Poundland Girl Wins Forced Labour Ruling

[GAC]

zero hour contracts are disgusting, seeing them more and more now for warehouse and security work, what used to be a job that you could survive on is now a joke. iv been offered 3 possible jobs all zero hour contracts when i asked what my average hours over the year could be they couldnt actually provide an answer and said "well you should be ok, as long as you dont take too many holidays" what you mean unpaid holidays.

no wonder people are getting sick of this rubbish, all zero hour contracts do is make a company more profitable while taking money away from the guys who actually do the jobs at the bottom. got to love that thinking, hopefully its only a phase and will die off when they cant actually get people to work for them due to the zero hour contracts.

as for you guys harping on about slavery and what is and isnt slavery, go and start a new thread as its getting old, we know its not whips and chains slavery, but its not voluntary by any stretch of the imagination either.

 

[Haggisman]

Not really it is asking them to do a few weeks work for the 52 x £70ish they would get in a year.

By which logic would you be happy for someone who got a job immediately following a stint in workfare to continue to receive the remainder of those 52 weeks worth of £70 despite the fact they are now working?

After all, according to your logic they've earned it.

 

[shoes]

14 over the past week before you get all smartarse, there aren't always that many jobs I can apply for, for example the past week on Universal Jobsmatch (I do look elsewhere before you start) there has been a grand total of 10 jobs, most of which I don't have experience for, and again before you jump to conclusions and judge me there aren't many public transport links in this town, the buses don't start till near 8am ruling out a lot of factory jobs. Nearest town is a 4 hour walk.

Looking for a job isn't as black and white as you make it out to be, especially in this climate.

Fair comment.

 

[hurfdurf]

Yes, and we are not mates.



Meaningless blather.

You choose to consider everyone to be defined by their sex, sexual orientation and what you see as their race. You choose to judge everyone on the basis of the prejudices and stereotypes that you choose to attach to the groupings that you choose to consider as defining people.

It is your choice to do those things. You are not forced to do it.

I'd rather have honest bigots because they do less harm to egalitarian ideals. They openly oppose those ideals. People like you corrupt them.

Ah right OK, so you think a shop should be able to say "no blacks allowed", because at least they are being honest with their racism?

Egalitarian ideals would be amazing if we were all starting from a level playing field, but unfortunately history has crippled certain minority groups in terms of how society treats them.

 

[Angilion]

Ah right OK, so you think a shop should be able to say "no blacks allowed", because at least they are being honest with their racism?

Is silly lying all you have? Are you really that desperate in your opposition to egalitarian ideals?

I am the person opposing the idea that people should be defined by "race" and judged by racist stereotypes.

You are the person who supports that idea (and various other forms of irrational prejudice and discrimination).

I am not you. I do not agree with you. The fact that I disagree with you does not mean that I agree with you but just favour different groups. You may not be able to understand anything other than group identification and arbritrary stereotyping based on prejudices, but that does not mean that everyone else is equally limited.

I would say that the person running the shop in your example would be honest and would be doing less harm to egalitarian ideals than people like you, but that doesn't mean I agree with them. It just means that given two harmful options I'd pick the less harmful one.

Egalitarian ideals would be amazing if we were all starting from a level playing field, but unfortunately history has crippled certain minority groups in terms of how society treats them.

Egalitarian ideals are what you have if you have egalitarian goals. It's that simple. All you're doing is perpetuating various irrational prejudices on the various minor aspects of biology that you consider of such paramount importance that you think they define everyone. Your views are profoundly anti-egalitarian in themselves because you define people by those minor aspects of biology and you judge people on the basis of the collections of stereotypes and prejudices that you have attached to each grouping (which isn't really a grouping at all, but you won't understand that).

Your views are also profoundly anti-egalitarian because all forms of irrational prejudice and discrimination cause irrational prejudice and discrimination in response. So you are vigorously promoting endless irrational prejudice and discrimination. Whenever people split humanity into group A and group B and promote prejudice and discrimination against group A, it will result in some people responding by promoting prejudice and discrimination against group B. Which will result in some people responding by promoting prejudice and discrimination against group A. Which will result in some people responding by promoting prejudice and discrimination against group B. Which will result in some people responding by promoting prejudice and discrimination against group A. Which will result in some people responding by promoting prejudice and discrimination against group B. That ends only when enough people have egalitarian ideals and promote not just a lack of prejudice and discrimination against either group but an end to the idea that the division into A and B is of such great importance.

Finally, your views are profoundly anti-egalitarian because you're usurping and corrupting the whole idea of equality by saying that equality means defining people on the basis of minor aspects of biology and judging people on the basis of collections of stereotypes and prejudices. You people are like a virus infecting the cells of a host and using them to hide from the host's immune system while manufacturing more copies of the virus. Until, sooner or later, either the host's immune system wins and kills the virus or the virus wins and kills the host.

 

[hurfdurf]

Lol look at all that effort for such libertarian ridiculousness.

 

[Angilion]

Lol look at all that effort for such libertarian ridiculousness.

Writing a couple of hundred words doesn't require a lot of effort for me. It's a shame that it does for you, but your lack of ability doesn't excuse the harm that you're doing.

