Fergie at FA today

Originally Posted by Spiffy

I'm not, I'm talking generally and you're citing one offs. Generally speaking, if the business you work for were to expand, they would generally expand the site that's cheaper to recruit for and has less red tape when getting rid of staff if it doesn't work out. It's why Peugeot has expanded it's sites in the UK and not in France, It's more expensive to recruit and lay off employees in France.

Anyway, I'm not talking shit. Have a good evening.

Ah OK. So I just dreamed that they were going to lay people off in Aberdeen and recruit people here? FWIW I've worked in quite a few countries in Europe all with better unions than in the UK and they were all doing ok for themselves whilst UK bases were shutting down or getting rid of people. BAE shipped all it's work out to Poland and Romania (before they joined the EU) and China because the labour is cheaper, and they're cheeky £#%&!ers seeing a lot of the jobs were military contracts for the UK government they only got on the premise of keeping people in work . Whilst the French, Germans, Italians and Spanish seemed to manage OK without shipping work off to cheaper (and poorer quality workmanship) countries. But like I said I'm not arguing about it, there isn't any point as you aren't going to change your views.

i wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if the @#%&!s where lining up a whopping ban or more severe sanctions.

but after the inept performance of one of their officials last sunday they wouldn't have a leg to stand on. hence the supposedly lenient treatment.

Originally Posted by Spiffy

That's why we have lower unemployment than France and Germany.

it's not - it's one possible way to reduce unemployment. it comes at great cost socially imo and it's simply not very good for many reasons. two especially stand out: first, however low you go, there will always be another country willing to lower its standards even more and, second, it actually doesn't keep unemployment particularly low. it shifts the economy into creating mcjobs with little security and poor pay where more people have work, but not work which can support a family with security and some kind of pride.

look at the figures (early 2009):

uk unemployment rate: 5.6
germany (that quagmire of labour regulation): 7.8
france: 7.4

but also
netherlands: 4
austria (one of the most regulated countries in the world with an extremely high social level):3.8

and those pesky scandinavians
denmark: 1.9
norway: 2.6
sweden: 6.2
finland 6.4
iceland 1.6


drawing a simple equation between labour standards and unemployment rates just doesn't hold up. and that's quite apart from the loss of skills, know-how, industrial capacity and potential for invention etc etc.

source:

http://www.indexmundi.com/map/?t=0&v=74&r=eu&l=en



back on the original point, anybody got figures for penalties given to/conceded by different clubs this year? we must be near the bottom in terms of penalties won, surely.

Originally Posted by borsuk

it's not - it's one possible way to reduce unemployment. it comes at great cost socially imo and it's simply not very good for many reasons. two especially stand out: first, however low you go, there will always be another country willing to lower its standards even more and, second, it actually doesn't keep unemployment particularly low. it shifts the economy into creating mcjobs with little security and poor pay where more people have work, but not work which can support a family with security and some kind of pride.

look at the figures (early 2009):

uk unemployment rate: 5.6
germany (that quagmire of labour regulation): 7.8
france: 7.4

but also
netherlands: 4
austria (one of the most regulated countries in the world with an extremely high social level):3.8

and those pesky scandinavians
denmark: 1.9
norway: 2.6
sweden: 6.2
finland 6.4
iceland 1.6


drawing a simple equation between labour standards and unemployment rates just doesn't hold up. and that's quite apart from the loss of skills, know-how, industrial capacity and potential for invention etc etc.

source:

http://www.indexmundi.com/map/?t=0&v=74&r=eu&l=en



back on the original point, anybody got figures for penalties given to/conceded by different clubs this year? we must be near the bottom in terms of penalties won, surely.

And having worked in all these countries plus Switzerland and Italy, the UK has the worst pay, conditions and bosses but gets work done no faster. Hence why I £#%&!ed the place off 5 years ago and have never been back for work.

Originally Posted by borsuk

it's not - it's one possible way to reduce unemployment. it comes at great cost socially imo and it's simply not very good for many reasons. two especially stand out: first, however low you go, there will always be another country willing to lower its standards even more and, second, it actually doesn't keep unemployment particularly low. it shifts the economy into creating mcjobs with little security and poor pay where more people have work, but not work which can support a family with security and some kind of pride.

look at the figures (early 2009):

uk unemployment rate: 5.6
germany (that quagmire of labour regulation): 7.8
france: 7.4

but also
netherlands: 4
austria (one of the most regulated countries in the world with an extremely high social level):3.8

and those pesky scandinavians
denmark: 1.9
norway: 2.6
sweden: 6.2
finland 6.4
iceland 1.6


drawing a simple equation between labour standards and unemployment rates just doesn't hold up. and that's quite apart from the loss of skills, know-how, industrial capacity and potential for invention etc etc.

source:

http://www.indexmundi.com/map/?t=0&v=74&r=eu&l=en



back on the original point, anybody got figures for penalties given to/conceded by different clubs this year? we must be near the bottom in terms of penalties won, surely.

