Brexit Discussion Thread VI

prinzeugen

prinzeugen wrote: »

The HR guy must be an idiot then. The way some of the media is reporting a hard Britex makes it look like a new Berlin wall is about to go up!

And the situation you posted would be illegal in the UK/Ireland anyway under equal opportunities/equal status acts in the UK and Ireland.

The reason they are keeping it on the qt, is they know they could be hauled through the courts.

It doesn't sound like it falls under any of the nine grounds you can't discriminate against here:
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/justice/law_and_rights/irish_human_rights_commission.html

Picking an office a job can be done from isn't discrimination on nationality.

Moving car assembly lines is a bit more complicated than sending a new employees laptop to Dublin rather than London.

judeboy101

These decisions by the EU take a major sting out of a no deal. ERG will be delighted.

Peregrinus

judeboy101 wrote: »

These decisions by the EU take a major sting out of a no deal. ERG will be delighted.

Not really. They fall well short of what the UK would get in a transition period under the Withdrawal Agreement, and there will still be major disruption.

judeboy101

Peregrinus wrote: »

Not really. They fall well short of what the UK would get in a transition period under the Withdrawal Agreement, and there will still be major disruption.

I'm sorry but the no deal has been painted like so apocalypse with blood in the street and cat and dogs living together etc. It was meant to be getting kicked out of the house by your housemates with no clothes on. Now your housemates are letting you pack allowing you to visit, letting you use their wifi .

Peregrinus

judeboy101 wrote: »

I'm sorry but the no deal has been painted like so apocalypse with blood in the street and cat and dogs living together etc. It was meant to be getting kicked out of the house by your housemates with no clothes on. Now your housemates are letting you pack allowing you to visit, letting you use their wifi .

That won't solve your homelessness problem!

Three points:

First, look at the areas where the EU has not made any no-deal arrangements - medicines, data flows, veterinary checks, fisheries, any services other than financial services. And tariffs, of course. Virtually nothing here is going to address the massive congestion/delay/capacity issues at ports.

Secondly, look at the limitations on what has been announced. Yes, UK truckers will be able to deliver goods from the UK to points in the EU. But they won't be able to do a follow-on trip, picking up goods from that point and bringing them to another point in the EU, and so on, until they get to a point from which goods need to be brough back to the UK. Without this freedom, UK truckers operations in Europe become much less efficient and so more expensive. And they'll be at a competitive disadvantage by comparison with EU-based trucker who can do this, and for whom the corresponding freedom to make deliveries between points in the UK is much less signifcant. Likewise UK airlines can't make intra-EU flights, which is a much bigger problem for them than the loss by EU airlines of the right to make intra-UK flights.

In the same vein, the continued recognition of existing financial services contracts is convenient for EU-based customers, but it means relatively little to the UK-based banks, who won't be able to write any new contracts for EU customers after Brexit day. These contracts are paid for up front; the revenue stream is cut off immediately.

And, thirdly, these are unilateral and temporary measures which can be revoked by the EU at any time, without notice or agreement. They're explicitly stated to be temporary, and people and businesses are encouraged to act on the basis that they won't be round for ever. So, e.g. companies making long-term logistics arrnagements will not be contracting with UK truckers or UK airlines, since UK truckers/airlines cannot guarantee that they can provide services for a period into the future. Whether and when they will be revoked will depend entirely oni the interests of the EU and its member states, and not at all on the interests of the UK.

judeboy101

Peregrinus wrote: »

That won't solve your homelessness problem!

Three points:

First, look at the areas where the EU has not made any no-deal arrangements - medicines, data flows, veterinary checks, fisheries, any services other than financial services. And tariffs, of course. Virtually nothing here is going to address the massive congestion/delay/capacity issues at ports.

