D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
An example of a shit, underpaid job doesn't disprove another job is shit, and undrpaid.Was just an example
If being a binman is such a bed of roses, why aren't we all battering down the doors to apply?
Bin men strikes (9 Viewers)
- Thread starter Covstu
- Start date
If being a binman is such a bed of roses, why aren't we all battering down the doors to apply?
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
They don't set those rules. You keep referencing other jobs but it's a non argument. Two wrongs don't make a right.
Nick
Administrator
I didn't say it wasn't a bed of roses, I said the wages weren't as bad as made out.
You asked what other job, I just gave an example I know more about.
I wouldn't apply now, but if I was 18/19 living at home again or with minimal outgoings it would have been better than the 10k I was getting paid then.
Nick
Administrator
That's because nw just asked me what other job, so I gave an example of one.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Nick
Administrator
I had a job on 12k about 10 years ago I think it was, that was skilled with experience needed in it. Bin men earnt more than me then easily.
10k was about 14 years ago I think.
I was on 17k - 18k 8 years ago when I had a kid and bought a house. It's liveable, a struggle but liveable.
It's not coming at it from a snob point of view, it's from somebody who.has had shit jobs and wages point of view so don't think it's too bad.
Last edited:
stupot07
Well-Known Member
Didn't say you were. You need to factor in inflation though, which was the only reason I asked.
12k 10 years ago is the equivalent of £15.7k now
10k 14 years ago is the equivalent of £22.3k now
17k 8 years ago is the equivalent of £21.5k
£12,000 in 2007 → 2017 | UK Inflation Calculator
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Nick
Administrator
I know you didn't say that, was just making sure!
Understand that, but then bin men were still on a decent whack back then too
What would people say is an acceptable wage for a bin man if £17k is so low?
#SHFWF! B-)
Nick
Administrator
So if that's the minimum starting wage, how will that impact every other job? Every other job will go up too.
I'd say benefit should go down
No every other job should maintain the differential, although that's probably already shrunk through minimum /living wage legislation.So if that's the minimum starting wage, how will that impact every other job? Every other job will go up too.
I'd say benefit should go down
Anyone over £70K a year has to swallow the pill, sorry Grendel.
Seriously though wages have shrunk through inflation and now Austerity fo a good while, that needs redressing.
As ever I ask where Is all the money going as the need for workers both skilled and unskilled across technologies /services disappeare via automation, robots AI etc, and what is going to happen to all the folk left redundant?
There will be many more to come.
Nick
Administrator
But if every job gets a pay rise, the cost of everything shoots up with it doesn't it?
They have already Nick through the weakness of our currency impacting the people we're talking about the hardest and economists tell us that's all good.
We've had the likes of Boris and Farage championing increases last summer and said Economists begging for some inflation.
These guys depending on their politics usually find there way around it.
What really is true and undeniable as stats show is that the divide is wider than ever between rich and poor.
That imbalance has to stop and be redressed.
Nick
Administrator
I agree between rich and poor but if you give the bin man 21k, the driver wants 50k. Lorry drivers want 50k, things cost more to be delivered etc.
What incentive is there to learn and progress if you can walk into a 20k job with no experience or qualifications.
The same as there's no incentive now to push bins about if you can get more on benefits. I'm sure there used to be waiting lists to be one.
It's all well and good giving everybody a pay rise but we will all be paying it in the end.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Where's the incentive to work if universal benefit is worth more?
Why do you and I as taxpayers subsidise wages for the low paid through tax credits whilst CEOs and shareholders take all the profits? You really want to start thinking beyond what the tabloids tell you.
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
To be fair to the Tories (and Lib Dems when in coalition) the increases in the minimum income tax band and rise of national minimum wage is trying to reduce the requirement for tax credits.
Makes sense, even if it hasnt been straightforward sorting out the convoluted mess that was in place previously.
Nick
Administrator
That's why the benefit system is stupid where able bodied people are better off doing nothing than working and should be lowered.
Is a full time bin man on £17k even entitled to tax credits? It's nothing to do with CEO's and Shareholders, it's about whether £17k is that bad of a wage for a job you can walk into like that (hence they have had waiting lists in the past).
It's nothing to do with tabloids telling me anything, it's that a bin man's average wage is a fair bit more than other jobs classed as "skilled" or having a "trade" where people need experience and/or qualifications.
The answer isn't just "give everybody a pay rise" to suit because a bin man gets more, it was nothing more than pointing out £17k isn't that bad.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
But there's not a queue of people breaking down doors to be a bin man.
Given the job conditions and the service it provides, I'd pay them more.
Given the job conditions and the service it provides, I'd pay them more.
Nick
Administrator
How much would you say a normal bin man should be on?
hill83
Well-Known Member
A sack load.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
If they don't start carrying their weight, I'd bin them all off.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
No, there is an issue with pay.
Marty
Well-Known Member
Please explain. I just want to understand your view point.
hill83
Well-Known Member
I'm no mathematician or mind reader but I think he's saying the pay should be more.
Nick
Administrator
So we give everybody a pay rise, then benefits just go up again.
Why on earth would benefits be higher than jobs a lot people can get after gaining a degree for example?
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
It is simple. Benefits should be enough to cover the cost of living for somebody who is out of work, that's what they exist for. Whether they do or not is down to personal circumstance, but they probably do just about do for your average person.
If pay is worth less than benefits then there is a serious issue with pay. In the UK, real pay has stagnated for low earners for years and years whilst it has grown for those at the top.
The UK government has known for years that there is an issue with pay, but due to Tory and New Labour obsession with courting the very rich, failed to deal with the route cause of it and instead spend money topping up pay through tax credits and allowed the situation to exacerbate.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Why do benefits go up?
Nick
Administrator
You can't just give everybody who works full time a minimum of 20k or whatever just to make sure it's more than benefits.
Not every company has CEOs at the top it can be blamed on because they have a big wage, plenty of small businesses would be up shit creek if they suddenly had to pay their unskilled workers £20k or whatever rather than the £13 - £14k on minimum wage. That's £7k per person they have to pull from somewhere every year, they will have to whack their prices up to make that up.
What if there is a small design agency for example looking to hire a graduate fresh out of uni, usually they would be able to give them £15k - £17k starting out. They don't have much experience but they have qualifications. That suddenly jumps up to £23k - £24k because it has to be more than benefits.
To cover the extra wage everybody had to pay people who worked for them prices and services would go up. It would get to the point when products and services are too expensive for people on benefits, what happens then? Benefits go up to match because then people can't afford to live because everything is too expensive. The multiple people involved in baking, transporting and selling the loaf of bread or pint of milk would all be getting pay rises, who covers it to prevent everything shooting up?
Yes, with big massive companies the CEO's could lose a few grand to cover it. and have 60k instead of 120k. What about small businesses with 5 - 10 employees where they would have to give them all thousands more a year just to make sure it's more than benefits.
Last edited:
Marty
Well-Known Member
I sort of understand your view point, but in alot of cases benefits more then cover basis living expenses, and allows luxuries too (takeaway, gags, booze etc). This shouldn't be the case.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
More fun than being a bin man. I'd take a lower salary for better conditions.
And we can live without advertising, too...
Nick
Administrator
Yes but if they all had to have a pay rise to overtake benefits who covers it? It's a small business run by a bloke who takes a very modest wage himself. No fatcat CEOs on 150k for doing nothing.
He needs to pull an extra few K a year out of the bag.
dancers lance
Well-Known Member
I think this situation could be used to address some of the awful gender inequality that is so plagues our society, sack the lot of them and employ the thousands of women who would be fighting over each other to take this role, a role that has been so monopolised by the patriarchy!