Sports Direct - Why are MPs involved?

[claig]

I am against zero hours contracts, but as the political class allowed them to be legal, why are MPs calling a businessman in for questioning?

It's about the conditions that were picked up in the warehouse - paying under minimum wage , calling ambulances for people having to give birth in toilets and having heart attacks, having to stay after hours without pay for security searches , docking pay etc.

But why is this something for MPs to deal with? Are there no legal or union or employment measures if something was done wrong? What has the political class got to do with business?

Does this mean that every business who has a lot of zero hours employees and asks them to stay behind at the end of the shift to check for possible theft should be called in front of the political class? Is this what they are there for and is there no one else who can do this?

I think you are being a tad disingenuous in your posts. It's about rather more than zero hour contracts.

So you think that's ok? Wetting yourself as you aren't allowed to go to the toilet? What he is doing I against good working practice which is stated by the political class as you insist on calling it

It hasn't got anything to do with zero hours contracts. It's an investigation into poor working practices in his business by the Business Select Committee. He's under investigation by HRMC for not paying minimum wage , he doesn't recognise unions in his business although they had plenty to say today .

I don't see what it has to do with the political class.

BBC Newsnight said that unions and the media and investors had tried to get change and only the "media circus" of this appearance in fron of the political class has done anything?

Surely there are other ways of dealing with it if anything was done wrong rather than having MPs call him in? If not, then how many other things are going on elsewhere that never get sorted because the political class doesn't have time to interview everyone?

What control do the political class have over businesses and business people? Surely they only make laws and the law should be used if anything is wrong?

Who should sort it ?

'He's under investigation by HRMC for not paying minimum wage , he doesn't recognise unions in his business although they had plenty to say today .'

Yes, then why are MPs involved if it is to do with the HMRC? And it is not illegal not to have unions, so what do MPs have to do with businesses?

'Who should sort it ?'

That is what has got me wondering? Why are MPS doing it? Is that all we have got? As he said himself, other businesses will also do things wrong and he wanst to be treated fairly.

Do we rely on the political class to sort out possible bad employment practice? Have we not got a better way of resolving these things?

I suggest you read up and draw your own conclusions . Not sure why you're asking for info and repeating the same thing over and over.
Who should sort it ?

What do you suggest happens ?

And what was your view on the 'political class' getting involved in the wiretapping saga?

This is from the TUC

"Do I have a right to use the loo during my working day?

The law is currently unclear on this, but you do have a right to take a break for 20 minutes if you work more than 6 hours a day, and therefore do have a clear right to use the toilet during this time, or during a lunch break.

If you have a medical condition which means you have to take a toilet break at other times your employer would not be able to deny you a break.

The TUC is pressing for legal change to give people the right to use the toilet at other times. Find out more in the TUC's Give us a (Loo!) break guide."

worksmart.org.uk/

I have heard of other comapnies having these type of policies. Why aren't the political class interviewing them and why aren't they changing the law?

Are you Mrs Ashley ? You popped a button earlier today love . So embarrassing for you on TV and everything.

'And what was your view on the 'political class' getting involved in the wiretapping saga?'

What wiretapping saga? The political class are voted in by us to represent us and make the law so if there is a law about wiretapping that they need to vote on then they have to be involved.

But interviewing a businessman about employment practice that may be bad but not illegal, is what I don't understand.

Maybe it was just the political class doing factfinding. I think he could have refused and they may not have the power to force him to appear.

It's the government

Do you mean simply 'politicians' when you say 'political class'? Or do you think those involved in today's select committee are some sort of elite MP?

I'm getting Gabby Logon flashbacks.

No, I'm wrong, they have a lot more power than I thought

"Sports Direct: MPs to discuss sanctions on Mike Ashley
Move could include billionaire being found in contempt of parliament after his refusal to appear before select committee"

www.theguardian.com/business/2016/jun/03/sports-direct-mike-ashley-mps-to-discuss-sanctions

I am surprised at that level of power. Sounds a bit like a North Korea type thing over business.

I don't think they are elite in any way. I just think they are a class of politicians, a grouping of politicians, a political class.

Do you think that maybe you don't understand the full role of a MP?

'Do you think that maybe you don't understand the full role of a MP?'

Yes, I didn't know they had the power to summon business people if they don't like the way they run their business. I didn't think they had that power. I thought there would be a separation of powers where some other legal agency would be involved rather than politicians. It seems a bit arbitrary to me because, as Ashley said, there are other businesses doing things wrong.

You do know that politicians are democratically elected, don't you?

'You do know that politicians are democratically elected, don't you?'

Yes, but I didn't think that gives them the power to summon business people if they don't like the way they operate. I thought it would be a matter for lawyers if something was done wrong, not a political committee.

They asked him to give evidence, he agreed. He was originally asked last year, but declined to do so.

The committee could have chosen to find him in contempt of Parliament if he had continued to refuse to appear.

The committee are investigating the culture at his company, they have more scope than HMRC, who can check into whether staff are paid NMW, but can't do anything about people being afraid to take time off sick when they desperately need to for fear of losing their jobs.

It is largely the same as when the Culture Select Committee hauled Rupert Murdoch before them to explain how he, much like Mr Ashley yesterday, was paid an awful lot of money for running a company where he didn't appear to know what was going on. Or the questioning of those involved in the shambled which is the demise of BHS, which is starting today.

If you know of another company being run in a similar manner as either SportsDirect, BHS or News Int, you can ask your MP to bring it up with the relevant committee, so they can consider if they wish to look into it.

The committees can then use the evidence they obtain from such hearings to decide if the laws they make need to be changed, which would seem to be fairly clearly their remit.