AIBU to wonder if those who are in favour of Johnson’s ‘deal’...

[theunknownknown]

have considered why the commitments to workers’ rights have been downgraded?
And why workers should trust him on this? Given that he is a proven liar.

He may be a proven liar but then again point me to anyone in westminster who isn;t! Proven or unproven will do OP !!! Its all a mess and so far away from the dreams of what could be that was peddled out way back when...even then I was skeptical!

There’s a hashtag on Twitter at the moment bobptd ‘Bored of Brexit, Pass the Deal’

Which implies that they don’t give a shit about the detail, they just want it to be done.

I'm worried about workers' rights, too. But I am not sure Labour MPs will vote for the deal. If it gets through it will be by one or two votes.

I worry about everything. I don't see one benefit from the deal .

But, so sick of it all.

I don’t understand the rush. Surely even brexiteers would like the deal to be properly scrutinised and basic documents like impact
assessments produced. I am almost more scared that we’ll sign up to anything just to get a deal without thinking through if that is really right for the country. Corbyn could have allowed a delay if he’d allowed a caretaker government. It’s all party before country and it makes me so angry.

have considered why the commitments to workers’ rights have been downgraded?

They haven’t been, have they? Do you have a link to back this up?

If the deal doesn’t get through there will be a GE.

If that’s the case, I really wouldn’t want to be a Labour MP/candidate out canvassing in one of the constituencies that heavily supported Leave.

dingdong I think the commitment to a level playing field (ie to maintain worker and environmental standards on a par with the EU) has been removed from the WA (legally enforceable) and put in the (not legally enforceable) political declaration of how the parties would like their future relationship to look (not enforceable). So it will depend on the terms of any future trade deal.

A key plank of the single market was that all workers shared a minimum set of rights so that no one member state could undercut the other. Some EU members will be reluctant to cut a deal that leaves them with ‘Singapore on their doorstep’, so it is possible that commitment to EU worker rights will be made a condition of the uk selling tariff free into the EU.

Obviously it would mean that workers cost more, so it is not attractive to free trade politicians who want to sell us beyond the EU.

But workers in many eu countries currently earn a lot less than UK workers?

The EU has never regulated the national minimum wages of member states, but all employment rights cost money to an employer and they can make a real difference to an employer’s bottom line. . There is a competitive advantage for example in having no TUPE protection, so that a new incoming employer buying a business can simply slash everyone’s wages to make the product cheaper. The EU prevents this. There is also an economic cost to being legally required to provide 20 day’s holiday a year. The EU prevents paid holidays being done away with.

What makes you think the government wants to reduce workers' rights? I mean, why would they? They would have to amend/ enact new laws to do so and they would require voting on in parliament.

As Matt Hancock, MP, stated on Question Time last night, by not including it in the legal part of the withdrawal agreement and putting it in the Political Declaration, it means we would have the ability to strengthen workers' rights.

The ability, yes. But then we always had that (the EU legislates minimum standards, not maximum).

Btw, I am not necessarily in favour of Mr Johnson's deal on the WA. I was just putting in my two penn'orth about workers' rights.

It’s not as if our leaders have been hiding their views - except in plain sight. They (Truss, Raab etc) are the authors of Britain Unchained, in which they describe British workers as among the laziest in the world. Or Matt Hancock, who described employment tribunal claimants trying to enforce their worker rights as ‘Japanese knotweed’, clogging up the arteries of entrepreneurs. So under this deal I expect we will get what we deserve.

It’s actually Britannia Unchained, 2012. There is a review here - which reveals - somewhat worryingly - that Johnson has a copy in his car.
www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/07/britannia-unchained-free-market-book-defines-boris-johnson-s-new-cabinet

What makes you think the government wants to reduce workers' rights? I mean, why would they? Once of the first things they did after 2010 was to extend from one year to two years the period during which a new employee can be sacked for no reason at all. I would argue that that doesn't show any great commitment to workers' rights.

We're capable of creating and implementing our own legislation on workers' rights. We did so long before the existence of the EU and will do so again. If the politicians of the moment do not prioritise this topic, they will be voted out sooner or later. It's in our hands.

itinerary I think that’s true. The shame is that we are at risk of people giving Johnson a thumping majority at the next election. Four years is a long time, especially in an economic ‘low road’ country like the uk which prioritises ‘lots of jobs’ over the terms and conditions of those jobs.

Everything that figment says. Nothing in the last ten years gives me confidence to think that this government is on the side of workers. Indeed, throughout the leave campaign one of the consistent themes was de-regulation and red tape. I always understood this to mean the erosion of our working rights.
I only have to look at the MPs who are cheering this such as JRM to know that it won’t benefit most workers in this country.
And if there isn’t going to be a bonfire of our rights, why relegate the commitment from the legally binding Withdrawal Agreement to the non-legally binding Political Statement.
People may want Brexit done but this deal needs scrutiny.
My understanding is that over 120 points are the same as in the deal that May agreed. So what motivates Johnson to sacrifice the commitment to working rights?

As Matt Hancock, MP, stated on Question Time last night, by not including it in the legal part of the withdrawal agreement and putting it in the Political Declaration, it means we would have the ability to strengthen workers' rights

But leaving the commitment in the WA would also allow us to strengthen workers rights. So why move it.
Frankly, I’d look out the window to check if any member of the Tory party told me it was night time.

Why indeed. Why would I trust my working conditions to a Tory Government? Andrea Leadsome called for the minimum wage and maturnity leave to be scrapped in 2016. What does that tell you?

We can afford workers rights because everyone in our trading block implements those rights. Outside of a trading block we are down the the minimum level of protection offered by our competition in order to remain competitive, a significant step back. Look at the employment, leave and health care standards in the US - apauling but for the few, and look at the size of that economy.

^ Exactly. No wonder JRM et al are backslapping each other and grinning like Cheshire cats.
I can’t understand why any working person would think this is a good thing.
Bonfire of regulations and red tape I think they said.
The lack of transparency is disgusting.

Actually, I’ve been thinking about this all day and just can’t get my head around the fact that someone upthread said that the commitment to maintaining working rights had been removed because the tories want to strengthen them. I’m just astounded that someone took this seriously.
Anyone who is not of independent means should be very worried right now.
I’m beginning to think that Johnson doesn’t actually want a trade deal with the EU because that might tie him to standards that are contrary to the US desire to sell us toxic chicken.

People didn’t want May’s to pass so they got BJ’s

I’m wondering what we’ll get next if his doesn’t pass. And what do people want instead.