OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[swaledale]

There are lies, damned lies and there are statistics. This stat about more folk having a job than ever before is factually correct. However, facts don't always tell the whole story. For instance, here is a fact for you............ American Red Indians walk in single file........... well, the one I saw did.

It's the same with the number of employed stat. There are way more people employed in part time jobs than ever before. There are far more people on those damned zero hour contracts and a proportion of them regularly get called in for 1, 2 or 3 hours a week when they really need far more than that. There are people with multiple part time and/or zero hour contracts. I don't know for sure but if you have 6 PT/ZH jobs, it wouldn't surprise me to find out that you count 6 times in the number of people in employment figure. That is how much I trust these stats.

Whatever the stats I can tell you that it is bloody hard to recruit people with the right skills now and isn't going to get any easier. At the lower end of the market employees are being squeezed more and more but as a significant proportion of them seemed to have voted for a party that thinks this is acceptable I'm finding it harder to have much sympathy for them.

As for wage inflation if we pay the same for a 4 day week, well there is no reason why the output isn't the same if we are efficient. I find in companies that on average one day a week is wasted and unproductive anyway, usually on endless meetings that have no purpose other than to fill up managers days!!!

[MadAmster]

1. Whatever the stats I can tell you that it is bloody hard to recruit people with the right skills now and isn't going to get any easier. At the lower end of the market employees are being squeezed more and more but as a significant proportion of them seemed to have voted for a party that thinks this is acceptable I'm finding it harder to have much sympathy for them.

2. As for wage inflation if we pay the same for a 4 day week, well there is no reason why the output isn't the same if we are efficient. I find in companies that on average one day a week is wasted and unproductive anyway, usually on endless meetings that have no purpose other than to fill up managers days!!!

1. I won't argue with that. I think you are probably spot on and are involved in the process which I haven't been since 2002 when I stopped doing 70 hour weeks in IT Management and moved into the calmer waters of the teaching profession.

2. I first started cutting down on the number of meetings in the late 80s. I found my diary getting fuller of the damned things and decided it was time to make them more efficient by changing the makeup of the agenda. Everey agenda item had to be qualified as to its purpose be that informing people of something, or making a decision on something. I also demanded that everybody read both the minutes of the last meeting plus any documentation sent relevant to that meeting before the meeting and not during. It cut out the endless meaningless discussions that occurred because the agenda items weren't properly described beforehand. Add to that curbing any attempt to veer off course and meetings became shorter, sharper and more productive.

[mistaram]

Whatever the stats I can tell you that it is bloody hard to recruit people with the right skills now and isn't going to get any easier. At the lower end of the market employees are being squeezed more and more but as a significant proportion of them seemed to have voted for a party that thinks this is acceptable I'm finding it harder to have much sympathy for them.

As for wage inflation if we pay the same for a 4 day week, well there is no reason why the output isn't the same if we are efficient. I find in companies that on average one day a week is wasted and unproductive anyway, usually on endless meetings that have no purpose other than to fill up managers days!!!

Good post Swales I've seen all of those Its like office workers never look out of the windows in the morning So has to have something to do in the afternoon

[AdiSalisbury]

There may well be some people that over justify their existence and could work a reduced week, however it's unfair to expect that of everybody. A lot of people work over their contracted hours, many doing so unpaid, taking their work home with them, interrupting their family time and personal wellbeing. It is also not possible for people in services to reduce their week, whether that's retail workers, military or emergency. If they did, you'd either have to pay inflated overtime, or hire more people on reduced, and zero hour contracts.

Even (though I massively disagree) if you could magically deliver the same productivity over 4/5 of your current working time (and let's hope that schools had the same extra day off as employers), there is still a massive increase on salary cost as GP says, from the notion of "without reduction in pay". You have the following issues instantly requiring funding caused by this very notion:

Your hourly rates of pay increase. Assume a 40 hour 5 day week reducing to 32 hour 4 day week for ease...

