Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Heard him muttering on Radio 4 about "Putting a floor under skilled workers wages".
It's seems he's finally figured out that letting nearly one million low and semi-skilled workers into the country would drive down wages across large sectors of the economy ... and that those would be predominately Labour voters.
He was burbling on about introducing some sort of scheme where a worker from overseas would have to be paid the "going rate" for a job so as not to undercut the locals.
Completely unworkable.
At least Mr Corbyn ruled himself out as being able to be the PM today. Good of him to clear that up.
But I don't understand, how can wages in poorer areas be undercut by immigration, when we're constantly being told how much they add to the economy and how much additional net tax they pay?
its a trick, Andy Burnham has been possessed by UKIP.
But I don't understand how can wages in poorer areas be undercut by immigration, when we're constantly being told how much they add to the economy and how much additional net tax they pay?
Because your village/sector/employer is one datapoint, and the economy is the average of many datapoints?
But I don't understand, how can wages in poorer areas be undercut by immigration, when we're constantly being told how much they add to the economy and how much additional net tax they pay?
Mr Burnham, by contrast, today insisted that 'to win back the voters we lost to UKIP', Labour must change its approach to immigration.
He told delegates in Brighton: 'In places, a free market in labour benefits private companies more than people and communities. Labour hasn't faced up to that and that's why we look out of touch.
'The truth is that free movement on the current rules is widening inequality. It has built the economic power of the big cities and that is good.
'But it has made life harder for people in our poorest communities, where wages have been undercut and job security lost.'
Leave a comment: