observer Posted April 27, 2009 Report Share Posted April 27, 2009 Bit confused by Harridan Harman's latest joust with windmills over "equal pay"? They're now talking of a legal requirement for Companies to produce publicly the pay scales of their staff, yet more red tape to go with the 75% of such petty laws we get from the EU. So, employer thinks (especially in this economic crisis); to hell with this; I'll just employ agency staff from now on, and pass the buck to them - great result Mssss Harman. It's already cost Local Council Tax Payers ?billions to impliment a spurious equal pay policy; EG; Binmen being compared to Dinner Ladies etc - when they are totally different jobs - one can accept, if a man worked on school dinners he'd get equal pay with other dinner persons, likewise, if a woman works on the bins, they'd get the same rate as the men - but the two jobs are different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 So, employer thinks (especially in this economic crisis); to hell with this; I'll just employ agency staff from now on, and pass the buck to them - great result Mssss Harman. Good old Mrs Dromey I think what some in the private wealth creating sector might say is, to hell with this............... I'll move my business overseas...or close it down completely. Equality in the dole queue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 I think they are desperately trying to curry favour with the public. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inky pete Posted April 28, 2009 Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 Even in the same job equal pay does not necessarily mean equality. Consider two non-gender specific employees, "A" and "B". "A" has been working in the same role for 10 years and has maintained an excellent attendence record throughout that time. "B" has also been working in the same role as "A" for 10 years, but in that time has had career breaks totalling 4 years and also has a much poorer attendence record - having taken frequent periods of time off, often at very short notice, to attend to family commitments. "A" has trained and worked with temporary staff during "B"'s career breaks and has consistently covered "B"'s duties without complaint during the short notice absences. As an employee, who is worth the higher salary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted April 28, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 28, 2009 Fair point Inky; alas it's all part of the feminist domination of NuLab; where they won't take their husband's name, won't face up to the physical limitations imposed upon them by nature etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted May 2, 2009 Report Share Posted May 2, 2009 Is your last post on here an example of your new hobby flaming Obs, 10 out of 10 for trying, shame no Ladies rose to your challenge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted May 2, 2009 Report Share Posted May 2, 2009 Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted May 2, 2009 Report Share Posted May 2, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted May 2, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 2, 2009 .. and heres me thinking you were a lady Kyje - cos you sound like one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.