Good on Kemi!

[MrsBennetsPoorNervesAreBack]

I'm no fan of Kemi Badenoch, but I'm even less of a fan of Robert Jenrick, and I'm rather delighted to see that she has sacked him and withdrawn the whip before he could jump to Reform.

She has definitely had the last laugh here. He must be spitting bullets!!

Nah I’m happy for people to show themselves. It’s typically Labour at some point.

Then you can't complain when other posters do the same.

It is indeed interesting when people show who they really are...

Right.. not report? I’d say do what but really just whatever

Well it won't matter if there are no jobs obviously. Which is mainly because of Rachel Reeve's ENI rise and the new employment rights.

Its illegal to pay less than the minimum wage. And an employer will have to judge how many people they can afford to employ accordingly.

Haha yep

Just to clarify: I’m not outraged at all and certainly not complaining - I fear I’m unaware of some Mumsnet code; I was just bemused by the pp and actually found the Bridget P comment unintentionally funny…the ‘trolling’ was said in good-humour. And as an aside, the use of ‘chippy’ is loaded, but most people will recognise that, and that’s why I used it in my reply.

You don't like the new employment rights?

Not really. It will mean employers will be reluctant to take a chance on an unproven young person or a disabled person who may be perfectly able to do a job but employers may not want to take the chance.

Employers will be terrified of litigation. Even if they haven't broken the law even a hint that someone is going to try and bring a case against an employer is a nightmare. You can see the effects already with the reduced number of jobs available.

Re the code thing- Basically if you think someone isn’t real you contact mnhq directly rather than put it on the thread.

In the words of J Lo, I'm real!

Is it being a parody account to have different opinions from other people? I think I sound eminently reasonable most of the time. And I respect the opinions of others who have opposing views. Gen X...many of us used to be able to do that.

That's on employers, not the Bill.

If they only take a chance when they can exploit people, they are not great companies to wrk for.

Ik it’s annoying that the response is not real, perhaps the pp didn’t mean that anyway. But yeh I agree.

Its not exploiting people. Its weighing up the cost of the increased ENI and the potential for vexatious claims or for getting the new rules wrong or for employing the wrong person for the job and then getting stung. And this is before an employee may have settled in and made any positive contribution.

So an employer may just think its not worth the cost or potential hassle and just not employ anyone new. Its their choice not to hire. Which, if you are a young person with no track record to prove you are a good potential employee, is not great.

Or the employer doesnt want to pay decent wages as it affects their profits and is happy for people to rely on the state to make up the deficit.

And then complains about benefits.

Young people have always had the inexperience problem.

Yes but you could take someone on and give them a trial. Now this is a risk.

Employers are usually good people. They want to keep staff happy and make sure they pay them properly so they don't go elsewhere. But it has to be affordable and not overly onerous for them ultimately. SMEs employ most of the workforce in the private sector and many have very tight margins. You'll be naive or very ideological to think otherwise.

Agree. It’s not a good idea to be too onerous on SMEs as it just impacts jobs.

Well obviously E. Heath was about as much use as a sick headache! Doesn't alter the fact that the last few years of the 70s were even more dire.

Heath was bloody useless, you'll get no argument from me on that! I remember endless powercuts but you are most likely right about the timing.

Too many people just don't have the skills need to justify a salary that isn't subsidised by the government. The government has already decided that people who might have an economic value of say £10 an hour don't deserve to have a job at all.

Supermarkets are good example where the number of people paid to sit at checkouts has fallen. Some people say they prefer to go a person than a machine but how many would be prepared to pay the differential. If it cost £3 to pay the person to process the shopping would people still prefer that option?

On the thread topic, yes Kemi is really coming into her own. I liked her stance on women’s rights, and was sorry she didn’t have time to see it through. She is turning out to be a good leader.

She is clear thinking and doesn’t get side tracked by impossible fantasies.

Now I’m definitely a lefty but honestly don’t think name calling helps. I appreciate how frustrating it is and the desire to express that frustration but seriously you’ll never change hearts and minds by speaking like this. In fact you play right into Reforms and the Tories hands by speaking like that.

Ok if you want to get rid of unions are you prepared to give up your sick pay, your maternity pay, your holiday pay…. I could go on…

It’s mostly how the left operate though (obviously not you)

Many areas of work aren't unionised. They seem to be able to claim sick pay, maternity pay and holiday pay still, as is their legal right.

I'm not against unions per se and I think collective action is a good thing. I just think they have too much power in the workplace. Many call for strikes far too often on minimal votes, causing huge disruption and cost and the government has to cave in. And many are run by zealots eg the BMA. And Labour want to increase their powers as if they have no recollection of history of this country. I suppose Keir Starmer doesn't read as he claims, but really.