Homebase let cat out of the bag about using workfare to reduce wage bills

[ttosca]

Only someone very naive could believe private firms are participating in the government?s workfare scheme because they want to provide work experience for unemployed people out of the goodness of their own hearts and not as a way of reducing their wage bills by using forced labour at taxpayers? expense.

But ask any of them and they?ll swear the workfare people they?ve taken on are extra to their requirements and are not ? repeat not ? replacing jobs they would normally have had to pay someone a proper wage to do.

Well. It looks like Homebase have accidentally let the cat out of the bag.

Here?s a poster currently displayed on the wall in the manager?s office of Homebase Haringey ? which clearly shows the company is using workfare as a means to reduce their payroll costs:

tompride.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/homebase-workfare.jpg?w=529&h=715

This is particularly interesting, as Homebase have recently been lying to telling the public they?re not participating in workfare at all. See my previous post about that here:

Homebase are so embarrassed about using workfare ? they?re reduced to lying about it

Looks like Homebase just can?t stop themselves telling porky pies about workfare, doesn?t it?

tompride.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/oops-homebase-let-cat-out-of-the-bag-about-using-workfare-to-reduce-wage-bills/

[MiniTheMinx]

We didn't have a global warming agenda when we discovered steam claig, nor when the peasants revolted, nor when children as young as five worked in factories and we created racism as a rational excuse for colonies and slave labour. We didn't have a science devoted to climate change when our banks became trusts with imperialist aspirations, or when we we set up the east india company, colonised america and stood by whilst the poor drank gin and chinese died of opium. What we had was the birth of capitalism.

[claig]

Many conspiracy theorists believe that the ultimate goal of the Neo-Malthusian elite is a socialist one world government and that capitalism is just a temporary stepping stone used as part of the Hegelian dialectic. A socialist one world government is the type of thing that Marx predicted. But the elite don't believe any of that bullshit, they use whatever they need to control people.

The CEOs are not the elite, the puppets are not the elite. The elite are the Neo-Malthusians who control both hands in the card game, who play both sides of the Hegelian dialectic in order to form the synthesis which many believe is the socialist one world government.

And many believe that the green document is right when it says talks about a possible authoritarian regime that will take draconan measures.

They will probably say, as Orwell predicted, that Big Brother Loves You and they are only doing to "save the planet" for little old you.

[MiniTheMinx]

Alex jones is all over the internet along with other "nationalist zealots and survivalists" conspiracy theories abound, they even interview these people on main stream U.S news channels.

Do you think they would interview me? no because I am a marxist. Of course they wouldn't.

What was going on with McCarthyism? were they going after conspiracy theorists because they had uncovered the evil plot? no, they went after communists.

Social and political power is wealth. Wealth is social and political power. Undermine wealth and these people have no power. Undermine private property and the stranglehold of finance and corporate power and these people have no conduit for their "plan" (and that plan has nothing to do with green meanies) and that plan has everything to do with perpetuating their wealth and power.

[MiniTheMinx]

Marx turned hegel on its head.

[CouthySaysEatChoccyEggs]

Glad to see I'm not the only person outside the Hebrides that knows about the Skye bridge travesty!

[claig]

'We didn't have a global warming agenda when we discovered steam'

They hadn't thought the scam up then. But at the time the elite had their Reverend Malthus and teh message is the same as it was then. Only now they are much more sophisticated and capital is global and communication and mass media is instant.

[CouthySaysEatChoccyEggs]

OK Claig, YOU work for less than NMW then. Unless YOU are willing to do so to 'rebuild our Country' then why the FUCK should anybody else?!

[claig]

'Alex jones is all over the internet along with other "nationalist zealots and survivalists" conspiracy theories abound, they even interview these people on main stream U.S news channels.'

That is exactly why many people say he works for the system. There are other conspiracy theorists that they won't interview, but they always have Alex Jones on.

'Do you think they would interview me? no because I am a marxist. Of course they wouldn't.'

Of course they would. Marxists are in most university departments. Eric Hobsbawn is a national treasure and Marxist intellectuals are the intellectual elite. They are more likely to interview a Marxist than a representive of the people and the people's paper - a Daiily Mail journalist.

[claig]

'OK Claig, YOU work for less than NMW then. Unless YOU are willing to do so to 'rebuild our Country' then why the FUCK should anybody else?!'

Don't blame me, I didn't create teh policy. New Labour began the process and Iain Duncan Smith implemented it. It is happening now. People are doing it. There is nothing I can do about it. No one asked my opinion. But since it is happening, I think people should gain real skills by doing things that help teh community rather than stores to stack shelves.

[CouthySaysEatChoccyEggs]

A fair day's pay for a fair days work.

Which workfare isn't. If you were to work 40 hours for your £71 JSA, that comes out as just under £1.78 / hr.

When you consider that NMW is £6.19 / hr, people on Workfare are underpaid by £4.41 / hr.

Or that they are being paid less than 29% of the minimum that their labour is worth.

Would YOU agree to being paid just 29% of your current salary? No? Then you have no choice but to admit that workfare is wrong!

