Forum menu
Most pharma companies I’ve worked for even gave the cleaners at least double that in bonuses.
For context, greggs Plc is on that list.
How much did your minimum wage pasty slave get paid in bonuses this year?
Just like CEOs donto boost share prices for their own reasons – no one worries about that. Who is looking out for shareholders then?
If you want to equate Labour's corporate policy with the market manipulating antics of dodgy CEOs, that seems like a good starting point.
This proposal is being presented as some kind of 'victimless crime', but you cannot redistribute that amount of share capital without hurting plenty of people who rely on its dividend income directly or indirectly. And that includes those who have modest amounts in pension funds.
Did Labour see Theresa May threatening to screw over the pensioners at the last election and think that was some kind of vote-winning masterstroke?
How much did your minimum wage pasty slave get paid in bonuses this year?
https://www.glassdoor.co.uk/Bonuses/Greggs-Bonuses-E10161_P2.htm
A bit of googling suggests that 20,000 Greggs workers got a £500 bonus last year. So now they'll get a government mandated bonus that gives them the same amount as last year despite growth of the company and economic damage. WIN!
Oh - and why not just raise the minimum wage by the equivalent amount if you care about Greggs workers?
Oh well that's fine then, a 200 quid 'bonus' over the year.
That will make everyone feel better.
Edit, or even £500, the shop workers don't earn squat to begin with.
Did Labour see Theresa May threatening to screw over the pensioners at the last election and think that was some kind of vote-winning masterstroke?
I'm starting to think that they are just really ****ing high and snaffling copious amounts of magic mushrooms.
That or they are A) as cynical as the Tories B) ****ing stupid.
Oh well that’s fine then, a 200 quid ‘bonus’ over the year.
That will make everyone feel better.
https://www.theguardian.com/global/2016/mar/05/greggs-conquered-britain-bakery-profit-sausage-rolls
Guardian is saying 20,000 employees received £500. So I assume that's most of them and the glasdoor page is wrong.
So now they'll get the same as they did last year, despite sales growth! What a win for income equality! It appears that Labour are as charitable as the Greggs CEO.
Edit, or even £500, the shop workers don’t earn squat to begin with.
So had you actually been reading my posts, you would have noticed me suggesting paying them more. What do you think will happen to these workers bonuses when the labour ones come it? Worked yourself up to team leader, where you were previously inline for a bit more than £500? Sorry, you have your government mandated £500 dividend - now **** off!
I was speaking more in general terms, but I concede I took a quote from you, without full context it kind of demonstrates how easily things are skewed in politics.
£500 bonus sounds sweet, but when you divide that by 12 and take 20%,it suddenly becomes nothing, maybe an extra meal or two over a year for a family. Especially when the pound is on it's arse against the dollar and the euro.
I guess I'm just still hopeful we can stop brexit.
It's a cynical soundbitey move by Labour, that doesn't really solve the cost of living crisis in this country. It doesn't address worker apathy, it's a stealth tax and Labour are doing it because they don't have the balls to add it on to the corporation tax they have already announced. Because under a Corbyn labour, it's not about emancipating the worker, it's about tying them to the state - the reward for working hard and helping to increase your companies performance is supporting the glorious state and that should be enough in of itself.
That is such utter bollox its hard to even begin to refute it
do German companies have higher productivity and higher profitability? do they have worker representation and shareholding?
One key thing with workers having a stake in the company is productivity goes up
What you are doing here is project fear from a far right wing perspective. and completely misunderstandin / misrepresenting what the policy actually is. You do realise that although the FT hates the idea its analysis is way away from yours
That is such utter bollox its hard to even begin to refute it
do German companies have higher productivity and higher profitability? do they have worker representation and shareholding?
One key thing with workers having a stake in the company is productivity goes up
German companies do a "stake in the company" in an entirely different manner, they are better unionized for a start - and the workers, even the cleaners don't just get a paltry £500 - it's a 13th month of pay.
https://www.reddit.com/r/germany/comments/9oo04q/how_common_is_the_13th_month_as_a_christmas_bonus/
You do realise that although the FT hates the idea its analysis is way away from yours
Not really, it's tone is just more diplomatic.
What you are doing here is project fear from a far right wing perspective.
Yeah, it's fake news isn't it TJ.
