No Poles, or Spanish need apply

FTA69

gandalf wrote: »

Doolix my god if I time travelled back in time to England in the 1950's I'm sure they were saying the same about the irish then. That statement smacks of hypocrisy especially given our recent history.

The situation is correcting itself. The jobs are drying up and the workers are now moving back home or to places were there is employment like London for the 2012 Olympics.

We still have problems here like an out of date Public Service that is choking the country economically. You can't blame that on migrant workers, that's the governments fault and by extension our fault for voting in the muppets and not demanding that they ensure we get value for money.

Spot on lad, I'm going working on the Olympics there when the college year here is done.

For us to turn around start giving out about people coming here to work is the height of hypocrisy, to moan about them living 4 to a house is even worse considering we did the exact same thing in countries across the world. The fact that people are being paid low wages has nothing to do with the workers, but the bosses who pay them those low wages.

The only way around these problems is for all workers, Irish, Polish etc, to unionise and ensure fair standards for all. It's about time people started kicking up instead of kicking down at other workers trying to make a life for themselves.

gandalf

FTA I agree with everything except the unionise part of your response.

Part of the problem here is the disproportionate power of the unions in the Public Sector and Semi State (especially the Private Semi State ESB). While those of us in the private PAYE sector have to weather the peaks and troughs of the markets the permanent staff and especially a bloated middle management are paid too much, have job security and a defined pension that us in the private sector can only dream about.

The main thing that has to be ensured is the migrant workers are not working below the legal minimum wage and where they are it be reported and dealt with vigorously. If you know its happening there is no point whinging about it and not reporting it to the authorities.

asdasd

This thread is about England. So the standard mantra of "We went everywhere, we ees hypocrites" doesnt apply. The cost of people going somewhere is amplified by the numbers who go.

There are 100 million East Europeans on wages less than Mexico. A small percentage of that population on the move is enough to distort labour markets in the UK, and particularly Ireland.

So if 1% of Poland's population moves to Ireland the Irish population increases by 10% ( working population by 20%), if 1% of Ireland's population moves to the UK the population increases by a mere 0.06% which clearly has no difference on labour costs.

Personally I dont think that people who, in a recession, cant get jobs because immigrants are given preference as just going to write it off as stuff that happens. In a recession we cant argue that jobs are not been taken by immigrants, since clearly they are; nor that these are jobs the locals wont do, because clearly they will.

New ideology required.

asdasd

The main thing that has to be ensured is the migrant workers are not working below the legal minimum wage and where they are it be reported and dealt with vigorously.

Any wage is legal if people contract as self employed. Mimimum wage is a legal fiction.

gandalf

asdasd given the largest migrant community here are from the UK then I reckon it is quite pertinent to this thread

As for your exclude migrants idea you can't unless you are proposing we or the UK leave the EU. If that happens then the least of your/our/their problems would be migrant workers.

I doubt we will be seeing Poles moving here or to the UK in the near future given their economy is on the up and ours and the UK's are in severe decline.

oscarBravo

asdasd wrote: »

Any wage is legal if people contract as self employed. Mimimum wage is a legal fiction.

The Revenue Commissioners make a clear distinction between employment and subcontracting, and it has very little to do with whether someone claims to be employed or not. If someone is paying less than minimum wage by pretending to subcontract the work, they're open to a world of grief from Revenue.

sink

asdasd wrote: »

This thread is about England. So the standard mantra of "We went everywhere, we ees hypocrites" doesnt apply. The cost of people going somewhere is amplified by the numbers who go.

There are 100 million East Europeans on wages less than Mexico. A small percentage of that population on the move is enough to distort labour markets in the UK, and particularly Ireland.

So if 1% of Poland's population moves to Ireland the Irish population increases by 10% ( working population by 20%), if 1% of Ireland's population moves to the UK the population increases by a mere 0.06% which clearly has no difference on labour costs.

Personally I dont think that people who, in a recession, cant get jobs because immigrants are given preference as just going to write it off as stuff that happens. In a recession we cant argue that jobs are not been taken by immigrants, since clearly they are; nor that these are jobs the locals wont do, because clearly they will.

New ideology required.

