UKIP look like fools again

[Soulman]

No there isn't. In the old days Thursday was the jobs day in the Argus wasn't it. You would apply in writing or phone for an interview, and then be offered an interview, so you cut these type of people out completely. Your employer had a duty to give you a 3 month trial period and you had a thing called a contract of employment.

I think the Umbrella Scam has been quashed in Wales, and rumours that the same could happen in England. CIS is better, but then again the agency charge the employer a rate and then pay the worker a few quid less, best to just cut out the middle leeches and pay the worker say a rate in between. The agencies do not bill the client for 3 months which is why some employers with a cash flow problem use them. Although that is no excuse for the big companies.
You have probably seen this clip, but it shows that a 3 month direct contract can be achieved. Nice to see my mate getting involved.

 

[El Presidente]

Not nice when I worked for a local company knew the job, and was told there wasn't any more work. As I walking out the door on my final day a load of agency staff walked in. I know it's not the workers fault but it felt like a kick in the teeth, even more so because I had worked for the company previously for over four years and was my first proper job after leaving school. Funny enough a year later the company folded. I still knew people who worked there when it was going downhill, and they told me that loads of mistakes where being made by agency staff. That's a result of unskilled Labour right there.

Even my brother in law who himself is a fully qualified electrician is never one to talk politics but even he said to me on some sites he works on the general health and safety and quality of work done by Eastern Europeans was of a very poor standard and he had to correct it.

If these politicians actually got on the ground and got their hands dirty for a change, they might have a better understanding of what is going on out there in the real world.

It's the unscrupulous employers that are the problem for taking on unskilled and non-qualified staff. The birthplace of the unskilled and non-qualified staff is surely an irrelevance. There's good and bad sparkies from everywhere.

 

[Hastings gull]

One other thing. Independent research from the Nuffield Trust found that immigrants were not causing a burden on the NHS. It found that usage rates were around half that of English-born people.

Similarly, the Office for National Statistics showed that the vast majority of immigrants were paying taxes, and so were contributing to the exchequer to pay for our NHS. Most of the burden in the NHS is caused by an ageing population.
Lastly, the requirement for nurses and doctors in the NHS means that we have to recruit from abroad. There simply aren't enough qualified staff to treat our population. It takes up to 13 years to train a doctor/consultant and so even if we introduced Mr Farage's mad points system, we would be able to shut the doors to immigrants working in the NHS until 2028. There are 370,000 nurses in the UK and 20% of them are foreign. That's 74,000 . And that's just nurses.

Complicated it is. It's certainly not as simple as just saying "it's all Europe's fault!"

I have given up on believing any of the research into this sort of thing, as it is so easy to ignore what is inconvenient. Given that half of all immigrants come from non EU countries with health systems nowhere near as good as ours, whatever one thinks of the NHS, I find it very hard to believe that they have less use of the NHS and are not a burden.Would they not have stored-up health problems form poor diet etc? Also you say their usage is around half of Brits, yet they only make up about 7% of the population, so either this is badly expressed, or their use is in fact much higher.
If you say that the vast majority are paying taxes, then Ok, though I think this might be rather exaggerated, but OK, that is what you claim. However, how many have been paying taxes for as long as their demands on the NHS might financially warrant. I am not for one moment suggesting that anyone is denied treatment, but I would think on average, but certainly based on last year's figures, the NHS is being used by an extra 300.000 a year who have paid next to nothing. Say over the last 5 years, this would be one and a half million with relatively little paid in. I do feel that this is a burden, whatever other feelings you may have.

 

[Soulman]

It's the unscrupulous employers that are the problem for taking on unskilled and non-qualified staff. The birthplace of the unskilled and non-qualified staff is surely an irrelevance. There's good and bad sparkies from everywhere.

Not really El Presidente. I have to say that the standard of electrical regs in the UK is probably the best in the world. Proper apprenticeships adhering to those regs and the experience and training here passed on, by reputable companies is very hard to match in other countries and so you get substandard labour from overseas, who have different standards, regs and practices.
Now the JIB, which employees pay in to, are seeing the JIB using the money to train people in European countries. These trainees are then guaranteed work over here and the cost of the training is then deducted from their wages. Many are employed by the agencies, who then drive down the rate, because they know that the rate is certainly better than they can earn in their own country. So the rate goes down for everybody, and the employees that have funded the JIB see their subs being used to train others.
Many sparks that come over have not done the same training as over here either.
A lot of the foreign sparks work for one year approx, the job ends and they go home for 3 months, collect our unemployment benefits (and they also got the CB sent home whilst working here) and the money received whilst presumably out of work in their own country, amounts to roughly the same as their wage in their own country.
Also for that year worked and then unemployment, they can get the tax paid back in full.
Three months later they come back and the cycle continues.
I shall just add that while they are getting trained there are very few apprenticeships offered for youngsters over here.

