What do remainers think of this!

[Corcory]

6 MPs, members of the commons select committee, paid a visit to Sports Direct's warehouse in Derbyshire the other day.
It is build in an ex mining area specifically to provide work for a community badly needing employment opportunities.
When the MPs were shown around the warehouse they had the opportunity to speak to many of the employees there. None of them were British all of them were Eastern European. Some didn't even speak English. So could easily be duped into taking reduced wages and a reduction in their employment rights! No unions are allowed there.
The taxi driver who took the MPs there told them there are never any jobs advertised around here from the warehouse and that people from the area would love jobs there - well provided the paid the proper wages and gave full employment rights!

Tucker Agreed in the sense of the logistics capability but there was a big structural change in the industry as the big companies using the traditional "mail order" (catalogue) business model lost market share to new players who were better at reaching new consumers and expanding the market , both via Direct Mail and Online, GUS (including Kays) Little woods, Freemans and Grattan are largely brands consigned to history. Now as I say even that changed structure is a mature market with a lot of competition and downward pressure on costs.

Sorry op you lost me at 'you can't work there unless you speak Polish!' There is no point, no point in trying to construct a logical argument with someone who is demonstrating so much ignorance.

Myschool - I am only quoting what was said by the local MP in an interview he gave on the subject. Why on earth am I demonstrating so much ignorance? Do you, or anyone you know work in a warehouse or factory more especially the Sports Direct warehouse in Shirebrook who can refute these clams?

Suffice to say the point of the thread was that Sports Direct's warehouse in Shirebrook employs 3000 people, most of which are Eastern European so much so that locally it is known as the Gulag and that you can't get a job there unless you speak Polish!

I understood that it was nicknamed The Gulag because the working practices made it resemble a labour camp?

data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/business-innovation-and-skills-committee/working-practices-at-sports-direct/written/34181.html

Corcory Sports Direct have already been called out on their working practises which were illegal, that they are sharks and pretty clueless ones too, was further proved by ineptly trying to leave a camera in the room where the MPs were meeting. However as others have said MPs are not necessarily giving the whole story, they have agendas too, especially when speaking in their own constituency

What do you think of this? More anecdotedata but it is a story that hangs together given the economics of the industry. This is what I was told by somebody who works in the supply chain for the car industry (an industry sector that people seem to value more than others that are more significant to the UK economy for some reason I have never been able to fathom.) It is not an industry known for it's sharks, unlike warehousing, but it is known for it's tight logistics strategies. Nobody at any stage in the supply chain wants to see production lines slow down for want of components or indeed for complonants to back up and require storage. Margins are dependant on it being tightly managed to ensure everything arrives at each stage "just in time".

Their capacity to meet the demand for components is now suffering because the Eastern Europeans who previously took the part time work to cope with the peaks in demand are no longer coming. It has been a long time since local people were available to take the jobs, it is in a leave area but one where there is currently very low unemployment as a result of a concentration of science and tech industries. The bell is starting to drop that if we leave the customs union and their supply chain from Europe slows down, and they cannot cope with peaks in demand, the business is going to go bust and local people are going to lose the skilled engineering jobs. Not long ago the company had to increase salaries in order to attract the skilled labour, but not much use having a higher salary when it is becoming increasingly clear your job is going to be insecure.

Corcory Do you not think that the exploitation of workers might have something to do with the lack of trade unions. You think British workers would get better pay and conditions at Sports Direct? Not without worker organisation they won't.
It is Tory legislation, not repealed by Blair, that continues to allow the exploitation of workers. The EU has nothing to do with it.

I assume you will oppose any further anti TU legislation by the Tories?

I have nothing against trade unions Bito, in fact I would welcome anything that would reduce the exploitation of workers.
The warehouse jobs would have to compete for workers along with other jobs and would be dependent on supply and demand as is the norm without the influx of people coming from Eastern Europe. It is the FOM policy of the EU that I have a problem with which in my opinion makes it much easier for the 'sharks' of this world to operate.
Whatwould - your analogy of the parts manufacturer is an interesting one in that the manufacturer has obviously set up business in an area without need to consider local employment possibilities and relies entirely on imported labour to function. Perhaps they should look at relocating in an area where there is a higher % of unemployment. Or perhaps they simply need to change their practice of employing part timers to cover the peaks and troughs but to spread their production more evenly through out the year and employ more full time staff. They may actually have to advertise further afield in the UK and offer a relocation package. People used to move all over the country for work. What ever happened to that idea?