Secondly, look at the limitations on what has been announced. Yes, UK truckers will be able to deliver goods from the UK to points in the EU. But they won't be able to do a follow-on trip, picking up goods from that point and bringing them to another point in the EU, and so on, until they get to a point from which goods need to be brough back to the UK. Without this freedom, UK truckers operations in Europe become much less efficient and so more expensive. And they'll be at a competitive disadvantage by comparison with EU-based trucker who can do this, and for whom the corresponding freedom to make deliveries between points in the UK is much less signifcant. Likewise UK airlines can't make intra-EU flights, which is a much bigger problem for them than the loss by EU airlines of the right to make intra-UK flights.

In the same vein, the continued recognition of existing financial services contracts is convenient for EU-based customers, but it means relatively little to the UK-based banks, who won't be able to write any new contracts for EU customers after Brexit day. These contracts are paid for up front; the revenue stream is cut off immediately.

And, thirdly, these are unilateral and temporary measures which can be revoked by the EU at any time, without notice or agreement. They're explicitly stated to be temporary, and people and businesses are encouraged to act on the basis that they won't be round for ever. So, e.g. companies making long-term logistics arrnagements will not be contracting with UK truckers or UK airlines, since UK truckers/airlines cannot guarantee that they can provide services for a period into the future. Whether and when they will be revoked will depend entirely oni the interests of the EU and its member states, and not at all on the interests of the UK.

It's the equivalent of being evicted for not paying rent and put into a homeless hub hub. Not ideal but doesn't teach you a lesson about not paying your rent

NIMAN

judeboy101 wrote: »

It's the equivalent of being evicted for not paying rent and put into a homeless hub hub. Not ideal but doesn't teach you a lesson about not paying your rent

Unless you live in Strokestown.

Nody

prinzeugen wrote: »

The HR guy must be an idiot then. The way some of the media is reporting a hard Britex makes it look like a new Berlin wall is about to go up!

It is in terms of possibility to move people around, data etc.

And the situation you posted would be illegal in the UK/Ireland anyway under equal opportunities/equal status acts in the UK and Ireland.

The reason they are keeping it on the qt, is they know they could be hauled through the courts.

A company has the right to move a job where ever they see fit; they are not discriminating against a UK person being hired but simply not hiring in their UK entity. That's a significant difference that you appear to have glossed over.

Peregrinus

judeboy101 wrote: »

It's the equivalent of being evicted for not paying rent and put into a homeless hub hub. Not ideal but doesn't teach you a lesson about not paying your rent

(You've plainly not spent much time living in a homeless hub.)

Back to the point: The EU's primary objective in a no-deal situation is not to maximise pain for the UK; it's to minimise pain for the EU. Some of the things they do for that purpose may, incidentally, also tend to alleviate the plight of the UK, but that's incidental. The UK cannot depend on the EU acting to alleviate its plight and, where the EU does act in that way, the UK cannot depend on it continuing to do so.

The UK is still looking at disruption and dislocation of a kind, and on a scale, that it hasn't seen since 1945.

bilston

judeboy101 wrote: »

I'm sorry but the no deal has been painted like so apocalypse with blood in the street and cat and dogs living together etc. It was meant to be getting kicked out of the house by your housemates with no clothes on. Now your housemates are letting you pack allowing you to visit, letting you use their wifi .

You seem almost disappointed.

Maybe I'm missing something but customs delays will remain a major problem and that could lead to empty supermarket shelves and rising petrol costs, which in turns leads to a steep increase in inflation.

murphaph

Water John wrote: »

Think she would be a great PM but wouldn't be able to keep brexiteers onside.

She wouldn't have to if things keep going the way they are. The Tory party will split as centrists have indicated they will resign the whip. Labour may split too. A new centrist party formed of the sensible heads in the HoC is a real possibility, especially now that Corbyn has put his foot in his mouth again.

I think Rudd, Grieve, Soubry, etc. would have a lot more in common with Starmer, Umunna, Smith. etc. than with Mogg and Johnson.

mickoneill31

prinzeugen wrote: »

The HR guy must be an idiot then. The way some of the media is reporting a hard Britex makes it look like a new Berlin wall is about to go up!

And the situation you posted would be illegal in the UK/Ireland anyway under equal opportunities/equal status acts in the UK and Ireland.