Take the instance of dell jobs lost in Limerick. There is no possible way we could retain those jobs without lowering wages. Their cost base was simply to high relative to the competition. Up until 2007 dell was the worlds leading PC manufacturer, they lost that position to HP and Lenovo and Acer are creeping up on them. To retain market position they have to lower their cost base and the only way to do that was to lower their wages. On the other had PC prices have fallen through the floor and parents are buying them for 12 year olds something they could not have afforded to do even 2 years ago.

If we start restricting lower wage workers and attempt to keep wages artificially high we are only going to precipitate the movement of manufacturing jobs out of this country.

O'Morris

gandalf wrote: »

As for your exclude migrants idea you can't unless you are proposing we or the UK leave the EU.

If you read this article in the Sunday Business Post from the time of the Nice Treaty referendum you'll see that the EU minister Dick Roche seems to think otherwise. He suggested that if the scaremongers were proved right and we did see a massive increase in immigration after EU enlargement that there were legal mechanisms under existing EU law that would allow to take "special measures"

The Commission will monitor it and see how it develops. We, as a member state, can go to the Commission and ask it to take special measures. Those special measures exist under existing law, and have nothing whatsoever to do with the Nice Treaty....

With the European elections and Lisbon Treaty referendum coming up later in the year I can see immigration being a major issue. If the government is serious about getting the Lisbon Treaty passed then they need to think seriously about doing something to reduce immigration. I don't think we'd lack allies in Europe if we did get a deal worked out on this.

pepsicokeacola

O'Morris wrote: »

If you read this article in the Sunday Business Post from the time of the Nice Treaty referendum you'll see that the EU minister Dick Roche seems to think otherwise. He suggested that if the scaremongers were proved right and we did see a massive increase in immigration after EU enlargement that there were legal mechanisms under existing EU law that would allow to take "special measures"

With the European elections and Lisbon Treaty referendum coming up later in the year I can see immigration being a major issue. If the government is serious about getting the Lisbon Treaty passed then they need to think seriously about doing something to reduce immigration. I don't think we'd lack allies in Europe if we did get a deal worked out on this.

dont you worry, large scale immigration to ireland is over.

O'Morris

pepsicokeacola wrote: »

dont you worry, large scale immigration to ireland is over.

I hope you're right but I'm not sure if we should just sit back and wait to see how it turns out. According to this article, well over a hundred thousand PPS numbers were issued to non-nationals last year. And 2008 wasn't a great year for job creation in this country.

In the first ten months of the year, almost 140,000 new PPS numbers were issued to non-nationals, suggesting that there is still a surplus entering the country.

Geogregor

asdasd wrote: »

This thread is about England.

Hmm, I thought it is Irish forum?

The cost of people going somewhere is amplified by the numbers who go.

Costs or benefits, it depends from perspective.

There are 100 million East Europeans on wages less than Mexico. A small percentage of that population on the move is enough to distort labour markets in the UK, and particularly Ireland.

Can you quote your source? What do you mean by Eastern Europe? Russia? Ukraine? Or only new EU members? You should check wages and GDP per capita in Prague region for example. It's far from Mexico.

Personally I don't think that people who, in a recession, cant get jobs because immigrants are given preference as just going to write it off as stuff that happens.

What do you mean by preferences for immigrants? As far as I know, immigrants are first to loose jobs. It happened to some of my friends. For example two of them worked as architects. Recession, bum, here you go, sorry guys, go home. By coincidence those who lost jobs were immigrants. Is it what you call preference?
So stop talking nonsense.

In a recession we cant argue that jobs are not been taken by immigrants, since clearly they are; nor that these are jobs the locals wont do, because clearly they will.

In recession jobs are lost not taken by anyone. Immigrants loose jobs faster and more often than locals. But we are easy scapegoat.
Why don't you complain about greedy bankers who got us in this mess in first place?
Remind me about boss of RBS, was he Polish? Or maybe Lithuanian?
As far as I know he was British, actually Scottish to be precise.
By the way I would like to see broker, who lost job in City, picking up vegetables in rural Norfolk.

FreedomJoe

Good luck to any Irish person who thinks they can to the UK looking for work.

The London authorities tried to ensure that only local workers received jobs on the Olympic construction.

However employment agencies wised upto this and relocated thousands of poles into local rented housing and thus automatically qualified them for local jobs.

