.
Can't disagree with you there. Unions do more harm though. IBEC aren't the reason people are dying on trolleys in A&E's.IBEC do all that but they’re not slow to try to convey the impression that they’re acting in the national interest. No less disingenuous at times than their union counterparts.
A paid day off...See what happens now when someone wants to take a day off for their dear old grandads funeral.
Most employers are fair-minded but there a still a number of unscrupulous ones who take unreasonable advantage of workers. This is borne out by some of the WRC adjudication findings.
Have you noticed that the State seems to always have to comply with WRC recommendations but the Unions can reject them?I often wonder how many of those WRC awards are actually paid. My suspicion is that many employers ignore them completely, especially given that the costs of taking a High Court appeal means that not many of them can afford to. (My former (PS) employer did once and the WRC's asinine recommendation was completely dismissed; sadly, the unfortunate taxpayer had to pick up both side's large legal bills for that one.)
Okay, so they aren't doing anything, just suggesting that someone else does something. Got it, thanks.
Have you noticed that the State seems to always have to comply with WRC recommendations but the Unions can reject them?
Or they are a good employer and look after their staff like the company i work for. They give 10days for parents,6 weeks+ for a child, 2 3 days for grandparents, i was asking on behalf of my daughter.I sometimes wonder why anyone opens up a business anymore with the sense of entitlement people have. By all means go to your grandparents funeral, but to get days off for it at the owners expense? Seriously?
Is that a Multinational?Or they are a good employer and look after their staff like the company i work for. They give 10days for parents,6 weeks+ for a child, 2 3 days for grandparents, i was asking on behalf of my daughter.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?