The reason they are keeping it on the qt, is they know they could be hauled through the courts.

Peregrinus wrote: »

I think you've misunderstood mickoneill. It's not the case that he's applying for a job in London that is only open to nationals of the EU-27. On the retirement/resignation of the current occupant the opportunity is being taken to relocate the role from London to an EU-27 location, presumably because the the nature of the role makes it desirable that it be discharged with the Single Market.

Presumably a British citizen is free to apply for the job and will be considered on the same basis as any other applicant. But, if appointed, he'll leave the UK to take up the job.

There's nothing illegal about this and the company faces no prospect of being hauled through th courts. They haven't made a public announcement about this because, well, why would they?

Bang on. The company has multiple offices. The replacement role was just advertised in the European offices. The guy in the UK just left by himself and the role wasn't readvertised over there. They've been doing this for a while.

I was about to reply to prinzeugen when I saw your reply. I'm not really sure it warrants a reply though when he / she sees fit to dictate what is illegal when they don't even know the difference between a HR person and a hiring manager. I'm guessing we're not discussing with an expert.

Like you say companies don't make public announcements. That's not their businesses. Their business is to provide their product and make money. Politics is not most companies business. The actual reason for my new company not hiring in the UK at the moment is something I hadn't considered before but makes total sense and must affect 1000's of employees. I'm not going to go into more detail on a public forum.

After the sterling drop after the 2016 referendum the current company I am with let 5% of their staff go in Dublin. You didn't see this in the papers either. One of our products which was barely profitable became unprofitable and not worth continuing very quickly so it was axed and the staff that supported it were either moved or part of the 5% to be let go. This is just business as usual to companies. Nothing illegal or underhand but they're not shouting it from the rooftops either.

On the positive side for UK jobs a role in the UK is probably cheaper for an American company now with the drop in sterling. I know companies are juggling those numbers constantly too when deciding where to place staff.

EdgeCase

What's worrying be a bit is talking to some continental colleagues of mine this morning. Four of them are talking about handing in notice and moving back to France and Spain because of what they're reading about disruption and particularly food and medicine shortages in the papers this morning.

I don't know how serious those plans are but it's the first time that I've seen people very worried.

murphaph

Peregrinus wrote: »

(You've plainly not spent much time living in a homeless hub.)

Back to the point: The EU's primary objective in a no-deal situation is not to maximise pain for the UK; it's to minimise pain for the EU. Some of the things they do for that purpose may, incidentally, also tend to alleviate the plight of the UK, but that's incidental. The UK cannot depend on the EU acting to alleviate its plight and, where the EU does act in that way, the UK cannot depend on it continuing to do so.

The UK is still looking at disruption and dislocation of a kind, and on a scale, that it hasn't seen since 1945.

Indeed I would go so far as to suggest that many of the EU measures are explicitly about helping Ireland "manage" a no deal Brexit. That awful German dominated EU at it again.

seamus

EdgeCase wrote: »

What's worrying be a bit is talking to some continental colleagues of mine this morning. Four of them are talking about handing in notice and moving back to France and Spain because of what they're reading about disruption and particularly food and medicine shortages in the papers this morning.

I don't know how serious those plans are but it's the first time that I've seen people very worried.

Well it'll work out to some extent because if people leave voluntarily, they don't have to be laid off. But this is one of the big problems, for London especially.

Migrant workers are highly mobile, they can up and leave at the drop of a hat. If it sounds like Britain is going to be a 3rd world country (even for a few months), then migrants will go home where they won't have to ration food and medicine.

Companies will also start capitalising on it and offering relocation packages to their EU staff to go live in Belgium or Dublin. For those in the UK for whom migration is their problem, they'll be delighted. For the UK economy though, it's a mess. Every job left vacant by an EU migrant is not one that'll be filled by a UK citizen. It'll be made redundant or moved to another country.