Everyone currently working 32 hours or more, instantly gets a pay increase to a full time salary.
Your hourly rate of pay is no longer based on 40 hours, but 32, so your part time salary costs all increase - eg. if your full time equivalent salary is £30k, currently your part time hourly rate is 30000/52/40=£14.42 which becomes 30000/52/32=£18.03. That's a 25% increase.
(Above 2 points aren't me fantasising with numbers, its a legal requirement under the prevention of less favourable treatment for part time workers directive)
You then have the overtime issue. Again, assume you magically can do 5 days work in 4 so don't have to pay overtime on the 5th day (good luck with that) for staff who regularly work overtime, but you now have to pay their overtime rate with a 25% increase.
Add all that up, then add a minimum of 3% employer pension contributions, and 13.8% Employer NI Contributions, and you have a whopping increase in employment costs, which magically will return the same productivity as the 5 day week did.

Lets hope you have a huge profit margin to absorb that extra cost, else the following cost saving steps are likely to happen to try and avert bankruptcy:

All staff perks removed (anything from life assurance to staff discounts).
All contractual benefits reduced to statutory minimum (pension, company sick pay, holiday etc).
All enhanced redundancy benefits reduced to statutory minimum.
And ultimately, an endless stream of redundancy.

Standard unofficial formula for any company that attempts to survive. You may get some union protection on your T&C's briefly, but it won't stop you getting made redundant, it'll only speed the process up, though you'll want to get in while your redundancy terms are still in tact. A 4 day week for the same pay as 5 is a poorly thought out and dangerous policy.

[Trickytreesreds]

Whatever the stats I can tell you that it is bloody hard to recruit people with the right skills now and isn't going to get any easier. At the lower end of the market employees are being squeezed more and more but as a significant proportion of them seemed to have voted for a party that thinks this is acceptable I'm finding it harder to have much sympathy for them.

As for wage inflation if we pay the same for a 4 day week, well there is no reason why the output isn't the same if we are efficient. I find in companies that on average one day a week is wasted and unproductive anyway, usually on endless meetings that have no purpose other than to fill up managers days!!!

Swale there is so much wrong with that, it is surreal.

1. yes there is a skills shortage. We should be training more and not fetching in foreign labour whilst never trying to address the issue. That is the cheap route with long term consequences. Speculate to accumulate. So freedom of movement is detrimental to this.

2. How can output per 32 h/w, be as efficient as 40 h/w?
When working with machinery, it has to be used to its capacity of run time. It can only operate at 100% no matter what. So you tell me,. How many bottle tops can a machine produce in 32 hours that betters 40?
You are purely giving an example of a management role sat at a desk. Try working at shop floor level when you've got quota's to reach.

I despair at times.

[swaledale]

Swale there is so much wrong with that, it is surreal.

1. yes there is a skills shortage. We should be training more and not fetching in foreign labour whilst never trying to address the issue. That is the cheap route with long term consequences. Speculate to accumulate. So freedom of movement is detrimental to this.

2. How can output per 32 h/w, be as efficient as 40 h/w?
When working with machinery, it has to be used to its capacity of run time. It can only operate at 100% no matter what. So you tell me,. How many bottle tops can a machine produce in 32 hours that betters 40?
You are purely giving an example of a management role sat at a desk. Try working at shop floor level when you've got quota's to reach.

I despair at times.

You really are thick aren't you?

1. The skills shortage is not just down to training, its down to demographics, we don't have the numbers of people required to train in the first place hence why we require foreign labour. Or perhaps you have found a way to clone people?

Still as your about get your Brexit, no doubt we shall find out what happens, presumably there will be a mad rush by all those eager Brits to take up jobs currently done by immigrants?

2. You really do spout utter nonsense here, technological developments increase the productivity of machines all the time or are you going to tell me that a machine producing bottle tops today produces at the same rate a machine did in the 1950's?

Of course the key here is how that increased efficiency is used, for the benefit of all, with output maintained or even increased but with people working less hours, or to increase the wealth of those in charge? Its clear from the ever widening gap between the richest and those on average incomes which way thats gone!

Oh and by the way there are countries where a 32hr working week is the norm but thats probably (like how technological development can be used for the benefit of the many not the few) passed by your inward, backward looking mentality.

Do try to keep up my dear.

[Trickytreesreds]

You really are thick aren't you?

1. The skills shortage is not just down to training, its down to demographics, we don't have the numbers of people required to train in the first place hence why we require foreign labour. Or perhaps you have found a way to clone people?