Corcory The company is where it is precisely because it facilitates the employment of the skilled workers (engineers) they need, as well as their position in the supply chain. It is very naive to think that anyone running a successful sustainable business has not thought through every aspect of their operations, as well as their markets etc. to arrive at a strategy that is most effective in terms of having a profitable business, indeed in the car industry they have particularly complex strategies to maintain a production supply chain that best responds to demand whilst having the optimal cost structure, just in time strategies are pretty universally employed in manufacturing operations now because they are the most profitable way to operate. Unskilled temporary workers (and it is the temporary nature of the work that is a bar to recruitment of UK workers, as it is in the agricultural sector) were the only means of responding effectively to peaks in demand, all the other means you suggest will incur cost and make the business less economic and would not allow them to fulfil their role in the supply chain, the business would go elsewhere. Quite possibly it will anyway since they rely on the input of parts from their French subsidiary and if we come out of the customs union that part of the chain will break down and the company will doubtless move the whole operation to France, to cut out that blockage.

The EU is facilitating lots of parts of the economy like this one, indeed especially this one, since the issues for the car industry are at the forefront of the debate, that may become simply uneconomic after Brexit. Less economic activity will mean less tax revenue for the state. In this case it will lead to loss of good well paid jobs, and a good standard of living for their families, for skilled UK workers.

Intrinsic to the thinking in your post is the entitled assumption that this company can do all those things and stay in business, by extrapolation that the UK economy is somehow owed a living by the rest of the world. It simply isn't.

So whatwould, you are suggesting that a company which is positioned where it is because of the ready supply of trained skilled workers wouldn't change any of it's working practices with regard to temp. employment and would rather up sticks and move the whole caboodle to France! I am suggesting that if the temp. employment of unskilled workers is the only block to continued work in that area then surely any company would look at different methods of solving this problem.
As for your last sentence! where did I ever say that I felt that the rest of the world owes us a living! I am talking about FOM and specifically why I don't agree with it. I am well aware that there are loads of other parameters involved in the continued prosperity of businesses in the UK but in this thread I am addressing only one and not all the other ills that could befall the supply chain in the auto motive industry.

So whatwould, you are suggesting that a company which is positioned where it is because of the ready supply of trained skilled workers wouldn't change any of it's working practices with regard to temp. employment and would rather up sticks and move the whole caboodle to France!

There are many reasons why a company in the automotive supply chain would consider moving to continental Europe post brexit - not necessarily labour, but more importantly the issue of non-tariff barriers if we are outside both the SM and the customs union. JIT manufacturing practices would make companies unable to guarantee on-time delivery to european car makers very uncompetitive.

Companies (companies who don't care about labour) come to the UK because we have the least regulated workforce in the EU. This is not the fault of the EU. These companies behave badly. This is not the fault of the EU. These companies use FOM to abuse unregulated labour. This is not the fault of the EU.

This does not happen in France or Germany even though they have more generous benefits. It is due to the unregulated labour in the UK. This is not the fault of the EU. This is the fault of successive UK governments diluting the power of the trade unions.

Do not blame the EU for legislation enacted by UK governments. This is not the fault of the EU. We are to blame because we voted for Tory governments.

By we I mean you I didn't vote for them.

When did I ever say it was the 'fault of the EU'. I have stated I don't think we should have FOM. full stop.
Misti - I am well aware that there are loads of other reasons why a company may not wish to stay in the UK but I really don't think that the availability of unskilled temp. workers is an insurmountable problem as whatwould suggested. I didn't start talking about the auto motive industry partly because they are not a very good example of what I am trying to say as there are so many other parameters involved with that industry. Whatwould brought them up.
I am more than happy with my analogy of warehouse workers as you can't transfer that 'industry' to another country and it doesn't depend so much o other external parameters.

We have a discount store here which seems to be 90% staffed by eastern european immigrants. I have no other problem with this but I just think they must be conned in someways, perhaps unpaid overtime, or unpaid annual leave or something. Otherwise, why hire almost exclusively eastern europeans, many who don't speak english, whenever I try to ask for assistance they're very apologetic and polite [i think! as they're responding in their language] and get a supervisor to come help me. I just feel sorry for them, they're all very nice and I have no problem with anyone just working and paying taxes and not causing problems but they must be getting conned in some ways. The local newspaper did a story on this and since then the company has hired more english people. It's just dodgy. But if it wasn't eu immigrants, I'm sure they would just be targeting some other group (young offenders etc) so i don't think it's an EU issue.

The issue with FOM is a UK issue not asn EU issue.

We don't have to leave the EU to solve this issue. We don't have to abandon FOM to solve this issue we just need labour laws that protect workers.

Corcory Removing FOM is going to increase the cost base of many industries, it will either potentially be one nail in the coffin (the car industry) or the nail in the coffin (the UK warehousing /logistics industry for the business models for low margin retail and online shopping) . To assume it will not result in a substantial hit to the UK economy is to assume that someone somewhere will pay for it, they won't.