Mezcita

EdgeCase wrote: »

What's worrying be a bit is talking to some continental colleagues of mine this morning. Four of them are talking about handing in notice and moving back to France and Spain because of what they're reading about disruption and particularly food and medicine shortages in the papers this morning.

I don't know how serious those plans are but it's the first time that I've seen people very worried.

You wouldn't even know it was happening based on the general feeling within my office in London. Best to ignore the massive trumpeting elephant in the room.

Fun times.

EdgeCase

These were a group of largely french people in Ireland not the UK. They suddenly were wondering if there was also going to be a problem here and starting to read about it for the first time. You have to realise that there are a lot of people here who don't necessarily interact with Irish news content at all. These guys would be techies and they don't really pay much attention to news here and what they do read is from international news sites.

They picked up a story from CNN this morning about food shortages in the Republic and started contemplating handing in notice.

I'm *still* getting questions too from french people in France about whether Ireland is also doing 'the brexit'.

The government would want to be very, very clear about communicating. There's a big risk of causing confusion, particularly as the dust starts to be stirred up in England about implications for "southern Ireland" by those with an agenda.

For example providing briefings to companies' HR departments and internal communication people would be very, very useful especially in large companies with multinational staff.

Zubeneschamali

Peregrinus wrote: »

Pretty well everbody in the UK motor industry holds anti-brexit views. You should probably be asking yourself why that might be.

After a model cycle or so, say 10 years, the "UK motor industry" will be like that favourite Brexit entrepeneur Dyson: union jack on the box but made in Czechia, Poland, Malaysia.

EdgeCase

The British motor industry management may hold very anti Brexit views but based in vox pops in Sunderland and looking at the very strong votes in favour of it, the average British autoworker seems to have no idea they work as part of a pan European integrated supply chain.

lawred2

EdgeCase wrote: »

The British motor industry management may hold very anti Brexit views but based in vox pops in Sunderland and looking at the very strong votes in favour of it, the average British autoworker seems to have no idea they work as part of a pan European integrated supply chain.

What's to say that the majority of auto workers in Sunderland didn't vote remain?

Zubeneschamali

prinzeugen wrote: »

No deal and in 2 years people will be asking what all the fuss was about.

Sadly, this is probably true.


The press will scream over anyone blaming anything on Brexit and shout that everyone needs to get over it. Ordinary Brits will sigh and carry on.


A decade of grey depression, for sale signs on boarded up property, dole lines.


But hey, we might get new "Boys from the Blackstuff", "Auf Wiedersehen, Pet", "Brassed Off" or "Full Monty" shows on Netflix!

EdgeCase

lawred2 wrote: »

What's to say that the majority of auto workers in Sunderland didn't vote remain?

There was quite a bit of coverage of Sunderland in the run-up to the referendum, as it was seen as 'ground zero' for Brexit and there were a few reporters who surveyed the Nissan carpark and it would seem that the majority of those answering were planning to vote to leave, despite all the implications which were being talked about at the time.

I haven't seen any formal polling of autoworkers but it would seem like from informal surveying many of them did vote to leave.

lawred2

EdgeCase wrote: »

There was quite a bit of coverage of Sunderland in the run-up to the referendum, as it was seen as 'ground zero' for Brexit and there were a few reporters who surveyed the Nissan carpark and it would seem that the majority of those answering were planning to vote to leave, despite all the implications which were being talked about at the time.

I haven't seen any formal polling of autoworkers but it would seem like from informal surveying many of them did vote to leave.

yeah but I wonder was that a case of selective reporting... a case of "look at these lads whose livelihoods are dependent on EU membership still wanting to leave" - British lionheart types you know.. pride of Britain and all that

or else a case of pointing out the prize turkeys voting for their own Christmas

might have left out all those chaps who had the sense not to vote for the chopping block as there was no story in that

EdgeCase

lawred2 wrote: »

yeah but I wonder was that a case of selective reporting... a case of "look at these lads whose livelihoods are dependent on EU membership still wanting to leave" - British lionheart types you know.. pride of Britain and all that

or else a case of pointing out the prize turkeys voting for their own Christmas

might have left out all those chaps who had the sense not to vote for the chopping block as there was no story in that

All you can get for Sunderland is the overall figures:

38.7% Remain - 51,930 vs 61.3% Leave 82,394

Leroy42

EdgeCase wrote: »

All you can get for Sunderland is the overall figures:

38.7% Remain - 51,930 vs 61.3% Leave 82,394

I think it realistic to assume that many of them did vote for Brexit. After all, they were sold the promise that nothing would change, except for the better. They would be staying in the SM, the EU would give them whatever deal they wanted and there was a whole world waiting for them.

