I understand that, only that would mean substantial extra employees that they have given no figures for or costings for public employees/employers let alone private companies. Given we are nearly at peak employment, where will all the extra employees come from, live, hospitals, doctors, schools? this is ontop of the already made promises by labour I worked in a unionised industry when the 42 hour eu working time directive came out and we had the bizzare situation of a manager and union rep going around the office. The manager was handing out the rights under the wtd and the rep had the opt out which was signed by most staff as the union phrased it at the time, no one is going to stop our members earning as much as they want. To clarify this however I will use the part of labours 2019 manifesto that covers this Page 62 Labour will tackle excessive working hours. Within a decade we will reduce average full-time weekly working hours to 32 across the economy, with no loss of pay, funded by productivity increases. We will meet this target by: • Ending the opt-out provision for the EU Working Time Directive and enforcing working-time regulations. Labour will make it illegal to work more than 4 days, no matter what the worker wants and effectively putting a block on extra earnings for the worker https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Real-Change-Labour-Manifesto-2019.pdf
Kier Starmer has merely zipped his scrotum into his jeans again, nasty accident but something he's well used to by now. It's in the eyes, it's a look that only those that know, know
Nooob you have repeatedly said that things in the (Tory) manifesto's were not obligations nor promises, simply pledges which is why it was OK not to do any of the following for ten years. Balance the books - Never happened Reduce Immigration - Never happened Build 260,000 homes per year - Never happened Maintain law & order - not slash the 20,000 police & probation and end up with acid and knife fights across the country Build grammar schools - Never happened Spend more per head on education & NHS - Never happened So maybe LAB will miss one out too? Just an idea.
Are you saying as a staunch labour supporter that you don't expect labour to carry out their 2019 manifesto promises already? Phew, that trust didn't last long Does the shadow cabinet know about your distrust of their honesty to carry out their manifesto promises? Labour, the alledged party of the working man, is going to make it illegal for workers to earn extra money if they want to work beyond 32 hours a week.
I point out the factual failings/ errors of who ever makes them; currently the Tories -and often you- are the lowest hanging fruit. If that in your opinion makes me staunch, thats your affair. Labour haven't fcuked anything up for years -save for getting themselves the chance to do so.
I'm happy to live in my skin, but you two that raises another question spewing bile all day against the JC and the Labour Party with no affect you numpties after all there is only 10-11 Labour voters who have manned up on this thread. My contempt for Tories knows no bounds you are right, and the country will probably return BJ and his flock shortly. I just hope you are all ready for the shit that is about to happen, " Yam o hyd ".
She will though she won’t want to be a media pawn She wouldn’t get off the floor because when she moved it hurt She did the same thing in the hospital I do have a witness that can verify if they remember
Well jez let me show you why that 32 hour a week is an issue Labour have said in the 2019 manifesto they will make the living wage at £10 an hour whilst at the same time saying it will be illegal to work more than 32 hours. This would give an average lower wage of £320 a week according to the ons, the current average wage (with no time limit on hours) is £461 a week https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentan...ageweeklyearningsingreatbritain/september2019 Labours dianeonmics means by raising the minimum wage but restricting the hours, means a loss on the average weekly wage for the lower wage man and women of £141 a week and it being illegal to for anyone to work any extra hours to make up that £141 a week loss So a £141 a week loss over 52 weeks equates too a £7,332 a year in wages loss. this will push hundreds of thousands onto working tax credits and the benefits system that was holey avoidable when they could work when ever they wanted How will labour fund those extra benefits that they have created by making it illegal to earn a fair wage?
Its obviously a mistake in the manifesto, or planning/ calculation. It hasn't happened, and it won't happen in that form because people will not accept it. This is where comparing what has actually happened as opposed to pledged is important. Its called evidence based findings. Consider the Tories: Unfortunately 320,000 homeless were not in a position to refuse. The public could not stop the extra $1 Trillion National Debt being "spaffed up the wall" either. PS. We do have an aircraft carrier without 'planes & and another for "spares" half built!
Hey dude, I'm just reading from the labour manifesto. On that basis on restricting earnings, 320,000 homeless will look like chicken feed once labour make it illegal to work beyond 32 hours so will see many many more not being able to afford private and social housing rents.
Are those the 50,000 we already have, or an additional group? Matt Hancock's asking for a friend... https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ree-johnson-challenged-over-nhs-pledges-video 'Do you have a nurses tree?': Johnson challenged over NHS pledges – video https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...cked-saying-nurses-still-stand-doctor-enters/ Matt Hancock mocked after saying that some nurses still stand up when a doctor enters a room, as NHS worker quips 'it isn't Downton Abbey'