Still as your about get your Brexit, no doubt we shall find out what happens, presumably there will be a mad rush by all those eager Brits to take up jobs currently done by immigrants?

2. You really do spout utter nonsense here, technological developments increase the productivity of machines all the time or are you going to tell me that a machine producing bottle tops today produces at the same rate a machine did in the 1950's?

Of course the key here is how that increased efficiency is used, for the benefit of all, with output maintained or even increased but with people working less hours, or to increase the wealth of those in charge? Its clear from the ever widening gap between the richest and those on average incomes which way thats gone!

Oh and by the way there are countries where a 32hr working week is the norm but thats probably (like how technological development can be used for the benefit of the many not the few) passed by your inward, backward looking mentality.

Do try to keep up my dear.

No Swale it's you who are thick.

You have no idea how production works n the slightest.
Customer is king FACT

Deliveries and lead time are everything.
Deliver first, you get work. Deliver quality, you get work. Get the cost down, you get work.

I worked in textiles.
Physics dictates how fast you can produce anything. A process can only go as fast as is scientifically possible.
Get the quality wrong and it costs you, BIG!

I worked in coal mining, physics dictated how fast you could cut coal.
Physics dictated how fast you could safely advance or withdraw.


So what do you have left? TIME!

Here's a ponder for you. 7 day working, 24 hours a day.
It's called continental shifts and eminates from European working directives. Ever worked them? I have, it's horrible.

You sit behind your desk, pushing buttons.
Keep telling yourself you're right and the rest of us are wrong.

The rest of the world with it's cheap labour, limitless hours will continue to undercut everyone price wise.
As for training, you're a plank.
Are you trying to tell me, that this country cannot produce enough electricians/Plumbers/bricklayers/ fitters/nurses/doctors etc and we have to outsource to Poland and Romania to fill them?
It's called education darling. Recruit within and train. Their knowledge then stays in house and we aren't reliant on outsiders.

Total NIMBY.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Unfortunately Tricky the trades learned via apprenticeships have been withering on the vine for ages as education policy has been encouraging people into university education, and dumbing down the entry requirements for it.

So even if that trend is reversed now, there is a generation or more missing. Hence the need to import labour to fill thr skill shortage

It's a massive own goal but successive governments of either colour over maybe 30 years ormore

As to your other point, production lines can only work at the speed of the slowest link, which inevitably is the human element. Thus any benefits of automation are limited unless you totally eradicate the human element.

As for "Time" you conveniently overlook the fact that time does not exist.....

[Trickytreesreds]

Unfortunately Tricky the trades learned via apprenticeships have been withering on the vine for ages as education policy has been encouraging people into university education, and dumbing down the entry requirements for it.

So even if that trend is reversed now, there is a generation or more missing. Hence the need to import labour to fill thr skill shortage

It's a massive own goal but successive governments of either colour over maybe 30 years ormore

As to your other point, production lines can only work at the speed of the slowest link, which inevitably is the human element. Thus any benefits of automation are limited unless you totally eradicate the human element.

As for "Time" you conveniently overlook the fact that time does not exist.....

Not all correct Geoff.
To texturise a yarn, you are limited by physics, The higher the decitex, the slower the machine has to run.
there is no human element in it.
To cut coal, you are limited by the shear forces generated against a rigid object. The thicker the seam, the larger the drum, the slower it cuts. No human element in it at all.
No you can cut down on the man hours needed to achieve the said task with technology, but that isn't what we are discussing.
To say you can obtain the same results over 32 hours of compated to 40 hours of work is in no way true for everything.

Rolls Royce work round the clock to achieve the production of a jet engine. Is it the human element slowing this down? Is it **** as like. It's complicated and labour intensive. It has to be done right. Can you turn an engine round quicker in a reduced time limit? No you can't

Toyota turns out a car every 66 seconds. that's 2181 per 40hr week.
so how are you going to make up the 436 missing cars ?
I'd would assume Toyota uses the latest technology on its production lines.

Time doesn't exist. Interesting theory. It is claimed to be the fourth dimension.
time is linear and can be measured.
Eddington said-

It is vividly recognized by consciousness.
It is equally insisted on by our reasoning faculty, which tells us that a reversal of the arrow would render the external world nonsensical.
It makes no appearance in physical science except in the study of the organization of a number of individuals. Here the arrow indicates the direction of progressive increase of the random element.

