BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
That’s up to the people involved is it not?TheBigBean said:
Seems to be a bit of an antiquated system to me.rick_chasey said:This au paire thing is just class warfare.
People wanting to take things away or spoil them from others.0 -
HTH john
- Genesis Croix de Fer
- Dolan Tuono-1 -
Ftfyddraver said:Glad you finally acknowledge it's the link
0 -
Nor does it help anything, other than maybe scratching his whining itch.john80 said:
Reading you posts is like reading a racists posts except your hatred is for people you voted for Brexit. Glad to see you are still pushing the brexit racist link.ddraver said:
It's is the direct equivalent of ski/summer season staff who go and work in a hotel in exchange for food, accommodation and a lift pass... (Oh and a bit of learning French.)TheBigBean said:
Seems to be a bit of an antiquated system to me.rick_chasey said:This au paire thing is just class warfare.
People wanting to take things away or spoil them from others.
Why do I suspect the brexit morons in the replies to the tweet are the exact same people who book Crystal holidays to Greece/Spain so they can have fish n chips and a nice English rep not one of them brown people..."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]1 -
Sh1t happens and things change. Time to move on don't you think?kingstongraham said:
That's the nature of the news.Stevo_666 said:
I was referring to the shorter term issues as you can see above. We know things like the extra cost of paperwork is there and in a few cases extra duties. As I've said before a sense of perspective is needed on how significant these are as there is a tendency to exaggerate them on here.kingstongraham said:
No, there's two sets of issues. One is the unexpected or unplanned for short term issues, the other are the permanent higher costs of doing business.Stevo_666 said:
In the end there were always going to be problems to be solved and errors moving to a new set of procedures etc but that is and will continue to drop away as it becomes BAU. I think quite a few people here wrongly seem to think that a lot of these early weeks type issues are somehow here to stay (or would like it to be that way so they can say that they were right).
The second will just be a drag on potential performance, as was always stated.
Once those poor bastards who no longer have a business model have gone, and people have settled into the new less efficient way of working, we'll just carry on with trade with the EU being x% smaller and x% more costly than before and that's just the way it is.
We won't even notice it's worse than it could have been.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Thanks for the details On the size, yes, the <0.1% make a bit more sense at that scale - still a few £million. If your turnover were £1m, that would be a grand, which wouldn't go very far. I also get that if you were already exporting/importing in and out of the EU, then you will already have the capabilities, so scaling them up is less of a job than if its all new to you.Stevo_666 said:
Annual turnover is in the £10bn-£15bn bracket.rjsterry said:
Possibly I'm asking the question in the wrong way. I have no real idea how big your group is. What order of magnitude is the group turnover (if you can say)? I would suggest that these things don't scale down proportionately, and the relative cost to an exporting SME with turnover <£1m would be much higher.Stevo_666 said:
A lot of our prep was done internally so no external cost for that part as we were not hiring extra to do it. But I would estimate less than 0.01%. Even if you put a cost on the internal time spent it would still be less than 0.1%.rjsterry said:
You've mentioned that you did well out of it personally. Do you have any idea what the total 'Brexit prep' spend was, say as a percentage of turnover?Stevo_666 said:
I was also pretty surprised at how little some large multinationals did to prepare. We set up a 'task force' in March 2016 and I was the mug who volunteered to coordinate it. In my regular chats with advisors on what others were doing, seems as if quite a few of their other clients really weren't doing their homework. And it wasn't that difficult for an average big group that put it's mind to the task.skyblueamateur said:
We've been reasonably lucky but I'm sure there are other industries which will really be struggling. I think they deserve empathy from both sides of the argument and they definitely need the Government to step up to help them as empathy alone isn't going to save jobs. Until the Government admits that Brexit has it's downsides and mitigates for them they're in the censored unfortunately.yorkshireraw said:
Ok - so not stuff that average man in the street needs to buy everyday.Stevo_666 said:
Not sure there is a ready made pigeon hole for what we do as we provide a mix of hardware and services. But for the hardware side which is what is in point here, I would describe us as electronic equipment. Without giving too much away....yorkshireraw said:@Stevo_666 can I ask what Industry / sector you're in?
Because there is a shed-load of continuing issues in Food. Which is kind of relevant to everyone who eats i.e. everyone.