In the UK they expect the construction industry to lose 70,000 jobs this year!

20,000 migrant workers register for London Olympics jobs - despite pledge to provide work for local people

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1085444/20-000-migrant-workers-register-London-Olympics-jobs--despite-pledge-provide-work-local-people.html

About 2,700 workers are on the Olympics site, rising to 9,000 by 2010. Estimates of the number of migrant workers there - mostly from Poland and Baltic states within the European Union - range from 10 to 70 per cent.

gabigeist

asdasd wrote: »

There is no freedom of movement from the accession states to most European States, a fact taht needs to be repeated every single thread.

I'm not sure why

Only four EU states – Austria, Belgium, Denmark and Germany – still impose restrictions on citizens from some or all of the eight formerly communist states that joined the EU in 2004.

Fair enough, Bulgarian and Romanian (joined 2007) workers can only access about half EU coutries but we're discussing Poles (and Spanish)here.

asdasd

Only four EU states – Austria, Belgium, Denmark and Germany – still impose restrictions on citizens from some or all of the eight formerly communist states that joined the EU in 2004.

Most did until recently.We'll see what happens in 2011 for Germany, at al.

ostrich

seamus wrote: »

Them and everyone else in that country. Does that mean that every citizen has a right to job over an EU immigrant? What about British people who haven't been living in Britain all their life? Are they lower on the "gizza job" chain?

If someone is getting work ahead of you it means two things:

1. You're asking too much
2. You're crap at your job

Market forces will always prevail, the nationality of the workers is irrelevant.

Thank you.

djpbarry

O'Morris wrote: »

According to this article, well over a hundred thousand PPS numbers were issued to non-nationals last year.

You did read the title of the article, didn't you? It has been pointed out to you in several other threads why the number PPSN's issued is not a very accurate means of measuring immigration, hasn't it? And yet you still persist; why is that I wonder?

FreedomJoe wrote: »

About 2,700 workers are on the Olympics site, rising to 9,000 by 2010. Estimates of the number of migrant workers there - mostly from Poland and Baltic states within the European Union - range from 10 to 70 per cent.

What the hell kind of estimate carries an error of +/- 30%? That's not an estimate, that's a wild stab in the dark. Ah, the good old Mail, statistically rigorous to a fault.

asdasd

What the hell kind of estimate carries an error of +/- 30%? That's not an estimate, that's a wild stab in the dark.

Gobal warming? Oh wait, the IPCC estimates that the temperature will rise from 1.6 C to up to 5.6 C this century. Seems like a huge variation to me.

Up to, is another weasal word.

EDIt:

Not that I dispute AGW. Just pointing out that your demands are more rigorous for your opponents.

asdasd

1. You're asking too much
2. You're crap at your job

We are all asking too much. If we had full open borders then the Irish wage would depress to the world miminum.

Things would be different for people who do get to conrol immigration, or in cartels, in their specific industrys i.e. Dentistry, Teaching, Consultancy, law etc.

Just the proles.

But thats ok. The upper middle class can always whine about "racism" of the workers from the sidelines, from their protected jobs.

djpbarry

asdasd wrote: »

Gobal warming? Oh wait, the IPCC estimates that the temperature will rise from 1.6 C to up to 5.6 C this century. Seems like a huge variation to me.

Apples and oranges. You're comparing a predicted result with a supposedly measured result.

asdasd wrote: »

The upper middle class can always whine about "racism" of the workers from the sidelines, from their protected jobs.

The Orwellian 'classism' argument is getting tiresome. I suppose the 'middle class' actively works to keep the 'lower classes' in their place, do they?

Serenity Now!

asdasd wrote: »

The upper middle class can always whine about "racism" of the workers from the sidelines, from their protected jobs.

Does having a job mean that that job is not only "protected" but that the person in question is "upper middle class"??? lol

There's a lot of jealousy going on here from the self-perceived class-warrior déludées, isn't there? Racism, xenophobia, bigotry...call it what you will, "The Worker" you refer to is unfortunately not the idealistic image you have in your head. As usual, every effer in this country wants everything for nothing.
:rolleyes:

Dannyboy83

seamus wrote: »

Them and everyone else in that country. Does that mean that every citizen has a right to job over an EU immigrant? What about British people who haven't been living in Britain all their life? Are they lower on the "gizza job" chain?

