I STILL think Tesco should fucking well PAY THEIR STAFF. Workfare is wrong!!!!

[TapselteerieO]

Still angry, I hope the protests on the 3rd of March all over the country really keep this campaign lit, it makes me furious to think people seem to assume it has been sorted.

I will boycott every company that uses schemes like this until they are ended completely.

Tilly - How can you justify not paying someone for work here by comparing it to the lives of people in other countries? In this country we have a national minimum wage, that is fair, I cannot see how the economy will improve if people are not paid for the work they do whilst big businesses profit. These companies are making billions (Tesco's £3.5 Billion last year) in profits from money we spend in their businesses WHY should they not pay their workers? The money workers earn gives them spending power which helps put money back into the economy, pays taxes and NI contributions - they are contributing to society, if people are working for their benefits they have no money, are stuck in a rut and the profits go to the businesses and not back into the economy.

You think there is something wrong with paying people a wage for the work they do?

Yes I'm not motivated either way,I haven't been won over by marxist economic theory and some of the socialist of years gone by advocated a sort of return to old fashioned farming methods and individual production! would this feed the world? probably not because cargil and some of the petrochemical companies have stripped whole areas of land, laid to waste and non productive now. We can't put right what went before but we can reform what we have. Industrialisation, globalisation and the scientific progress we have made so far means that we have a great opportunity for creating equality. But capitalism free from any sort of management has descended into a sort of hell creation with banks like goldman sachs speculating on food prices. This is what is causing real poverty now in the third world and will also create huge inequalities here. The difference between what is paid and what producers receive is this "profit" & it isn't going to where it should. This is why I ask who do the banks serve, it doesn't just come down to bonuses-it's share holders you need to get hold of so rather than bash a wbanker why not also repatriate some of the 80% that wealthy share holders have stolen accrued. Banks are not keen to reign in their activities because they will lose 2/3 of their ability to make money and sharholders and very wealthy people specualting on food and other commodities won't ask for reform, we need to because an unpaid workforce here can not pay for the good we produce.

[unfettered] capitalism ... has descended into a sort of hell creation with banks like goldman sachs speculating on food prices. This is what is causing real poverty now

YY. And your comments about profits being enclosed by a very small group of super-rich. This way, everything's going to be sucked into a high-roller vortex where the very wealthy have no further means of creating wealth - having destroyed their markets - except to fight each other for share. Like the Dark Ages, only worldwide this time.

^^ I would have considered this an extreme prognosis ten years ago. I never guessed things would degenerate this fast; if the pace keeps up, we'll be witnessing complete entropy before I get my pension (ten years, according to yesterday's update - funny how quickly we've all got used to moving goalposts, eh?!)

garlic - i dont think your description of a slavery in the UK is at all accurate:
www.jrf.org.uk/publications/modern-slavery-united-kingdom

the joseph rountree foundation are not talking about 'centrally-heated home, has her own room, is fed a decent balanced diet, clothed, mostly treated with reasonable courtesy and has free time.'

they are talking about 'appalling working and housing conditions, the withdrawal of passports or ID documents, deceit and abuse of power, the use of physical intimidation ? renders the possibility of flight
remote.'

so i do think workfare & slavery are very different.

I'm just not getting any further into this. We're going off track and/or hair splitting.

I think serfdom involves a non-negotiable obligation on the worker's part, which the worker did not choose and isn't free to exit. I think it involves the removal of rights. I think it is a form of slavery.

You don't :)

Working without pay may or may not meet the definition of slavery but it sure as hell meets the definition of exploitation.

Edwina Currie is fond of using the mobile phone argument. You"re not her are you Tilly?

And people often need a mobile phone and internet these days to be able to apply for jobs Yes thats PAYING jobs not WORKFARE.

someone on workfare is as free to stop claiming JSA as someone working is to stop work and not be entitled to JSA.

both people probably cannot afford to choose to stop workfare/work.

i agree that banks etc. speculating on food prices is wrong. unfortunately we have become beholden to them in terms of borrowing as inidividuals and a nation. which is why i support paying down the national debt and diversifying away from 10% dependency on the City. however in the here & now we depend on them & dont have enough power to kick their arses & i think trying to is damaging to us.

you can get a really cheap payg mobile for job hunting.

"someone on workfare is as free to stop claiming JSA as someone working is to stop work and not be entitled to JSA" yep too right and their kids can starve, fantastic.

TillyMoo, it's been proven in other countries that this type of scheme does not work where the economy is weak and jobs are scarce. The DWP lack any credible evidence that its working here and to date I have heard the costs stand at one billion! Think how many real jobs could be created in small businesses incl yours, if red tape and taxes were cut for small firms.