Perhaps this is going off a tangerine here

[swaledale]

No Swale it's you who are thick.

You have no idea how production works n the slightest.
Customer is king FACT

Deliveries and lead time are everything.
Deliver first, you get work. Deliver quality, you get work. Get the cost down, you get work.

I worked in textiles.
Physics dictates how fast you can produce anything. A process can only go as fast as is scientifically possible.
Get the quality wrong and it costs you, BIG!

I worked in coal mining, physics dictated how fast you could cut coal.
Physics dictated how fast you could safely advance or withdraw.

So what do you have left? TIME!

Here's a ponder for you. 7 day working, 24 hours a day.
It's called continental shifts and eminates from European working directives. Ever worked them? I have, it's horrible.

You sit behind your desk, pushing buttons.
Keep telling yourself you're right and the rest of us are wrong.

The rest of the world with it's cheap labour, limitless hours will continue to undercut everyone price wise.
As for training, you're a plank.
Are you trying to tell me, that this country cannot produce enough electricians/Plumbers/bricklayers/ fitters/nurses/doctors etc and we have to outsource to Poland and Romania to fill them?
It's called education darling. Recruit within and train. Their knowledge then stays in house and we aren't reliant on outsiders.

Total NIMBY.

Oh dear you really are a Dim to post this.

So the rate at which miners dug coal and the means by which they did it didn't change between the time mining started to the time it finished? Really?

You sound to me like a luddite, someone who thinks that how things are now and how they are done now is the only way and there can be no changes, not in how we work, the hours we worketc etc. Appropriate because you mentioned working in textiles, again you seem to have missed out a few hundred years of change.

You seem to be implying that technological developments have not increased production over the years, which of course is nonsense. The point is of course is who has benefited from that increase in production?

Yes of course I know continental shifts what relevance does that have to the argument about whether one could reduce the working week to 32 hours? Many workers like them, they often work 4 days then get 4 days off and so on.

I do wonder how on earth they reduced the working week from 5.5/6 to 5 days and then 40 hours to 37 (well enlightened companies did the latter)!

I've always considered it odd that when I went into businesses and made suggestions as to how to improve things, it was often the shop floor staff that were most obstructive and unwilling to change working practices although as companies like Nissan, Honda and Toyota demonstrated the UK worker was able to adopt to different and more efficient working practices. But then they had the advantage of starting up afresh and not having to change the ways of a dull witted, conservative thinking workforce.

I've worked with many organisations across many different sectors and used technology to improve both productivity and a better experience for the workforce.

You still don't understand demographics do you? If you don't produce enough babies, then your workforce shrinks obviously. I understand its a complicated fact for you to absorb, but its the case.

So exactly how then do you propose to train people who don't exist? I'm not trying to tell you, I'm trying to explain as simply as possible, (given your limited ability) what the reality of the situation is.

The other issue which you overlook is that as a society becomes better educated, they have a wider choice of jobs, I mean who in his or her right mind would choose to work down a coal mine, if you could do something else?

As this has happened in the UK immigrants have filled that gap, long before we joined the EU. So even in your fantasy land where there are enough Uk citizens in the employment pool, assuming all of them get the training and education required to fulfill their potential, that means there will be a number of job roles that people wont want, I'd be interested in your thoughts on how you fill those jobs?

I do enjoy these little debates where you expose your inherent lack of knowledge and understanding which I guess is inevitable as your experience is very limited.

I did also point out in my last post that there are countries who have working weeks of 32hrs (or indeed less) yet have higher productivity per employee than the UK and whose economies are doing well. Which was kind of a hint that actually it was possible to work a shorter working week and be more productive, but you seemed to ignore that as it didn't correlate with your experience.

[swaledale]

Not all correct Geoff.
To texturise a yarn, you are limited by physics, The higher the decitex, the slower the machine has to run.
there is no human element in it.
To cut coal, you are limited by the shear forces generated against a rigid object. The thicker the seam, the larger the drum, the slower it cuts. No human element in it at all.
No you can cut down on the man hours needed to achieve the said task with technology, but that isn't what we are discussing.
To say you can obtain the same results over 32 hours of compated to 40 hours of work is in no way true for everything.