Ive a mate who is a 'Strategic Planning Manager' for a large british electronics outfit - his sole job is researching and planning their next move of manufacturing sites. All these @#%&!s do is roam the planet taking max advantage of govt incentives, tax benefits and cheap labour.
They are massively profitable and yet lay folks off with the stroke of a pen. utter @#%&!s

Originally Posted by TripDownMiseryLane

Ive a mate who is a 'Strategic Planning Manager' for a large british electronics outfit - his sole job is researching and planning their next move of manufacturing sites. All these @#%&!s do is roam the planet taking max advantage of govt incentives, tax benefits and cheap labour.
They are massively profitable and yet lay folks off with the stroke of a pen. utter @#%&!s

i've consulted (still do) for a manufacturing company in poland. they now 'do' around 70% of their production in china, meanwhile laying off workers over here, of course. the company has grown very very fast over the last few years, primarily by buying up competitors who still produce in poland/surrounding countries, laying off the workforce and ordering goods to spec from china. the ceo (who i know very well outside of work) is a poland-first flag-waving patriotic type who votes for the more nationalistic of the main parties here.

of course, the share price has gone through the roof since it the company was floated, bonuses for the board ditto, and over the last three years or so they've laid off over 1000 workers at various sites (usually special economic zones in the first place), many with twenty or thirty plus years experience in the field (metalworking - casting, galvanising, grinding etc etc).

well done lads, vodka and tonics all round :shakehead:

Originally Posted by borsuk

i've consulted (still do) for a manufacturing company in poland. they now 'do' around 70% of their production in china, meanwhile laying off workers over here, of course. the company has grown very very fast over the last few years, primarily by buying up competitors who still produce in poland/surrounding countries, laying off the workforce and ordering goods to spec from china. the ceo (who i know very well outside of work) is a poland-first flag-waving patriotic type who votes for the more nationalistic of the main parties here.

of course, the share price has gone through the roof since it the company was floated, bonuses for the board ditto, and over the last three years or so they've laid off over 1000 workers at various sites (usually special economic zones in the first place), many with twenty or thirty plus years experience in the field (metalworking - casting, galvanising, grinding etc etc).

well done lads, vodka and tonics all round :shakehead:

couldn't you advise them otherwise...

Originally Posted by borsuk

i've consulted (still do) for a manufacturing company in poland. they now 'do' around 70% of their production in china, meanwhile laying off workers over here, of course. the company has grown very very fast over the last few years, primarily by buying up competitors who still produce in poland/surrounding countries, laying off the workforce and ordering goods to spec from china. the ceo (who i know very well outside of work) is a poland-first flag-waving patriotic type who votes for the more nationalistic of the main parties here.

of course, the share price has gone through the roof since it the company was floated, bonuses for the board ditto, and over the last three years or so they've laid off over 1000 workers at various sites (usually special economic zones in the first place), many with twenty or thirty plus years experience in the field (metalworking - casting, galvanising, grinding etc etc).

well done lads, vodka and tonics all round :shakehead:

Aint capitalism just great........ This lot are planning to close places before they £#%&!ing open them

Originally Posted by Billy Baroo

couldn't you advise them otherwise...

What, on the basis thats its morally reprehensible? that always goes down well in the boardroom

Originally Posted by Billy Baroo

couldn't you advise them otherwise...

i do, though it's not my field of expertise. it's pointless, though, as it's not the individuals' choice, as they acknowledge privately. if they do anything other than maximise profits and shareholder value then they will be removed, simple as that. once a company is public and the managers no longer own it the logic and pressures are inexorable.

Alan Leighton on SSN now having a moan about Fergie




Edit: talking of taking Fergie to court for defamation of character

I notice the police have introduced a scheme to help podgy coppers back to fitness so they dont have to face humiliation and embarrassment in the workplace.

Far better to tackle the problem that way than to pretend it isnt happening or reprimand people who state the obvious.