Blogs Coffee House

Up the workers!

14 August 2014

1:08 PM

14 August 2014

1:08 PM

Mr S was interested to read that Mark Carney has sounded the alarm on low wage growth. In light of yesterday’s announcements, the Times’s business commentator Andrew Clark calls for bosses to ‘display a modicum of largesse’ to sustain the economic recovery.

Mr S hears on the grapevine that business leaders are planning to open their pockets at the end of this year, if only to stop Ed Miliband, who is regarded with a certain amount of distrust. The thinking is that a wage rise will undermine Labour’s (increasingly successful) rhetoric on the cost of living.

Mr S wonders: will a prominent Tory use the party conference, the last before the election, to demand that businesses share the proceeds of the recovery? What have they to lose by doing so?


More Spectator for less. Stay informed leading up to the EU referendum and in the aftermath. Subscribe and receive 15 issues delivered for just £15, with full web and app access. Join us.



Show comments
  • dado_trunking

    The proceeds of the recovery … beautiful wording.

    Let’s be honest for once: what recovery? 10 months prior to the elections Osborne is found flooding the market with fresh capital … erhm … credit. If you cannot now see any new economic/construction activity where you are then our great leaders clearly do not not consider you worthy. Yet, manufacturing output remains low, tax receipts are down as wage growth is down.

    But nothing exemplifies better what is really going on in Britain today:

    We have talk endlessly about irrelevant UK fish exports to Russia (which are now curtailed) whilst ignoring that we have virtually switched off all our (Russian) coal plant four months ago and now import Norwegian gas instead. UK coal capacity is down from >13GW a year ago to <5GW today, like-for-like:
    http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/

    That is of course not free, so the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund took payment – now they own, amongst other thing, 75% of Regent Street and 64% of the back streets too.
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/constructionandproperty/11024354/Crown-Estate-fends-off-foreign-bidders-to-buy-slice-of-Mayfair-from-Church-of-England.html

    What does that do to the balance of trade?
    Nothing, the asset formerly owned by the indigenous just goes elsewhere.

  • The Masked Marvel

    So, if there is a wage rise, does that mean British workers will be paid better, more of the unemployed will be willing to take jobs, or immigrants coming in to take British jobs will be better paid? It’s hard to keep track of these things.

  • pointlesswasteoftime

    Too little, too late.

  • toco10

    Low wages are a direct result of Labour’s deliberate decision to bring in over 4.8 million immigrants mostly low skilled and often unable to speak English during its disastrous thirteen years in office.Red Ed was fully involved in this policy so it is more than a little hypocritical of him and Labour to complain about low wages when they created the situation in the first place.

    • HookesLaw

      ”UK research suggests that immigration has a small impact on average
      wages of existing workers but more significant effects along the wage
      distribution: low-wage workers lose while medium and high-paid workers
      gain”
      ”The wage effects of immigration are likely to be greatest for resident workers who are migrants themselves”
      ”Research does not find a significant impact of overall immigration on unemployment in the UK, but the evidence suggests that immigration from outside the EU could have a negative impact on the employment of UK-born workers, especially during an economic downturn”
      ”For both wages and employment, short run effects of immigration differ
      from long run effects: any declines in the wages and employment of
      UK-born workers in the short run can be offset by rising wages and
      employment in the long run.”

      http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/labour-market-effects-immigration

      • Alexsandr

        you believe that, hooky…
        everyone is realising that immigration is depressing wages which is why there is a disconnect between GDP and GDP/capita.
        but hey. you just stick your fingers in your lugoles and sing la la la.

        • fundamentallyflawed

          Some choice cuts ” small impact on average wages of existing workers” – so low paid immigrants take the new jobs, boosting business and GDP but nobody already in the same sort of jobs will actually feel the benefit.
          ” immigration from outside the EU could have a negative impact on the employment of UK-born workers,”

          When was the last time we had hundreds of thousands of immigrants entering the job market in the UK? Probably never. The future effects are pure conjecture while the current effects are measurable amongst our poorest population.

      • Colonel Mustard

        The University of Oxford became the academic wing of the Labour party years ago.

    • Tom Owen

      “Low wages are a direct result of Labour’s deliberate decision to bring in over 4.8 million immigrants mostly low skilled and often unable to speak English during its disastrous thirteen years in office.” How do unskilled workers who don’t speak English drive down the wages of skilled workers who do?

      • saffrin

        Well Tom, during Labour’s reign of terror, to fail to employ an immigrant, “any immigrant”, the threat of legal action, with huge compensation payments and legal fees to follow was always hanging
        over any prospective employer.

        • Mynydd

          Under the treaties signed by Mr Heath and Mrs Thatcher all workers have the same rights, which ever country they come from, and in which ever country they work. So a Brit working in Germany has the same rights as a native German. You will note that these treaties where signed before the last Labour government came to power. It is the duty of any prospective employer to know the law under which they operate, failure to do so could result in legal action and compensation payments.

          • saffrin

            That may be but it was only in the UK that employers faced possible recriminations should they refuse to employ an immigrant.
            Further more, Labour changed the criteria for social housing discriminating in immigrants favour when they didn’t refuse immigrants housing on the grounds they’d voluntarily left whatever housing they had before.
            If the rule applies to UK citizens, why not the World’s immigrants?

            We all know Labour intended to flood the country with “diversity”, they’ve confessed to it.

    • Mynydd

      When the then Conservative Prime Minister Mr Heath signed the Treaty of Rome he open the door to the free movement of labour. This was reinforced when the Conservative Prime Minister Mrs Thatcher signed up to the Single Market. Since then when an employer required extra workers, say on the farm, they went straight to eastern Europe, with its low wage economy, without even advertising the jobs in the UK. So if you want to blame anyone, blame; Heath, Thatcher who signed up to mass immigration, and employers who took advantage of their policies. My final comment being, Mrs Thatcher considered mass immigration would undermine the trade unions.

    • dado_trunking

      Peddling piffle again? It was FATCHA who skillfully imported those your lot worry most about to obfuscate the fact that the North West of England would otherwise be a ‘green and pleasant land’ by now.

    • John Smith

      Add in the elderly not retiring & we have an oversupply of labour, that means wages will not rise
      Plus we have poor productivity, we were overpaying wage increases, based on zilch, for years
      Its a perfect storm

  • Smithersjones2013

    Mr S hears on the grapevine that business leaders are planning to open their pockets at the end of this year,

    Let me guess they’ve been saving up for this for a decade!

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here