Do you not like experts TJ (the FT)?
do German companies have higher productivity and higher profitability? do they have worker representation and shareholding?
Correlation is not causation.
Working culture is utterly different in Germany for so many reasons.
One key thing with workers having a stake in the company is productivity goes up
Agree entirely. But this proposal only pretends to give workers a stake in the company. They have a “share”, which they can’t do anything with, and if it performs well the government gets the rewards not them. It’s a grab by the state neatly dressed up us a sensible policy we can all get behind, if we don’t look too closely at the details. That should ring alarm bells with Labour voters, never mind those Labour need to be winning over in the next six weeks.
“apocalyptic nonsense” about Capital Flight from the Shadow Chancellor:
It isn't a surprise that they have considered captial flight, Corbyn and McDonnells ex-CPB mates have been wargaming capital flight, currency devaluation and bond boycotts as counter-revolutionary attacks for decades.
Kelvin is right, Labour voters should be worried about the people who are leading the party at the moment.
"I can't prove you are a Communist. But when I see a bird that quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, has feathers and webbed feet and associates with ducks—I'm certainly going to assume that he is a duck." - Emil Mazey, 1946
But this proposal only pretends to give workers a stake in the company. They have a “share”, which they can’t do anything with,
By focusing on the dividend and missing out that 10% block of shares in a single block is huge. In fact it is double what a lot of companies set as a disclosure threshold. It would give workers real influence at the board level.
It's pretty clear that Labour are positioning themselves to be the party to reduce inequality. Ending independent schools, this share plan etc
They are just bloody awful at communicating it.
By focusing on the dividend and missing out that 10% block of shares in a single block is huge. In fact it is double what a lot of companies set as a disclosure threshold. It would give workers real influence at the board level.
Mentioning the disclosure threshold is meaningless waffle. It's pretty normal for single majority shareholders to essentially control the direction of a company in the real world. It's a stealth tax that offers workers very little real agency, what are they going to be able to threaten to do if they disagree with the direction of the company? Dump the shares and hurt the company? They can't.
There are two possible reasons why this is Labour policy:
1) Cynical soundbite electioneering.
2) Murray et al have not forgotten their CPB/Sraight Left commie roots and are softening up/testing the electorate for full scale seizures of privately owned UK headquartered companies.
Anyway, I hope it works out for you - I hope Labour save you and make your life better. Instead of tanking the economy and doing a Venezuela. Sadly, I think in 2025, there are going to be a lot of hilariously angry and even more viciously disillusioned voters if Corbyn takes power in December.
Might be true (the disillusioned bit, not the Venezuela fantasy). But the alternative is far far worse… a Johnson government “promising” that the transition period will end next year, with us out of the Single Market, out of the Customs Union, rushing into a deregulation focused trade deal with the USA.
Instead of tanking the economy and doing a Venezuela
Stop with that repeated nonsense. You can no more predict that than compare it.
Venezuela has an economy pegged to oil prices which also had a large private sector.
It's had success and failure as both socialist and capitalist - with both corruption and mismanagement across different adminstrations.
Anyone defending the status quo of our failed market economy and it's ability to function for the privileged few hasn't been on the right side of reality.
If you want another five years racing to the bottom then let's keep going in the same direction. Otherwise let's change it and do something different.
In other news you can smell the Tory desperation. Gove has been on twitter - probably mildly drunk - creating havoc with all manor of AS allegations.
It's back-fired.
The party of liars.
Tories broke pledge on 'starter homes' in 2015 manifesto, report says
The world seems a very dangerous place at the moment. We all think we're established or getting established and then overnight someone can just take 10pc of your pension savings. The defence that it will redistributed to 'workers' is a bit lame since AFAIR 35 million of us have pensions invested in stocks and (I suspect) not many of us work for uk owned companies.
But the alternative is far far worse… a Johnson government “promising” that the transition period will end next year, with us out of the Single Market, out of the Customs Union, rushing into a deregulation focused trade deal with the USA.
Labour say they are going to implement controls to stop capital flight to stop, among other things, people saving their pensions savings. Self evidently they're going to have to. I can't see how you can do that within the EU which requires free movement of capital so we can be pretty sure that under Labour we will be leaving the EU.