If someone is getting work ahead of you it means two things:

1. You're asking too much
2. You're crap at your job

Market forces will always prevail, the nationality of the workers is irrelevant.

Bloody good post

Dannyboy83

asdasd wrote: »

No we don't have "free movement" in the EU. Poles cant work in most parts of the EU.

This is incorrect.

Polish citizens can freely work in the following countries:

UK, Ireland, Sweden, Finland, Greece, Spain, Portugal and Holland.
Poles can also work in all of the A10 countries.
Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary , Latvia , Lithuania , Poland , Slovakia , Slovenia , Cyprus , Malta

Poles can also work in Iceland & Norway, outside the EU but within the EFTA.

Subsequently, Polish citizens can work (sector specific) in the following countries:

Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany and Austria.

Furthermore, Poland has a massive influx of Ukranians- outside the EU and the EFTA but actively seeking membership.

With regard to Bulgaria and Romania - I don't know.
But they are not allowed to work in the Irish Republic anyway, unless requested by an employer.

Dannyboy83

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That's why I said it was a difficult question. I tend to support the idea that rates negotiated with a union should be protected -- a deal is a deal. But I could be moved from that position in cases where it can be shown that unions used unfair leverage to arrive at a rate. [In Ireland, I think that unions should now be open to the possibility of re-negotiating some rates downwards, especially in construction.]

It's even more difficult if we are looking at a "going rate" established by custom, and without union involvement.

Another bloody good post.

sovtek

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

Luckily enough, unions don't dictate legislation on working conditions. God knows where we'd be if they did!

Probably having better working conditions, more benefits, free time, wages etc etc.
Remember...that stuff nobody had until unions were formed in western industrialized nations.

Dont be at yourself

Yes, because with redundancies left, right and centre, it's clear to everyone that employers are able to give employees better working conditions, wages, more free time and so on.

This 'outstetched hand, everything for nothing, regardless of economic realities' attitude represents exactly the negative side of unions.

sovtek

O'Morris wrote: »

I hope you're right but I'm not sure if we should just sit back and wait to see how it turns out. According to this article, well over a hundred thousand PPS numbers were issued to non-nationals last year. And 2008 wasn't a great year for job creation in this country.

You need immigrants to keep coming to ireland. It's not like you guys have been running the place that great so far. Also you need immigrants to improve the gene pool.

sovtek

NekkidBibleMan wrote: »

Yes, because with redundancies left, right and centre, it's clear to everyone that employers are able to give employees better working conditions, wages, more free time and so on.

This 'outstetched hand, everything for nothing, regardless of economic realities' attitude represents exactly the negative side of unions.

The economic reality is that companies are using a crisis to screw workers and the only thing between us and them are unions.

Climate Expert

To all the racists here, free movement of workers within the EU was not created to allow employers seek employees from a specific country. It was created to allow an EU citizen to be legally allowed work in another EU country.

Dont be at yourself

The economic reality is that companies are using a crisis to screw workers and the only thing between us and them are unions.

Oh, I forgot. Companies aren't laying off workers because they're in threat of going to the wall. It's because companies are evil and just want to screw the worker.

Wake up.

Wheely

asdasd wrote: »

Things would be different for people who do get to conrol immigration, or in cartels, in their specific industrys i.e. Dentistry, Teaching, Consultancy, law etc.

Just the proles.

But thats ok. The upper middle class can always whine about "racism" of the workers from the sidelines, from their protected jobs.

Sorry Professor Orwell, who are the "proles" now"? And how are you grouping dentistry teaching law and , I'm sorry, consultancy in the same category-right they all require one to have an education, but.....

DO you mean medical consultancy or a more generic type?

I can assure you "law" HARDLY provides a protected job in the current climate-it is in fact shelling jobs. And depending on what form of consultancy your referring to, neither is that. You seem to be mixing public and private sector jobs there.........

There seems to be an air of bitterness in your posts, I suggest you put down your beloved copy of the "manifesto" and try and to shed that ayers rock on your shoulder.

Incidentally, how does your racist subtext go down with the rest of the "comrades"?