Rolls Royce work round the clock to achieve the production of a jet engine. Is it the human element slowing this down? Is it **** as like. It's complicated and labour intensive. It has to be done right. Can you turn an engine round quicker in a reduced time limit? No you can't

Toyota turns out a car every 66 seconds. that's 2181 per 40hr week.
so how are you going to make up the 436 missing cars ?
I'd would assume Toyota uses the latest technology on its production lines.

Time doesn't exist. Interesting theory. It is claimed to be the fourth dimension.
time is linear and can be measured.
Eddington said-

It is vividly recognized by consciousness.
It is equally insisted on by our reasoning faculty, which tells us that a reversal of the arrow would render the external world nonsensical.
It makes no appearance in physical science except in the study of the organization of a number of individuals. Here the arrow indicates the direction of progressive increase of the random element.

Perhaps this is going off a tangerine here

Cutting down the man hours to achieve the said task is EXACTLY what we are discussing here! Your entire case was that there is that the working week could not be shortened without loss of productivity, yet you have just admitted thats not the case.

The fact you have wandered off into some fantasy world of your own and regurgitate crap you have googled is irrelevant.

[swaledale]

There may well be some people that over justify their existence and could work a reduced week, however it's unfair to expect that of everybody. A lot of people work over their contracted hours, many doing so unpaid, taking their work home with them, interrupting their family time and personal wellbeing. It is also not possible for people in services to reduce their week, whether that's retail workers, military or emergency. If they did, you'd either have to pay inflated overtime, or hire more people on reduced, and zero hour contracts.

Even (though I massively disagree) if you could magically deliver the same productivity over 4/5 of your current working time (and let's hope that schools had the same extra day off as employers), there is still a massive increase on salary cost as GP says, from the notion of "without reduction in pay". You have the following issues instantly requiring funding caused by this very notion:

Your hourly rates of pay increase. Assume a 40 hour 5 day week reducing to 32 hour 4 day week for ease...

Everyone currently working 32 hours or more, instantly gets a pay increase to a full time salary.
Your hourly rate of pay is no longer based on 40 hours, but 32, so your part time salary costs all increase - eg. if your full time equivalent salary is £30k, currently your part time hourly rate is 30000/52/40=£14.42 which becomes 30000/52/32=£18.03. That's a 25% increase.
(Above 2 points aren't me fantasising with numbers, its a legal requirement under the prevention of less favourable treatment for part time workers directive)
You then have the overtime issue. Again, assume you magically can do 5 days work in 4 so don't have to pay overtime on the 5th day (good luck with that) for staff who regularly work overtime, but you now have to pay their overtime rate with a 25% increase.
Add all that up, then add a minimum of 3% employer pension contributions, and 13.8% Employer NI Contributions, and you have a whopping increase in employment costs, which magically will return the same productivity as the 5 day week did.

Lets hope you have a huge profit margin to absorb that extra cost, else the following cost saving steps are likely to happen to try and avert bankruptcy:

All staff perks removed (anything from life assurance to staff discounts).
All contractual benefits reduced to statutory minimum (pension, company sick pay, holiday etc).
All enhanced redundancy benefits reduced to statutory minimum.
And ultimately, an endless stream of redundancy.

Standard unofficial formula for any company that attempts to survive. You may get some union protection on your T&C's briefly, but it won't stop you getting made redundant, it'll only speed the process up, though you'll want to get in while your redundancy terms are still in tact. A 4 day week for the same pay as 5 is a poorly thought out and dangerous policy.

Well those firms in the Uk that already do this must be wrong then! As must the countries where the average working week is 32 hours or less, whose productivity per employee is higher than the UK and whose economies seem to be fine!

[Manofpride]

No worries, Boris will sort it. Things are improving already and we're not out yet!

[AdiSalisbury]

Well those firms in the Uk that already do this must be wrong then! As must the countries where the average working week is 32 hours or less, whose productivity per employee is higher than the UK and whose economies seem to be fine!

Is it 25% better per employee? Do you have any empathy for the people that would lose their jobs?

[AdiSalisbury]

No worries, Boris will sort it. Things are improving already and we're not out yet!

The future is bright, the future is Boris!