Can anyone solve the paradox of stopping capital flight whilst keeping free movement of capital? No? We're leaving under Labour then.
Venezuela has an economy pegged to oil prices which also had a large private sector.
...and Britain has an economy pegged to business and inward and outward investment.
If you sequester 10pc of UK firms and then impose controls on moving capital out to stop people saving their pensions you lose all of that.
That German 13th month. They did that in the 30s when my mum was serving her apprenticeship. Basically the salary is divided into 13 parts and you get 2/13ths in December. So not necessarily a "bonus".
Can anyone solve the paradox of stopping capital flight whilst keeping free movement of capital? No? We’re leaving under Labour then.
It can’t be.
JC has opposed the EU (in whatever form it’s taken) since it’s inception.
He’s a life long Brexiteer & even the most cursory examinations on his voting record confirms that.
Vote Labour if you like JC & his policies.....but don’t vote Labour if you expect him to fight your corner on Remain. He doesn’t want to & the fence sitting, the contrary political views with8n his own party, the consistent whipping to ensure Brexit progresses prove that.
the consistent whipping to ensure Brexit progresses prove that.
Yes. It was startling that May lost her votes despite him whipping to support it.
Oh wait thats not quite what happened is it?
They are not taking 10% of your pension. I suggest you read the proposal
“I can’t prove you are a Communist. But when I see a bird that quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, has feathers and webbed feet and associates with ducks—I’m certainly going to assume that he is a duck.” – Emil Mazey, 1946
That's rubbish - you might as well just point and shout "Look at him. JUST LOOK AT HIM!"
The world seems a very dangerous place at the moment. We all think we’re established or getting established and then overnight someone can just take 10pc of your pension savings.
That's not going to happen.
Yes. It was startling that May lost her votes despite him whipping to support it.
Oh wait thats not quite what happened is it?
May lost her votes because the ERG headbangers voted against their own leader. As did de Pfeffel and Jaxon Rees Mugg at times.
That’s not going to happen.
In what sense is it not going to happen?
He’s a life long Brexiteer & even the most cursory examinations on his voting record confirms that.
And yet.. 2nd ref is party policy and he campaigned for remain last time...
There's a massive difference between a protest vote and actually doing something.
I can't understand why otherwise intelligent people are so moronic when it comes to politics. So incredibly irrational.
And yet.. 2nd ref is party policy and he campaigned for remain last time…
So you can solve the paradox of stopping capital flight whilst keeping free movement of capital? Great, tell us how!
Ah… back to whether the “Straight Left” team around Corbyn are communists or not, and why they are still trying so hard to keep Labour policy strongly pro-Leave. Nothing has changed.
So you can solve the paradox of stopping capital flight whilst keeping free movement of capital? Great, tell us how!
This is why I think what you are saying won't happen.
And yet.. 2nd ref is party policy and he campaigned for remain last time…
There’s a massive difference between a protest vote and actually doing something.
I can’t understand why otherwise intelligent people are so moronic when it comes to politics. So incredibly irrational.
Yet he’s spent a lifetime voting against the EU?..
As I said if you like his policies - fine.
But JC has no love for the EU & whatever he says should be tempered by that. The actions of his WHOLE POLITICAL CAREER demonstrate this quite clearly.
I for one find it hard to trust a man whose been so deliberately politically ambiguous the last 3 yrs on the one issue that is so era defining. I’d rather it wasn’t so - but I think we need someone a rather more unequivocal leading the fight. That’s not Corbyn..
“If you want another five years racing to the bottom “
When “racing to the bottom” now means:
- record unemployment
- the U.K. is number one in Europe in attracting inward investment
- c60% of the population now make no net contribution to the running of the state
- real (inflation adjusted) disposable household income has growth 10% in the last 7 years
- Income inequality has fallen compared to the last Labour govt
- wage growth has hit 2.9%
- the U.K. is one of a very few (2 or 3) countries to actually deliver on the 0.7% foreign aid commitment
- healthcare as a % of GDP remains higher than at any point under the last Labour government or any other government before that.
- the U.K. is one of a handful of countries that have committed to de-carbonising the economy by 2050.
There are undoubtedly many areas where more focus and investment is required but many countries would gladly take any of the above outcomes.
There are undoubtedly many areas where more focus and investment is required but many countries would gladly take any of the above outcomes.