I agree with bit of a cow that we need better and easier to enforce labour laws. I speak from some experience having bought a constructive dismissal case against an employer who discriminated against me after Cancer treatment. I regretted settling because it involved a gagging order when so many people had the same experience but were not In a position to bring a case and be fairly compensated, though thankfully now Cancer is covered by the disability discrimination legislation. Now I think the new business models that subcontract delivery to individuals are ripe for regulation. I gather that Deliveroo are now facing a backlash from their largely educated self employed delivery force who are beginning to come together to exert pressure for better conditions but elsewhere those acting as Couriers for online shopping firms have long struggled to earn a minimum wage whilst shouldering the costs of storage and the risks of their franchisers not marketing effectively enough for there to be economies of scale in their delivery areas.

I also want to see the economy better focused on the value added activities that generate the margins that sustain better employment practises but that certainly won't be helped by Science and Tech losing FOM and all the benefits of EU membership.

However we are where we are at the moment, and if you stop FOM you throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I don't think you have completely understood my reasons for not wanting FOM. I want everyone, from where ever in the world they come to have an equal right to come and work here. I feel strongly that the FOM policy is a discriminatory one. If there is a real need for unskilled workers in this country then the government could admit people from anywhere in the world who had the correct credentials to come and work here.
I agree that work regulations have to be tighter and that TU representation should be the norm but that doesn't get away from my fundamental dislike of the EU FOM policy.

" is build in an ex mining area specifically to provide work for a community badly needing employment opportunities."

I assumed from this ^ comment that you thought the jobs should go to locals.

I can't see how this is an EU issues. If we had immigration from all over the world the issues you mention would remain.

Bito - I don't actually believe that we will need the amount of unskilled workers coming from other countries or skilled workers in many fields that we do at present.
I feel that training professions like nurses and other medical professions need to be over hauled and a big rethink needs to take place. Rather than dissuading people from going into these professions by making it really difficult to go to medical school or by the recent changes made to the nurses financing of their training.

I think you are being naive about FOM, Corcory. Already more than half of immigration is from outside EU. You want us to give up shed loads of advantages from being part of EU in return for what? Our immigrants coming from India and Africa vs Eastern Europe to do the jobs no one wants to do? Will it make a difference? Or will we see (we are already seeing) a return to overt racism /2nd class citizens ?

And as ever, you (everyone forgets) forget the reciprocal part of the agreement, where British people live elsewhere in the EU. How do you see that working in the future?

I feel strongly that the FOM policy is a discriminatory one. If there is a real need for unskilled workers in this country then the government could admit people from anywhere in the world who had the correct credentials to come and work here.

What is stopping them from doing that now? It seems to be entirely due to Theresa May's obsession with trying to cut down immigration.Why she has such a visceral hatred of immigrants is beyond me.

She could take students out of the equation and cut numbers at a stroke. If those students have a positive experience here it would engender good will towards this country - far more than her empty talk about 'the country being open for business' when as Home Secretary she had whole loads of students deported on flimsy charges, thus clearly telling them we weren't open for business.

We could also train more nurses, midwives and doctors - but we have chosen not to. Medical, nursing and midwifery schools all report no shortage of candidates for training. Before the EU came along we were quite happy to take staff from the Commonwealth to do the jobs. Now, we have suddenly decided that maybe we like the Commonwealth after all.

So Corcory, if you feel it's discriminatory, don't blame the EU for it, take it up with Westminster.

Marcia - I feel we need more controls on immigration which we don't at the moment . I also don't feel there are so many jobs that 'people don't want to do' and what has racism got to do with it? If we have more controls why would this make it more likely that we would have racial problems. I also feel that people already in this country should be able to stay here and the same should be the case for UK citizens in the EU. Peregrina - How do you think changing the immigration policy of the UK without leaving the EU would work to make the situation less discriminatory?
Being 'open for business' has nothing to do with being open to all migrants.
FOM is an EU policy not Westminster.

And the reciprocal part?

Corcory are you local to Shirebrook? What you say about the locals not working there because of working conditions and the perceived requirement of not speaking Polish is true. I probably know Shirebrook better than most on MN but I admit I live down South now but still know people. Personally I feel sorry for those migrants who work in poor conditions be it there or for some dodgy builder etc. They don't know any better, probably living in dodgy accommodation being fobbed off with a promise of good wages. A lot of people have benefited from FOM, mainly those who own the businesses. Those who came here in the first wave of migration from the EU probably did very well for themselves, but now I think migrants are competing with each other as well as locals. Cheap labour is a good way to reduce overheads. No idea if Brexit is going to be the pill to fix these problems or not.

As someone who freely moved to the EU what should happen to me?

Maybe if you took advantage of FOM you might see that the UK is not the glowing paradise you think it is. It's my home but my rental, health, benefits, parental and workers rights are worlds better in my host country, even with a conservative govt here. They manage not to exploit people very well. Despite a financial crisis more severe than the UKs there aren't zero hours contracts for example. FOM is only a bad thing when it's exploited like the Tory govt policies have allowed it to be.