We could have a bloodless revolution and reform what we have or wait. It's like the pendulum on a clock if it's swung too far in one direction the obvious result is it will come to rest but only after swinging too far to other side.

(Ramble coming up...).
I don't recall at any point saying Workfare is slavery. Debating whether it is, in legal terms, slavery or not is not hugely relevant to the moral argument. I don't recall saying I don't think we need to reduce our national debt, either. I do recall saying that I strongly object to our leaders taking advantage of our current situation to push through ideological changes that are harmful and won't help our current situation - like the majority of the proposed NHS reforms, which no-one thinks will save money so much as cause chaos. I also strongly object to the propoganda around welfare reforms and the way in which the schemes are currently set up, apparently asking big companies to exploit others in return for cash from the Government (I was amused by Sainsbury's justifications for not joining in with the Government scheme, which included the rationale that the only reason it would have to join the inferior Government scheme would be in order to get cash from Government, as its own scheme was far superior and funded by itself...begging the question why the other huge and profitable employers taking part in the scheme don't set up their own, well run schemes in order to help the economy rather than using a poorly co-ordinated Government initiative funded by taxpayers' money... largely being, I suspect, that they are not in it for a social conscience; or maybe they are kindly taking on those that Sainsbury's rejects out of hand for not being employable in the first place? or helping out smaller employers using the schemes by giving the schemes "credibility" (at taxpayers' expense)?); the way in which money saving exercises are being justified by stigmatising people rather than focusing on the fact that money has to be saved somehow, even in a way which weighs unfairly heavily on those who can afford it the least (methinks if phrased that way it might result in a minority supporting it?....); and I object (maybe pointlessly, if it is the only answer) to the apparent only answer to our problems being to give more freedom and power to those who caused the lion's share of the problems (if for no other reason than by dint of their size): not the small employers or benefit scroungers, but the global corporations, hedge fund managers, banks, anyone with enough money to spare to gamble against other peoples' livelihoods etc. I have little faith that this power will be rebalanced subsequent to this global crisis, particularly when we have all been told we have to save for our pensions by pooling money together so that we can all play a part in the big gamble. So I have little faith that this is a crisis that we will get out of in a few years and then be able to carry on as normal if we just give the banks and big businesses more cash, less regulation and less of a tax burden. I fear they will just use these advantages to squash the small players out of existence altogether.

I do agree with you, Tilly, that everyone is trying to blame everyone else in order to get out of shouldering any responsibility - you will see if you read my posts that that is precisely what depresses me. But I hold by the assertion that you do not change this mindset by kicking out at those with the least power. The only way we can change for the better is for those who cannot be forced to change their behaviour to voluntarily change their behaviour first - at least to a degree where there is less simmering bad feeling towards them than there is now.... I see no signs of that happening and the result is a dangerous level of simmering anger. And I am not arguing from the position of someone who is at risk of being called to do Workfare. If I were arguing for my own personal interests (or possibly even the interests of this country), I would shut up, because I'm behaving like a turkey voting for Christmas. But then I fear we are all behaving like turkeys voting for their children's Christmas. Should we just be the grasshopper messing about all summer and assuming everything will be fine, rather than mess up the party now?

UK-wide day of action against workfare ? Saturday 3rd March

In solidarity with Liverpool Uncut?s action against workfare on Saturday 3rd March, Boycott Workfare has called a national day of action against workfare. There?s already actions planned in thirty seven locations across Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England (with others still planning!). Why not visit your high street for some fun and peaceful action as well?

www.boycottworkfare.org/?p=359

Well I feel sorry for Tesco. Presumably, with all these benefit cuts they will now have to make up the difference and start paying their shop staff properly. (It's really going to be expensive to bus all those people in from Manchester to work in the Westminster branches of Tesco Metro for a start).

How are they going to give people zero hour contracts if the government won't subsidise them?

Its only fair that Dave should thrown in a few free shelf stacking trainees to make things easier.

Yes, poor old Tesco. It's only making a large profit these days - that makes it a social pariah in shareholding circles.

Modern slavery in the UK, investigated by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation found:

"Modern slavery exists in the UK in various forms. All exhibit the common elements of the exploitative relationship which have always constituted slavery: severe economic exploitation; the absence of a framework of human rights; and control of one person over another by the prospect or reality of violence. Coercion distinguishes slavery from poor working conditions."

Comparing this to workfare schemes;

• severe economic exploitation; yes,
• the absence of a framework of human rights; workfare workers do not have the normal framework of employment rights.
• control of one person over another by the prospect or reality of violence. Coercion distinguishes slavery from poor working conditions; Coercion is certainly present and based upon the withdrawal of welfare support which is normally available.

