to rather intensely dislike Harriet Harman?

[grovel]

Naggy and bossy at the same time. And so tribal.

[forkful]

FrankieSandford

Have you ever run a business? How do you propose businesses that barely get by manage to run when they have to pay women who take the piss by serially breeding ?

Oh I don't know maybe if they are a small business by making sure that they can claim back OVER 100% of the stautory maternity pay that is paid to the woman (or SPP to men). Seem like a good idea?

Well - WAKE UP - because that IS what happens. Small businesses can claim back 108% of the SMP that they pay out.

Also if you employ women and are even remotely family-friendly you will be rewarded with a lower turnover of staff = more retained knowledge, less training, less recruitment fees = a more profitable business (assuming profit is all you care about....).

It doesn't make any sense to employ someone who can take a year off whenever they feel like it, and the employer doesn't have a choice in the matter.

Ooh NEWSFLASH - any staff member female or male can leave at any time (subject to notice etc.) - you don't get a choice in that.



So .

[FrankieSandford]

Ooh NEWSFLASH - any staff member female or male can leave at any time (subject to notice etc.) - you don't get a choice in that.
Yeah, but you don't have to give them their job back whenever they feel like coming back.

Oh I don't know maybe if they are a small business by making sure that they can claim back OVER 100% of the stautory maternity pay that is paid to the woman (or SPP to men). Seem like a good idea?
But what about the costs spent training someone and disruption to the business in finding someone else and training them up, when it's only a temporary position anyway?

"Family friendly" is utter bullshit. Families are personal business, to be done on your own time, not the employers! Am I the only person that sees this?

Yes, profit is all I care about. No profit, no jobs. I suppose you work in the public sector where profit doesn't matter and you can just ask for taxes to be raised to cover ineptitude. Doesn't work in the real world, and a lot of public sector types are finding that out now.

[mauricetinkler]

I'm liking it Sandford.

[bned]

I don't like her she was a senior minister in the most incompetant Government in modern history.

[mauricetinkler]

SGM - I would put my right arm you work in the public sector.

[archieleach]

StewieGriffinsMom Wed 20-Jul-11 19:10:59
Yes it is.

Cameron's policies have disproportionately affected women.

The small businesses who whinge about maternity rights for women making women "unemployable" are simply misogynists with no imagination or business sense. Frankly, they need to get a grip.



Imagine someone is self employed and earns £500 a week. That person takes on a woman paying her £250 a week and then she gets maternity leave and so that person has to employ another person and pay them their own £250 a week. Meaning they get nothing and the mother still gets £250.
So that person is paying something for nothing. You think that is reasonable?

How about you were working for someone who said, hey in a few months business is going to be really tight for about a year or so, so I?d like you to continue working but I?m not going to pay you £250 a week anymore but £0 and it is enshrined in law and there is nothing you can do about it.

Like it or not this is reality for a small business. It has nothing at all to do with misogyny or lack of business sense. If you knew anything about business you would see that it would be utterly counter-productive to employ women of child bearing age (which nowadays seems to stretch from about 11 to over 60).

And such legislation is supposed to improve women?s lives?

[forkful]

FrankieSandford "whenever they feel like coming back" - yeah it's not actually that is it - there are some parameters etc!

"what about the costs spent training someone and disruption to the business " - you get that when a man or woman leaves - permanently leaves that is.

"Yes, profit is all I care about. No profit, no jobs. I suppose you work in the public sector where profit doesn't matter and you can just ask for taxes to be raised to cover ineptitude."

Actually you can have not for profit companies/co-operatives/employee owned companies/public interest companies who often have wider aspirations than just profit - i.e. entities with a social conscience.

And for the record I am in the private sector.

"Family friendly" is utter bullshit. Families are personal business, to be done on your own time, not the employers! Am I the only person that sees this? - Families are everyones business. Who do you think are going to use your companies services/goods in the future, pay taxes etc - the next generation!

You won't get masses of sympathy on MN with that point of view.

I take it you won't be interested in the MN Family Friendly company initiative !

Oh, well - your company's loss - don't bother looking into all the research that shows that companies and boards which are more diverse not only reach better decisions, and have better corporate governance etc but also make more profit....

[HandDivedScallopsrgreat]

Oh right so women immaculately conceive children whenever they want (to get out of working obviously) and men are just passive bystanders with no thoughts, feelings or input on the subject. And anyone who thinks that employees are more important than profits, works in the public sector.

Just so we are all understood on those points .

[forkful]

where are all these men coming from goes off to google looks like another board invasion

[mauricetinkler]

For me, one of the main reasons I dislike Harman is because she deliberately mislead the public about rape in order to further her own cause (and career). She claimed the conviction rate for rape is only six per cent. Yet the Stern review which she ordered said the conviction rate for those charged with the offence is 58 per cent. She deliberately misrepresnted the facts and, by doing so, possibly deterred rape victims from contacting the police as they dont think their attacker will be caught.
If any poster wants to address this (rather than just hide behind the "oh you don't like her because you are a misogynist line) please feel free to do so.
Rape is an insidious crime. It deserves a better 'champion' than somebody like this.

[HerBeX]

Stop lying about rape maurice.

The conviction rate for reported rape is 6%.

Most reported rapes don't get to court, because the CPS know there is no chance of conviction.

[mauricetinkler]

Not lying - for those charged it is over 50 - check Google if you dont believe moi.
As for being no chance of conviction well, let's face it, it is a unique crime. Two witnesses, one on one side, one on the other.

[HerBeX]

I am perfectly well aware of the conviction rates when the crime gets to court.

The problem is that most cases don't get to court because of this glib assertion that the issue is one person's word against another and therefore it's not such a big issue that the vast majority of rapists are walking around our streets and being invited into our homes because there is no chance whatsoever that they will ever be brought to justice.

This isn't just a woman's issue, if you have a wife, a daughter, a sister, a mother, female relatives and friends, then your relationship with them will be affected if they get raped. And seeing as how 1 in 4 of them will be either raped or sexually assaulted in their life and most of them will never tell anyone about it, that's an awful lot of men being affected by rape..

[HandDivedScallopsrgreat]

maurice - what Herbex said is quite correct. You are the one not representing the facts. 6% conviction from reported rape, 58% conviction if the case gets to court.

"Rape is an insidious crime. It deserves a better 'champion' than somebody like this." I am happy for anyone to "champion" the cause against rape because so few people do in the public eye or in positions of power. And those that do and tell the truth about rape are more often than not silenced, ridiculed and lied about

[forkful]

mauricetinkler - your last post has really clarifed for me what you are doing here on MN.

Any one coming here with the types of views you have expressed on this thread about women who has knowledge of The Stern Review is coming here purposefully to throw a few soundbites out.

There are many many female MNers here who are not self identifying as feminists who will not be aware of what The Stern Review was.

Have you read the whole Stern Review? Wonder where you got your little soundbite from.

[HerBeX]

And Harriet Harman ws trying to do something about the fact that rape is a crime that goes almost totally unpunished.

What an evil bitch, eh? Trying to make rapists accountable for their action. Trying to get justice. What an utter cow.

And as for this horrible nonsense about trying to make life easier for families who have had babies by giving them longer maternity leave and - hey - the bitch - paternity leave for fathers - well, what a cow.

By serial breeders, do you mean women who have more than one child?

I'm presuming you don't mean men who have children?

[forkful]

Rape deserves a better "champion" that Harriet Harman!!!!!

Ha ha ha - heard it all now. Thanks for your concern!

[forkful]

Oh, but HerBeX - men don't need to "bother" their employers with issues around their DC - because their wives take care of all that.