If you accepted what was being fed to you, then why would they not vote.

Project fear was a very real a powerful slogan which managed, very effectively, to dismiss any and all calls for reflection consideration of issues.

Rain Ascending

EdgeCase wrote: »

There was quite a bit of coverage of Sunderland in the run-up to the referendum, as it was seen as 'ground zero' for Brexit and there were a few reporters who surveyed the Nissan carpark and it would seem that the majority of those answering were planning to vote to leave, despite all the implications which were being talked about at the time.

I haven't seen any formal polling of autoworkers but it would seem like from informal surveying many of them did vote to leave.

My recollection is that there was some general demographic analysis done of one or more constituencies in the region that showed that:

• Those in work were much likely to vote "remain" than the average for the constituency
• Those out or work or retired were more likely to vote "leave" than the average

Apologies -- I don't have a link to provide the numbers, but the associated news report was something that made me sit up and pay attention at the time, as it partially answered the conundrum of why places like Sunderland voted leave: the key swing votes were not those employed at manufacturing plants. Remember other (UK-wide) polling suggested that leavers saw Brexit as a good thing even if a relative became unemployed as a result.

10000maniacs

Peregrinus wrote: »

Pretty well everbody in the UK motor industry holds anti-brexit views. You should probably be asking yourself why that might be.


.

No you would be wrong on that. Channel 4 interviewed Nissan workers in Sunderland a few months back and a lot of the assembly workers were clearly on the side of Brexit.
That's the scary thing about Brexit, it's a self harm cult and for a lot of people it trumps putting bread on the table.

LuckyLloyd

I really try not to reply to this guy's posts. It's an almost nightly bombing of cliche completely absent of fact, to which there is little or no genuine engagement with the responses.

prinzeugen wrote: »

Corbyn is a Neil Kinnock Mk2. So bad nobody will vote for them other than ex miners and indoctrinated students.

The left.. Free speech. Just as long as its socialist/communist party approved!

Typical left wing. Do as I say, not as I do. The speaker in the HOC should be replaced as his bias for Labour is so obvious.

Didn't realise the UK electorate was 40% composed of miners and "indoctrinated" students in 2017!!

judeboy101

Peregrinus wrote: »

(You've plainly not spent much time living in a homeless hub.)

Back to the point: The EU's primary objective in a no-deal situation is not to maximise pain for the UK; it's to minimise pain for the EU. Some of the things they do for that purpose may, incidentally, also tend to alleviate the plight of the UK, but that's incidental. The UK cannot depend on the EU acting to alleviate its plight and, where the EU does act in that way, the UK cannot depend on it continuing to do so.

The UK is still looking at disruption and dislocation of a kind, and on a scale, that it hasn't seen since 1945.

Plenty on here were predicting exodus from city of London, financial crash, no planes flying etc. None of which will happen now. EU are staring to turn soft. It's like stopping paying your mortgage knowing full well the bank can't evict you for years.

mickoneill31

judeboy101 wrote: »

Plenty on here were predicting exodus from city of London, financial crash, no planes flying etc. None of which will happen now. EU are staring to turn soft. It's like stopping paying your mortgage knowing full well the bank can't evict you for years.

The second part is probably a good analogy. If you stop paying your mortgage and go for a new loan, what happens?

If you stop paying your mortgage is the final outcome ever good?

I won't bother with the first part. Posted by somebody who hasn't read any of this thread (or doesn't understand it).