 

[Soulman]

A report from last year. We are talking BILLIONS here, year on year.

" The European Union is accused of “breathtaking hypocrisy” for continuing to demand that David Cameron pays a £1.7 billion bill despite its own auditors failing to give a clean bill of health to more than £100 billion of spending by Brussels.
According to the annual report of the European Court of Auditors, seen by The Telegraph, £5.5 billion of the EU budget last year was misspent because of controls on spending that were deemed to be only “partially effective” by experts.
The audit, published this morning, found that £109 billion out of a total of £117 billion spent by the EU in 2013 was "affected by material error”.
It means that the Brussels accounts have not been given the all clear for 19 years running.
Treasury sources said that the disclosure shows why the EU needs “urgent reform”.

Read on.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...more-than-100billion-of-its-own-spending.html

 

[Hamilton]

I have given up on believing any of the research into this sort of thing, as it is so easy to ignore what is inconvenient. Given that half of all immigrants come from non EU countries with health systems nowhere near as good as ours, whatever one thinks of the NHS, I find it very hard to believe that they have less use of the NHS and are not a burden.Would they not have stored-up health problems form poor diet etc? Also you say their usage is around half of Brits, yet they only make up about 7% of the population, so either this is badly expressed, or their use is in fact much higher.
If you say that the vast majority are paying taxes, then Ok, though I think this might be rather exaggerated, but OK, that is what you claim. However, how many have been paying taxes for as long as their demands on the NHS might financially warrant. I am not for one moment suggesting that anyone is denied treatment, but I would think on average, but certainly based on last year's figures, the NHS is being used by an extra 300.000 a year who have paid next to nothing. Say over the last 5 years, this would be one and a half million with relatively little paid in. I do feel that this is a burden, whatever other feelings you may have.

It's not what I claim. It's what the Office for National Statistics states. These aren't claims, they are evidence.

Your claim that the NHS is being used by an extra 300,000 and that these people have paid next to nothing is an unsubstantiated claim. But these claims aren't surprising, because this is the twisted narrative that UKIP are feeding the public and that our mainstream parties haven't got the backbone to tackle.

 

[Hastings gull]

It's not what I claim. It's what the Office for National Statistics states. These aren't claims, they are evidence.

Your claim that the NHS is being used by an extra 300,000 and that these people have paid next to nothing is an unsubstantiated claim. But these claims aren't surprising, because this is the twisted narrative that UKIP are feeding the public and that our mainstream parties haven't got the backbone to tackle.

I think you are rather too naïve for your own good, my friend. OK, it is "evidence" as you say, but anyone can find "evidence" to support their viewpoint, if they tried hard enough. I am not suggesting that there is a deliberate plan to mislead, just that you are happy to believe "evidence" when it happens to support your opinion. By the way, did you not claim that the Nuffield whatever claimed these figures, now you attribute them to someone else? Lets be honest, if an immigrant comes here after years of comparative neglect from a very poor or possibly non-existent health service in the Third World, it take a helluva lot of believing that their reliance on the NHS will be less than the average Brit.
As to the figure of 300.000, as we are told by the Government, (who had every reason to play down the figures, given their previous bold promises) who entered the country last year, it is hardly rocket science to then go and claim that they will have paid in very little, if at all. Surely that is totally logical - unless you are, what is the expression, "none so blind than those who do not want to see." But it is fascinating how you are all too willing to stress it is unsubstantiated, whilst what suits you is "evidence". As to twisted narrative, one might say the same about yourself.

 

[JCL666]

I think you are rather too naïve for your own good, my friend. OK, it is "evidence" as you say, but anyone can find "evidence" to support their viewpoint, if they tried hard enough. I am not suggesting that there is a deliberate plan to mislead, just that you are happy to believe "evidence" when it happens to support your opinion. By the way, did you not claim that the Nuffield whatever claimed these figures, now you attribute them to someone else? Lets be honest, if an immigrant comes here after years of comparative neglect from a very poor or possibly non-existent health service in the Third World, it take a helluva lot of believing that their reliance on the NHS will be less than the average Brit.
As to the figure of 300.000, as we are told by the Government, (who had every reason to play down the figures, given their previous bold promises) who entered the country last year, it is hardly rocket science to then go and claim that they will have paid in very little, if at all. Surely that is totally logical - unless you are, what is the expression, "none so blind than those who do not want to see." But it is fascinating how you are all too willing to stress it is unsubstantiated, whilst what suits you is "evidence". As to twisted narrative, one might say the same about yourself.

This is possibly one of the most patronising posts I have ever read, and total horseshit to boot.

 

[Hastings gull]

This is possibly one of the most patronising posts I have ever read, and total horseshit to boot.

It was certainly not meant to be patronising, so sorry if it reads like that -this happens when all we have to go on is the written word. And then you talk about horse . . . whilst lecturing me about the tone of my post. Pot, kettle, black? Might it have been an idea to have actually contributed positively?