AIBU to think this is a 'Get on your bike' moment from the Government?

[chomalungma]

Apparently there's 8 million economically inactive people in the UK.

Ok - so some of them are students, carers, long term ill, SAHP etc...

So maybe 20% of them are probably capable of work.

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/feb/19/immigration-firms-will-need-to-train-more-uk-workers-says-priti-patel

So that's good because there are going to be loads of vacancies to fill in the UK and UK workers will have the advantage.

Let's hope the jobs are in the same place as the economically inactive people are...or will it be a 'Get on your bike' to get a job future for people - regardless of house prices and the practicalities of moving to the job.

Certainly going to be an interesting few years.

Surely moving for work is the norm these days

It's not practical if you have kids - not just because of housing but also because of schools. You can't apply for a school place until you've moved to a new area, but why would you move if you don't know you can get school places for your kids?

Not just low-skilled workers either will be jobless. Automation and artificial intelligence is affecting lots of standard middle-class jobs too. Salaries are falling and jobs are disappearing. Mine is one of them.

Yes, exactly daisypond. It's not like automation will be limited to undesirable jobs that no one wants. The government may do a big push on automation to solve the migration problem, only to find they've made huge numbers of people jobless.

Why are students assumed to be 'economically inactive'? Most do work. I realise in Johnson's world, students spend their weekends and summers idling on the chaise longue in mummy's study, but the vast majority of students are not independently wealthy and do have to work in order to do extravagant things like eating.

And if your immigration policy means there is such a shortage of workers that pensioners and carers are expected to pick potatoes, then it's clearly a bad policy that needs to be revised.

I think that the likely outcome (or more likely than the sudden rush of economically inactive Brits into work) is a vast increase in human trafficking and illegal workers in trades with less scrutiny. So farm work, restaurant staff, building, etc.

Changing the law won't stop people from working or employing immigrants. It will just result in them doing it illegally. And unfortunately that will give unscrupulous people leverage to get illegal workers to do other illegal activities too.

I agree WhoWants2Know

I'm one of those 8.5m people. 63 years old and retired. If Priti Patel thinks I'm about to take one of those jobs she can think again.

I was of the generation that DID have to get on their bike to get a job, and I'm paying for it now, being responsible for aged Mum and MIL who live a 4/6 hour return journey respectively from me.

If you're funding it yourself she won't be able to. It'll be the people who are reliant on top up benefits to be economically inactive that are easiest to influence back into the workplace.

Yes , in Japan they are working on a robot to care for the elderly and disabled. Perfect. Then none of the rest of us need go near them.

Would stop a form of elder abuse no one talks about. Foreign care workers being shouted at, abused and hit by the people they are caring for. Reported by neighbours to me in more than one case. The care workers either don't report it or aren't listened to.

@Baaaahhhhh Ppl who live in social housing cant just live away to work for weeks/months on end.

a. the place would be classed as abandoned if no one was seen to be living there for weeks. SH tenants would be risking their tenancy.

b. i live in social housing and in the space of three months ive had them wanting to do the gas safety check , discuss post Grenfell fitting of new fire doors, stock control survey and property inspections, They do the latter every time there is a change of HO which seems to be as often as i change my knickers

If we want a race to the bottom we can always dispense with things like gas safety checks and fire safety so these appointments dont have to be kept no?

And the HAs rules are it HAS to be someone on the tenancy who has to sign the paperwork so the tenant has to be the one to wait in. HA tenants cant just fuck off for weeks And imagine the AIBU.

"Aibu to think my neighbour doesnt really need their HA flat as they only come back once every couple of months"

Patels stupidity is off the scale.

As an interesting aside, the EU is trying to introduce an "EU Wide" minimum wage to discourage movements of workers from East to West. It is not going well, and would still be below our current rate

Not quite! each country would still set the amount, its a discussion paper atm.with many countries exempt.
UK min wage is still lower than scandinavian countries and italy france and germany.
We are an attractive place to work because of our in work benefits and their non contributory nature, unique in Europe.

TBF if you can afford live in carers, perhaps you should pay them a little more? and give extra holiday so they can visit home more often? i couldn't employ anyone who was sad and unhappy, little more than slavery.

I do think the point I made about automation is an important one to consider with immigration policy.

There are some roles like caring which will be done predominantly by humans.

But clearly there is a lot more factory work that could be automated in this country.

Driverless cars has a significant impact on immigration policy - there must be many hundreds of thousands of people who are taxi drivers or making amazon deliveries and so on. Within the next decade they will have to find a different field of work.

I am assuming there are government departments that are looking at the impact of technology on the workforce and the fact is in both skilled and less skilled jobs we will need fewer and fewer people as time goes on so it doesn't make sense to keep allowing more and more people to settle here who we then have to pay unemployment benefit to in the future when there's not enough jobs and eventually pensions etc.

I have no idea why more Brits wouldn't want to work there.

Some people like Monday to Friday 9 to 5 jobs. Working in a restaurant, or even retail for that matter, means working 'unsocial' hours. Now some can't due to transport or childcare etc but some people simply won't work those hours however decent the pay.