I find it amusing that someone who thinks that trivial irrelevancies such as the amount of suntan a person has defines who they are can describe anything as "ridiculousness", let alone equality. It's irrational prejudices that are ridiculous. I'd laugh if it wasn't for the grotesque harm they cause.

 

[CREATIVE!11]

Lol look at all that effort for such libertarian ridiculousness.

Too much time on ones hands.

 

[Xordium]

some of us do things just because its the right thing to do.

So you talk the talk - ever walked the walk?

Have you taken that privileged life you were given and done something (for humanity) with it. Not just a smattering here and there but knuckled down and made a long-term difference ...

 

[Agent_Smith357]

Reddit is leaking.

 

[Biohazard]

Hmmmmmmm.

 

[Xordium]

Hmmmmmmm.

Sorry but I am sick of him spouting the same old rubbish. And if you are sick of me spouting the same old rubbish back then I apologise.

 

[Biohazard]

Sorry but I am sick of him spouting the same old rubbish [in the name of equality].

I agree.

 

[Xordium]

I agree.

Yer well I am no better however I truly think before condemning everyone here as rape apologising privileged scoundrels he should have a long look at whether he is walking the walk. Plenty of good people on this forum who have put something back into society and not just taken and plenty of people on this forum who are good people at heart irrespective of their viewpoint on a variety of issues.

If hurfdurf had spent the best part of his life in Africa working for nowt in an orphanage or in some disaster zone getting people back on their feet then fair enough but if you haven't done something like that or an equivalent then he is just another champagne socialist.

 

[Angilion]

Even if he had done something more than playing the White Knight in his head, even if he'd spent years in the field working for something like Medicins san Frontieres, he'd still be a bigot promoting bigotry.

 

[kitch9]

If there is a job to do, it should attract a real wage.

Simple as that.

Meanwhile in the real world.....

Sorry fella, lifes tough. The job market is fiercely competitive and employers want employees with a proven track record.

If you can't demonstrate a decent work ethic due to poor/no references how are you supposed to get a job?

I'm an employer and if a dozen applicants got interviewed for a position I'd pick the guy who said he did these types of schemes to prove themselves, instead of the idle lefty handbanger socialist nutjob who just expected me to give them a job on plate with no references, and who thought these schemes were "exploitation."

 

[Angilion]

True around here, I know quite a few people whose contracted hours have been slashed "because of the economy" who are currently ok because theres work there for them to do their old hours but if the employer wanted to they'd be cut back to minimum hours and barely able to live, pretty miseable situation to be in really.

I know of people in worse situations, with part-time contracted hours. So without "overtime" to bring their working hours up to full time, they won't be able to live. You can't live on ~£90 a week as your sole source of income.

It also makes it impossible to work multiple part-time jobs to make the hours up to full time. If your terms of employment require you to work on demand without fixed hours or even fixed working days, it's obviously impossible to have another job.

Even if the employers who use their peasants in this way continue to allow them to work enough hours to earn a subsistence wage, there are still two issues. Firstly, there's no stability, no reliability. When people don't know from one week to the next whether or not they'll be able to buy food and pay the essential bills (rent, utilities, travel to work, etc), that's quite seriously harmful even when they can buy food and pay the essential bills. Secondly, there's no time off work. People who can barely get by on full time pay can't afford to take their paid holiday time when they only get 1/3rd pay during it, nor can they afford to be ill for the same reason. Assuming they get sick pay anyway, as that's becoming much less common recently.

 

[Angilion]

Meanwhile in the real world.....

Sorry fella, lifes tough. The job market is fiercely competitive and employers want employees with a proven track record.

If you can't demonstrate a decent work ethic due to poor/no references how are you supposed to get a job?

I'm an employer and if a dozen applicants got interviewed for a position I'd pick the guy who said he did these types of schemes to prove themselves, instead of the idle lefty handbanger socialist nutjob who just expected me to give them a job on plate with no references, and who thought these schemes were "exploitation."

That's a lovely use of false dichotomy to enable you to justify yourself to yourself. Which makes me wonder just how badly you treat your employees, assuming you're telling the truth. You want people who are willing to work bad jobs for no pay and consider themselves lucky. You want public money to be used to subsidise businesses that use forced labour instead of paid labour, thus reducing the number of jobs. That doesn't bode well for the employment you offer, nor for your understanding of national economies.

If the government just took the cost of these schemes and put it in their own pockets in a blatant act of corruption and theft, it would be cheaper for the country than these schemes. Even people who don't give a damn about the peasants should be opposed to these schemes because even just in terms of the national economy they are worse than useless, worse than a simple waste of money.

 

[Rroff]

Meanwhile in the real world.....

Sorry fella, lifes tough. The job market is fiercely competitive and employers want employees with a proven track record.

If you can't demonstrate a decent work ethic due to poor/no references how are you supposed to get a job?

I'm an employer and if a dozen applicants got interviewed for a position I'd pick the guy who said he did these types of schemes to prove themselves, instead of the idle lefty handbanger socialist nutjob who just expected me to give them a job on plate with no references, and who thought these schemes were "exploitation."

In the real world theres a balance to be struck so we can all live moderately happy lives and your on one side of that line and they are on the other and neither contributing to make life better for everyone.

 

[CREATIVE!11]

Reddit is leaking.

Wat?