Because if it would be wrong for YOU to devalue your labour by working for just 29% of what that labour should be worth, then it is ALSO wrong to expect those currently unemployed to devalue their labour by working for just 29% of the MINIMUM that their labour should be worth.

Unless you have a rained argument to that, then case closed, workfare is wrong!

[CouthySaysEatChoccyEggs]

Rained = reasoned.

[claig]

I would prefer that they gave people on workfare the minimum wage. But what I think doesn't count. I think they should scrap the Climate Act, but they won't do it.

[CouthySaysEatChoccyEggs]

YOU gain some of those skills then, Claig.

Because most of these people on workfare ARE trained and experienced in their previous employment areas.

Why do they need to be exploited either for big business OR for 'public good', when those jobs could be given to them as paid jobs?!

If the job is there, and needs doing, then PAY SOMEONE to do that job. Or don't expect it done.

Surely THAT is the 'free market' that the Tories seem to hold in such high regard?

It will NEVER be a 'free market' as long as some sections of Society are being exploited.

[CouthySaysEatChoccyEggs]

Are you always so defeatist, Claig, or only about policies that you agree with?

[MiniTheMinx]

Marx's Dialectic, this guy explains very clearly the difference btw Hegel and Marx's dialectic. Hegels dialectic is to do with the conciousness of the mind, which has no material basis.

"do babies think?"

A Hegelian would say yes they do, they think from day one and what they think is projected onto the world around them and that thought is reflected back at them. Nothing changes except their perceptions. We are shaped by our perceptions.

A Marxist would argue that if you put a baby in a darkened room it would form no thoughts because we only form thoughts from what we see/hear and perceive around us, we then reflect that thinking back into the world around us. In this way we shape the world around us.

Because it is quite a difficult concept to grasp, it has made it very easy for loons to misinterpret the difference btw Hegel and Marx.

[MiniTheMinx]

CouthySaysEatChoccyEggs so right, it isn't a free market because governments intervene and stack the odds in the favour of their pay master benefactors. Socialism for bankers fascism for workers.

[claig]

I am not defeatist, I am a realist.

'YOU gain some of those skills then, Claig'
But I am not on workfare, so why do I need to gain some of those skills?

'Why do they need to be exploited either for big business OR for 'public good', when those jobs could be given to them as paid jobs?!'

Ask Iain Duncan Smith, I don't know. There are no jobs available with those skills or they would be doing them.

'If the job is there, and needs doing, then PAY SOMEONE to do that job. Or don't expect it done.'

I presume teh job doesn't need doing which is why the poster that ttosca linked to was to convince managers to use people on workfare.

'Surely THAT is the 'free market' that the Tories seem to hold in such high regard?'

As I understand it, these jobs have been created as a form of training scheme and Iain Duncan Smith has been in charge of this policy which aims to help unemployed people get back to work and get some training. It is not that there are lots of vacancies but that they have been created to help people. That seems to be the intention.

'It will NEVER be a 'free market' as long as some sections of Society are being exploited.'

These jobs are not in teh market. They have been created as temporary posts for teh purpose of training. That is not the free market. That is big state socialism and state intervention with the help of big business, which is maybe why New Labour were teh ones who began teh process. I wonder if teh copied it from leftwing Clinton as well, or was it from Bush?

[claig]

'it isn't a free market because governments intervene and stack the odds in the favour of their pay master benefactors. Socialism for bankers fascism for workers.'

Exactly it is socialism and state intervention.

[claig]

'A Marxist would argue that if you put a baby in a darkened room it would form no thoughts because we only form thoughts from what we see/hear and perceive around us, we then reflect that thinking back into the world around us. In this way we shape the world around us.'

But that is rubbish and Hegel is right. A baby would experience fear and begin to cry and feel hunger, so of course it is thinking and conscious just as Hegel said. A baby is alive so it thinks. It doesn't need light to think, just as a person blind from birth can think and feel and be conscious.

Marx is a materialist and that is why he is wrong.

[MiniTheMinx]

The baby can not effect a change in its circumstances or the environment around it.

Of course babies feel hunger, do you think that babies "think" with fully formed vocabulary in their head though. Of course they don't. Children learn language because we speak to them.

[claig]

Marx turned Hegel on his head alright. Marx would have fitted in well in Alice in Wonderland with his mate the Mad Hatter.

[MiniTheMinx]

All this nonsense about Hegel being some evil mastermind is nuts. The only reason the conspiracy theorists get away with it is because so few people can read Hegel without going insane.

[claig]

'do you think that babies "think" with fully formed vocabulary in their head though. Of course they don't. Children learn language because we speak to them.'

The baby thinks and feels and makes sounds which have intention. It won't learn to speak English without any contact, but it is still conscious and would form thoughts.

[MiniTheMinx]

So you think Hegel is correct then , in which case what is your problem?

the whole basis of this NWO craparolla is the Hegelian dialect, now you say Hegel is right. What, so the Hegelians are not evil doers afterall.

[claig]

'All this nonsense about Hegel being some evil mastermind is nuts.'

Of course it is nits. He wasn't a mastermind, he was an idiot.