And yes, we don't need to eat shellfish, but a lot of our biggest consumption / manufactured products rely on imports / exports, for inputs (ingredients, packaging etc) or exporting finished goods.
Any cost increases (because of additional trade friction or increased transport costs) impacts the end consumer due to the relative (compared to cars, TVs etc) low price of food items and the fact food isn't discretionary spend. Sadly, many of those who voted for Brexit (lower income households in deprived areas) will be disproportionately impacted, as they spend relatively more of their disposable income on food.
It's also pretty important for jobs:
The food sector in GB employed 3.5 million people in Q1 2018 (3.9 million if agriculture and fishing are included along with self-employed farmers), a 1.0% increase on a year earlier. It covered 12% of GB employment in Q1 2018 (13% if agriculture and fishing are included along with self-employed farmers).
400K jobs are in manufacturing.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/food-statistics-pocketbook-2017/food-statistics-in-your-pocket-2017-food-chain#:~:text=The food sector3 in,with self-employed farmers).
Not looking for a fight, but am highlighting that while it may be looking ok for one type of business, there are plenty that are having issues, and those issues have potential serious consequences for many people's jobs and the population at large.
Steveo is also correct though and it's surprised me how unprepared some big businesses have been.
Its been a bit of a journey but I'm taking my foot off the pedal now.
As an aside I find it mind boggling that you don't consider time spent internally as counting towards costs. Maybe that's the difference working in a large business, but surely every minute spent on something you can't charge for is a cost. </p>
When you say 'surely every minute spent on something you can't charge for is a cost' - it isn't: the people involved were not getting charged to customers by the hour. In fact very few do in this line of business. We manage the issues that need dealing with and the cost to the business of employing us is the same whatever we work on.
They may not scale down proportionately but that's the score for my outfit.
On the other point, down at SME level, it's not so much charging by the hour: if we need to hire another member of staff, even part time, that will add materially to the wage bill. If that isn't providing something that we can charge a bit more for, it comes off the profit.
Anyway, thankfully we don't import or export anything. I can see it being an issue for all the small contractors who source things like joinery in the EU, though.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
It's government policy though, f#ck business.
Why is f.e.c.k censored, but f#ck isn't?0 -
Labour laws aren't, no. I have no doubt there would be plenty of servants who would come to the UK and work long hours for a very low wage if permitted to do so, but as a society people think it is not right to allow this. So, I do think it is a matter for others as well.rick_chasey said:
That’s up to the people involved is it not?TheBigBean said:
Seems to be a bit of an antiquated system to me.rick_chasey said:This au paire thing is just class warfare.
People wanting to take things away or spoil them from others.0 -
-
Are there no racist remain voters?pangolin said:HTH john
0 -
It is a bit different because those people have employers who should, in theory, be following employment law. Au pairs are part of a cultural exchange and are not employed and therefore have no rights to things like holiday pay or the minimum wage.ddraver said:
It's is the direct equivalent of ski/summer season staff who go and work in a hotel in exchange for food, accommodation and a lift pass... (Oh and a bit of learning French.)TheBigBean said:
Seems to be a bit of an antiquated system to me.rick_chasey said:This au paire thing is just class warfare.
People wanting to take things away or spoil them from others.
Why do I suspect the brexit morons in the replies to the tweet are the exact same people who book Crystal holidays to Greece/Spain so they can have fish n chips and a nice English rep not one of them brown people...
A bit of wiki historyhe concept of the au pair originated in Europe after World War II. Before the war, an abundant supply of domestic servants had been available to look after the children of middle and upper-class families, but changes in social attitudes, and increases in wages and taxes after the war, made the old system inaccessible to most middle-class parents. At the same time, social change increased the number of middle-class girls who needed to earn their own living, and rising educational aspirations for girls made experiencing foreign cultures and learning foreign languages more common aspirations.
However, due to the stigma attached to being a "servant", an essentially working-class status that even working-class people were repudiating, this potential supply for domestic labour could only be utilised if a new non-servant role was created. Thus the au pair was born. The au pair was supposed to be treated as a member of the family rather than a servant, and was not required to wear a uniform.0 -
-
Your view is it is a private arrangement so nothing to do with anyone else. Except that isn't true and labour laws evolve based on the views of others e.g. minimum wage.rick_chasey said:Au paires arent against the law ffs what’s wrong with you
I think the au pair set-up is antiquated and due change, I am able to think that even though it is currently legal. That it differs from your view is not evidence that there is something wrong with me. If I were to be a bit cheeky, I would suggest it is evidence of the opposite.0 -
On the other side after rent, utility bills, food and use of a car the slave has £500 a month to spend.