They would be even better if they were all true.
healthcare as a % of GDP remains higher than at any point under the last Labour government or any other government before that.
And yet, here in Todmorden, if you want a GP appt you have to queue up at 7.30 in the morning, wait for half an hour when it opens at 8am, and still have no guarantee that you'll see a doctor. The other option is to go to A&E in Halifax. There is effectively no functioning first line NHS provision here. Given that many things rely on that, (getting a sick note for work, ongoing prescriptions etc) it creates chaos in people's lives. And that's not even mentioning things like mental health support where those who should go and see a doctor don't because it's too hard. So yeah, the tories and their apologists can bang on about investment as a %age of GDP, but on the ground it's meaningless, and everyone here knows it is.
So you can solve the paradox of stopping capital flight whilst keeping free movement of capital? Great, tell us how!
This is why I think what you are saying won’t happen.
In what sense will it not happen?
You expect Labour to lose the election?
You mean John MacDonnell is wrong when he says he will impose controls to prevent capital flight? I.e. they'll just let it happen.
You mean the 10pc stock policy announced this week will be quickly cancelled?
You mean the 10pc stock policy announced this week will be quickly cancelled?
I suspect it will… if/when attempts to draft a bill to deliver it meet with reality.
Anyway, if you really want a ‘pro-Business, pro-Worker’ UK… vote Labour if you’re in a close Tory/Labour marginal, and then vote to stop Brexit if Johnson not getting a majority results in a referendum… it’s still a flowchart policy that won’t win over most people … but don’t be ‘most people’, be more considered than that.
I suspect it will… if/when attempts to draft a bill to deliver it meet with reality.
I have a lot of sympathy for that analysis. John MacDonnell spending five minutes with a Treasury Civil servant should be enough to kill it. BUT, the threat is there until that is made public, and the threat is what drives the rush to save out money by moving it.
Anyway, vote Labour if you’re in a close Tory/Labour marginal, and then vote to stop Brexit if Johnson not getting a majority results in a referendum… it’s still a flowchart policy that won’t win over most people … but don’t be ‘most people’, be more considered than that.
Except it's not even a flowchart policy any more because Labour have ruled out free movement of capital and said why they need to do that. There's no way of doing that within the EU so the plan must be to leave. (Unless I'm missing something which is always possible.)
Scary times.
the plan must be to leave
The plan is to hold another ref, it's pretty explicit.
The manifesto is aspirational, as they always are.
BTW I don't see a manifesto commitment to ending free capital movement, where are you looking?
where are you looking?
In his imagination I would guess 🙂
< backs out of thread >
BTW I don’t see a manifesto commitment to ending free capital movement, where are you looking?
The 10pc policy was described by RLB in the link posted by me above.
The response to the capital flight that will cause was described by John MacDonnell, posted in another link by me above.
I'd *love* to be wrong here, it would put my mind at ease.
Scary times.
Excellent. Project Fear is underway along with Project keep repeating lies.
Well I haven't time to listen to an hour of programme, and I've googled for this policy but I cann't find any quotes from RLB.
I did find this though from 2018, in the Guardian:
At Labour conference on Monday, John McDonnell declared that he plans to force all companies with more than 250 staff to put 10% of their equity into a fund for their workers. Each employee will then be entitled to company share dividends worth up to £500 a year. Any extra will go back into public services.
That doesn't specify how it will be done, but if companies are forced to do this then I think they will have to buy back their own shares, therefore investors aren't losing money...?
It could well be that a shadow minister is talking bollocks, which let's face it wouldn't be the first time.
Re capital flight, if you mean the article I think you mean, it says this:
The shadow Chancellor told party activists they should be prepared for an “assault” by opponents in the City, the media and in Parliament that could have economic consequences.
He revealed that extensive plans are being made for Jeremy Corbyn entering Downing Street, including contingency planning for a scenario in which a Labour victory triggers a fall in the value of the pound.
Speaking at a fringe event at Labour’s annual conference in Brighton about the early days of a Labour government, Mr McDonnell said: "What if there is a run on the pound? What happens if there is this concept of capital flight? I don't think there will be, but you never know, so we've got to scenario plan for that.
You made it sound like they know their policies will cause capital flight and are doing them anyway. But that's really not what was said, is it?