"Some UK-based companies, knowingly or not, rely on people working in slavery to produce goods which they sell: complex sub-contracting and supply chains, managed by agents elsewhere, often obscure this involvement."
It is an interesting feature of the workfare (work program) schemes that the companies were not aware of the mandatory nature of the scheme, and compulsion based on the withdrawal of essential welfare support. The schemes are run through a complex sub-contractor network - the DWP, then the prime contractor (such as A4E), then a sub-contractor (sometimes a charity) then the company where the work takes place.

hmm..

Here is an article, which I think is relevant to the Workfare and the many reasons why it is wrong! "How many more of Europe's jobs will be sacrificed at the altar of deficit reduction? How many more lives ruined, families impoverished and communities destroyed in pursuit of growth-choking, job-killing, self-defeating austerity? It is unacceptable for governments to stand by as dole queues lengthen. Unemployment is not a price worth paying. Nor is it a price that has to be paid."

ChickenLicknSun - you are quoting Joseph Rowntree Foundation on modern slavery. here is what JRF actually says about workfare:

www.jrf.org.uk/blog/2012/02/workfare-how-about-some-evidence

Workfare in USA, Canada and Australia does not work, and workfare in Holland does. According to the charity you quoted:

Dutch workfare, as part of a wider package of support, "cut costs and increased the number of social assistance claimants leaving benefits and entering employment."

this is modern british slavery: www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17019546

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/now-tesco-creates-20000-jobs--with-pay-7536441.html

"Tesco will shrug off criticism of its role in the Government's "workfare" scheme today by creating 20,000 jobs as it attempts to revive sluggish sales and tighten its grip on Britain's shopping basket.

Britain's biggest supermarket will flood its 2,175 stores with the new staff at busy times to improve customer service and concentrate the £67bn-a-year business on fresh food..."

Independent, 5/3/12

www.thegrocer.co.uk/companies/supermarkets/tesco/tesco-20000-new-jobs-will-make-customer-king-again/226888.article

The Grocer, 5/3/12

Tesco: '20,000 new jobs will make customer king again'

"Tesco has vowed to create 20,000 new jobs in the UK over the next two years in a bid to improve customer service.

The retailer said hundreds of stores would be refreshed, with staff given extra training in areas such as fresh produce, fresh meat and bakery. The revamp would also include improving store layout and the overall shopping experience, as well as opening new stores.

Tesco claimed the 20,000 new recruits would be largely made up of local unemployed people, although its figures have been disputed by critics

The move marks the biggest response to date since chief executive Philip Clarke admitted in January that standards of service and of the overall customer experience in Tesco stores had slipped below the levels he expected. He claimed Tesco stores had been ?running hot? for too long, with staff over-stretched and not sufficiently well trained enough.

?At the core of this investment is our determination to deliver the best shopping experience for our customers, bar none,? said UK boss Richard Brasher.

?We will invest in more staff on the sales floor at busy times, greater expertise and help in the crucial areas of fresh food, and enhanced quality and service across our stores at all times.?

But critics urged the government to scrutinise closely the job creation claims

?I would urge people to take these announcements with a pinch of salt because we?ve been here before,? said James Lowman of the Association of Convenience Stores.
Between 2008 and 2011 Tesco pledged to create 30,000 new jobs and it turned out they created less than 12,000 new jobs, he said

Some analysts questioned how many of the roles were new and how many were the result of existing staff being shifted around

But Brasher told Sky News: ?We are not counting people who move around our business. These are real net new jobs and that?s what we stand behind.?.."

Nunontherun - GOOD! Much better. Almost makes me feel like shopping in Tesco again!

TheRealityTillyMinto - You are conflating human trafficking and slavery.

On workfare, the DWP's own research (as quoted by the JRF) is that:
"There is little evidence that workfare increases the likelihood of finding work. It can even reduce employment chances by limiting the time available for job search and by failing to provide the skills and experience valued by employers. Subsidised ('transitional') job schemes that pay a wage can be more effective in raising employment levels than 'work for benefit' programmes. Workfare is least effective in getting people into jobs in weak labour markets where unemployment is high."

TapselteerieO - That's a good article. Interesting comparison with the US.

chickenlin - yes JRF do say that about workfare in US, Canada and Austrailia which i mentioned above. but they also say, in the same article Dutch workfare, as part of a wider package of support, "cut costs and increased the number of social assistance claimants leaving benefits and entering employment.

so they comment on different types of workfare differently.

Trafficking is a type of slavery www.antislavery.org/english/slavery_today/what_is_modern_slavery.aspx

I am still boycotting them as are my family. My brother was going to shop in Asda today, asked if I needed anything and I said no, because I won't shop there until they stop profiting from free labour - he went to Morrisons instead.