From the save owners point of view they get childcare, cook, taxi driver, babysitter etc
£500 is the low end of the market, if you want somebody more responsible it is £1k a month0 -
Surely the other end of the market is employing a nanny with proper employment rights?surrey_commuter said:On the other side after rent, utility bills, food and use of a car the slave has £500 a month to spend.
From the save owners point of view they get childcare, cook, taxi driver, babysitter etc
£500 is the low end of the market, if you want somebody more responsible it is £1k a month0 -
Why not go all ex pat in the middle East and take there passport and beat them if they get lippy. Sounds like where the UK should be heading. Maybe get Prince Andrew in for a spot of cultural learnings😀TheBigBean said:
Surely the other end of the market is employing a nanny with proper employment rights?surrey_commuter said:On the other side after rent, utility bills, food and use of a car the slave has £500 a month to spend.
From the save owners point of view they get childcare, cook, taxi driver, babysitter etc
£500 is the low end of the market, if you want somebody more responsible it is £1k a month0 -
It is possible to work within the current setup - there is no alternative - while still pushing for it to be better. There is also no reason not to keep reminding people which politicians led us to this bad decision. Actions should have consequences.Stevo_666 said:
censored happens and things change. Time to move on don't you think?kingstongraham said:
That's the nature of the news.Stevo_666 said:
I was referring to the shorter term issues as you can see above. We know things like the extra cost of paperwork is there and in a few cases extra duties. As I've said before a sense of perspective is needed on how significant these are as there is a tendency to exaggerate them on here.kingstongraham said:
No, there's two sets of issues. One is the unexpected or unplanned for short term issues, the other are the permanent higher costs of doing business.Stevo_666 said:
In the end there were always going to be problems to be solved and errors moving to a new set of procedures etc but that is and will continue to drop away as it becomes BAU. I think quite a few people here wrongly seem to think that a lot of these early weeks type issues are somehow here to stay (or would like it to be that way so they can say that they were right).
The second will just be a drag on potential performance, as was always stated.
Once those poor bastards who no longer have a business model have gone, and people have settled into the new less efficient way of working, we'll just carry on with trade with the EU being x% smaller and x% more costly than before and that's just the way it is.
We won't even notice it's worse than it could have been.
This wasn't just shit happening, this was a conscious shit decision helped by lying politicians.
It surprises me that you think politicians' past lies shouldn't be highlighted.0 -
I think you responded to the wrong postTheBigBean said:
Surely the other end of the market is employing a nanny with proper employment rights?surrey_commuter said:On the other side after rent, utility bills, food and use of a car the slave has £500 a month to spend.
From the save owners point of view they get childcare, cook, taxi driver, babysitter etc
£500 is the low end of the market, if you want somebody more responsible it is £1k a month0 -
No. I thought you were suggesting £1k per month was the other end of the market in that you get someone competent. My point was that really, to get someone competent, it would mean hiring a nanny who would cost more and have employment rights.surrey_commuter said:
I think you responded to the wrong postTheBigBean said:
Surely the other end of the market is employing a nanny with proper employment rights?surrey_commuter said:On the other side after rent, utility bills, food and use of a car the slave has £500 a month to spend.
From the save owners point of view they get childcare, cook, taxi driver, babysitter etc
£500 is the low end of the market, if you want somebody more responsible it is £1k a month0 -
By more competent I was thinking a Philippino mother who would have more experience and be more responsible than a “kid”TheBigBean said:
No. I thought you were suggesting £1k per month was the other end of the market in that you get someone competent. My point was that really, to get someone competent, it would mean hiring a nanny who would cost more and have employment rights.surrey_commuter said:
I think you responded to the wrong postTheBigBean said:
Surely the other end of the market is employing a nanny with proper employment rights?surrey_commuter said:On the other side after rent, utility bills, food and use of a car the slave has £500 a month to spend.
From the save owners point of view they get childcare, cook, taxi driver, babysitter etc
£500 is the low end of the market, if you want somebody more responsible it is £1k a month
A proper nanny costs a fortune0 -
Is it just me or is anybody else increasingly irritated by everybody demanding compensation for the negative impacts of Brexit.