TBF if you can afford live in carers, perhaps you should pay them a little more? and give extra holiday so they can visit home more often? i couldn't employ anyone who was sad and unhappy, little more than slavery

They are employed via agencies and the one we use has very strict rules on breaks and holiday entitlement, particularly when they are 24 hour live in. They also have no living costs at all. They mostly come for specific periods, ie: they work for 6 months and then leave. The pay is actually pretty good, and they then don't have to work continuously. That doesn't stop them missing their families though. The ones we have had have left husbands and children and parents back home. To the pp who said you can't leave your house, they don't, just the mum leaves, the dad looks after house and home. It is just a different way of working.

But Katherine the day shift hours at my restaurant (as for most restaurants open for lunch) was 10 am to 3 or 4 pm. That would actually be pretty good for parents working around school hours but it's never mentioned on here when people post for ideas about going back to work after DC. I just get the feeling entire sectors are written off as unsuitable by people without really looking into them.

dreamingbohemian

I’ve seen jobs advertised, ending at 4 which means child care is required for an hour after school. £4 x 3 kids takes a big chunk of pay.

Why aren’t these places more child friendly

At my restaurant they usually ended at 3, with people working 3 or 4 days a week, and taking turns to stay until 4. So childcare costs were pretty minimal. It was seen as a good PT day job.

They can't be more child friendly than that because the lunch rush goes until 2 at least, then you have to clean and cash out.

Obviously the ideal is something completely within school hours but those are like hens teeth, whereas there's loads of restaurants, depending where you live.

Helenadove Ppl who live in social housing cant just live away to work for weeks/months on end.

I think you have missed the point. Anyone who wants a job and needs to move away to get it, has to give up their current accommodation and find new. This can cost thousands of pounds in legal fees and stamp duty if you are a home owner or big deposits if you are renting privately. Also you don't have the useful option of a mutual exchange if you are not a social housing tenant. That actually makes you more mobile than many others.
I don't get why young people with no dependants can't move to get a job. I did it, my Dad did it and my children will do it when they graduate. This is a small country , we are not talking about having to emigrate to Australia.

Anyone else feel like the Tories are basically trapping us on this island, removing our rights and options until eventually reintroducing some some of serfdom?

It’s what we voted for apparently.

From personal experience wages aren't the only issue. There's also conditions of employment. When I was out of work there was no way I could compete as a mother for even temporary work with young Europeans with no family responsibilities. I can't start at 6am, I can't work 12 hour shifts. And while there are loads of young migrant workers who can, there is no incentive for employers to offer part time or family friendly shifts.

I was willing to do the work, even for minimum wage, but most local people with family responsibilities can't put in the hours like the young Europeans can. And for older workers they physically can't work long hours in certain jobs even if they could manage with shorter shifts. But there's no incentive for employers to accommodate when there's loads of younger workers available.

In the UK we just don't have large numbers of young, healthy economically inactive people.

It's a perfect storm in the making. Not just students and retirees are included in the figures. Those caring for family or relatives at home, (5.4 million in England alone), and stay at home mums who can't work due to the price of childcare. They will not be able to take up employment unless they have people to care for their dependants.

The wages won't go up as economy growth was ab after election caveat. So living costs rise, social care has no extra provision so will continue to decline leading to more unpaid carers unable to work. The nhs continues to be underfunded so long term disability will increase. Universal credit is being rolled ot, which makes it impossible for those on minimum wage to budget, so better for them if they don't work because the system is so inept it leaves them without cash if they go over a certain limit because they run on 4 weeks not a calendar month.

These people to take the jobs only exist on paper. Companies will fold. Definitely. And no, I'm not lying or deluded. It's not because they have to pay living wages, it's because retirees, students and innovators carers can't work. There's no-one to do the jobs.

It's definitely a fallicy that most of these economically inactive people want to work or want to do more than they already are. People who've taken early retirement and students might be willing to pick fruit for a few weeks in the summer, but they won't want to do it in the wind and rain in all weathers for 12 hours a day.

It's also worth noting that a lot of these people do unpaid work- whether through caring for their families, voluntary work or unpaid internships as students. If these people are now doing paid work who cares for their children or elderly relatives? Who listens to readers at school? Who mans the local charity shop for a few hours? Who provides summer holiday cover in the office?

I was of the generation that DID have to get on their bike to get a job, and I'm paying for it now, being responsible for aged Mum and MIL who live a 4/6 hour return journey respectively from me.

This is a very good point. This country relies on unpaid carers, be it Grandparents who look after after Grandchildren so that their parents can work when they wouldn't otherwise be able to because of childcare costs or adults who provide care for their aging parents so that social care isn't needed.

This is only possible if people are geographically close enough. The childcare thing is already a ticking time bomb with the increase in pension age.

@Baaaahhhhh dont be disingenuous I said SH tenants cant live AWAY from their main dwelling for long periods. With the attitude towards SH tenants (and i could link several threads from this very site which would be a glaring example of it) no doubt someone would report the place as abandoned. And tenancy agreements are very inflexible.

@sluj im talking about LIVING AWAY You are talking about MOVING AWAY.