Was reading an article about 50% of hauliers returning empty and demanding compensation. To get all SteveO they need to accept their business model has changed and adjust accordingly
In anticipation of leftie outrage I would agree to short term compensation for transition costs.1 -
I would save the ire for the greatest hits. The "no one voted to be poorer" the "Send any paperwork to me, the PM".surrey_commuter said:Is it just me or is anybody else increasingly irritated by everybody demanding compensation for the negative impacts of Brexit.
Was reading an article about 50% of hauliers returning empty and demanding compensation. To get all SteveO they need to accept their business model has changed and adjust accordingly
In anticipation of leftie outrage I would agree to short term compensation for transition costs.
0 -
rick_chasey said:
68% is a vast amount wtf
0 -
That's the problem - if it settles down to 5% down, that's absolutely massive, but now sounds like no big deal compared with the nonsense 68%.rick_chasey said:rick_chasey said:68% is a vast amount wtf
Plus, as I said on here, it's easy to see a large down turn on the previous year as covid related for the next couple of months. And then it will hopefully start to go up, and last year will cover up any issues and show a big increase.0 -
Your view of the employment contracts of Crystal Chalet Hosts is rather rosy. Believe it or no, I was offered far better 'wages' and conditions for my teenage dirtbag gap year season than I was by a major British Travel Company in 2016.TheBigBean said:
It is a bit different because those people have employers who should, in theory, be following employment law. Au pairs are part of a cultural exchange and are not employed and therefore have no rights to things like holiday pay or the minimum wage.ddraver said:
It's is the direct equivalent of ski/summer season staff who go and work in a hotel in exchange for food, accommodation and a lift pass... (Oh and a bit of learning French.)TheBigBean said:
Seems to be a bit of an antiquated system to me.rick_chasey said:This au paire thing is just class warfare.
People wanting to take things away or spoil them from others.
Why do I suspect the brexit morons in the replies to the tweet are the exact same people who book Crystal holidays to Greece/Spain so they can have fish n chips and a nice English rep not one of them brown people...
It's not actually relevant though because, as seemingly needs saying a lot in Britain, WW2 was 75 years ago and things have moved on a little. As said, both are ways for young, less well off young adults to have an experience abroad without Ma & Pa (eller mamma och pappa) footing the bill.
There is absolutely no benefit to anyone in stopping these things. It has been done for pure spite.
We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver1 -
Apparently not. at least if the teachers and civil servants on here are to be believed.TheBigBean said:
Are there no racist remain voters?pangolin said:HTH john
0 -
I described it as antiquated and something that started just after WW2. You say WW2 was a long time ago and things have moved on. Exactly my point, so I'm not sure the patronising tone was necessary.ddraver said:
Your view of the employment contracts of Crystal Chalet Hosts is rather rosy. Believe it or no, I was offered far better 'wages' and conditions for my teenage dirtbag gap year season than I was by a major British Travel Company in 2016.TheBigBean said:
It is a bit different because those people have employers who should, in theory, be following employment law. Au pairs are part of a cultural exchange and are not employed and therefore have no rights to things like holiday pay or the minimum wage.ddraver said:
It's is the direct equivalent of ski/summer season staff who go and work in a hotel in exchange for food, accommodation and a lift pass... (Oh and a bit of learning French.)TheBigBean said:
Seems to be a bit of an antiquated system to me.rick_chasey said:This au paire thing is just class warfare.
People wanting to take things away or spoil them from others.
Why do I suspect the brexit morons in the replies to the tweet are the exact same people who book Crystal holidays to Greece/Spain so they can have fish n chips and a nice English rep not one of them brown people...
It's not actually relevant though because, as seemingly needs saying a lot in Britain, WW2 was 75 years ago and things have moved on a little. As said, both are ways for young, less well off young adults to have an experience abroad without Ma & Pa (eller mamma och pappa) footing the bill.
There is absolutely no benefit to anyone in stopping these things. It has been done for poinyttspite.
I'm not looking to deny anyone young an opportunity, but am suggesting that cencepts such as employees who are beneath employment law should be a thing of the past.
Nannies earn slightly more than the minimum wage yet are considered outrageously expensive.
I encourage any kid I meet to take advantage of chances to work or travel abroad in the same way I did (without parental funding).
0
