Two quick topical questions from YouGov’s daily polling over the last couple of days. First, after David Gauke’s comments yesterday YouGov asked if people thought it actually was morally acceptable to pay tradesmen “cash in hand”. 49% of respondents said it was morally acceptable to pay “cash in hand”, 36% thought it was not.

Secondly, ahead of the (now cancelled!) strike by border, immigration and other Home Office staff YouGov asked whether people thought it was or was not acceptable for PCS staff to go on strike around the time of the Olympics. 64% of people said striking at the time of the Olympics would have been unacceptable, 24% said it would have been acceptable.


251 Responses to “YouGov on Cash-in-Hand and Olympic strike action”

1 2 3 4 5 6
  1. Jon Stewart is, by and large, and equal opportunities offender. On Monday he was attacking ABC news for falsely associating the Aurora shootings with the Tea Party – yes, he was defending the Tea Party.

    I didn’t think his Olympics stuff was great, but it wasn’t terrible. His Jubilee pageant section was brilliant (and was largely aimed at the over the top commentary by one of the US TV stations). And let’s face it, even prior to the Korea cock up there were enough UK critics of the Olympics – at least he’s doing it because he’s a comedian, not just to whine…

    @SoCalLiberal

    Marriage is a legal contract, defined in law. The state determines who can get married, and who can perform weddings. A church could bless a couple (assuming the celebrant wanted to and the church hierarchy didn’t object) but it wouldn’t be marriage, and couldn’t be advertised as such. Despite what some anti same sex marriage campaigners are saying it is highly unlikely that a prosecution under the equality legislation would occur if a vicar decided not to conduct a same sex marriage.

  2. @ Amber Star

    “Not voted for the UK equivalent of the US Democrats.”

    I doubt he’d get that upset over something like that.

    @ Old Nat

    “The problem is that under the UK Equality Act, as it stands, is that a licensed celebrant who refused to conduct a same-sex marriage could be prosecuted under that Act.

    The legislative change needed by the UK Parliament is very small, but finding time at Westminster for Scottish legislation has always been difficult.

    Of course, I have a solution to that! :)”

    Yes, of course you do. :)

    Anyway, you remind me of how important the 1st Amendment is as well as how important the doctrine of constitutional avoidance is. Different strokes for different folks I guess. (Hell, two weeks ago, you reminded me of why the 3rd Amendment is still valuable). Why the Scottish Parliament cannot write a bill exempting those licensing celibrants is beyond me. I mean, who would prosecute a case like that? But it’s in their best judgment.

    I’m always amazed at how European governments take years and years and years to legalize same-sex marriage (except for Denmark) when in the U.S., courts have ordered it as a remedy within a few weeks and for legislatures, it was a fairly easy legislative change. I’m surprised that there’s no lobbying force in Westminster capable of lobbying for this to be done quickly.

    “As to your last question, marriages (currently only between a male and female) by a registrar or licensed celebrant are legal. If the definition of “marriage” changes then all such marriages would also be legal.”

    That’s what I thought. Now, my assumption would be that a registrar must grant a license to all currently legally qualified couples. But a licensed celebrant acting within the confines of their own institution is not. I don’t understand why there are attempts to complicate the laws by creating legal same-sex marriage that has all sorts of exceptions within it. It defeats the whole purpose by creating discriminatory legislation.

  3. Good Morning All.
    Beautiful on the beach here.

    SOCAL LIBERAL.
    I think that the writing is on the wall for any denominational minister who wants to follow his conscience and refuse to preside over a marriage between people of the same gender.

    On the Economy, much bemusement about whether the actual economy is shrinking.

  4. @ The Sheep

    “Jon Stewart is, by and large, and equal opportunities offender. On Monday he was attacking ABC news for falsely associating the Aurora shootings with the Tea Party – yes, he was defending the Tea Party. ”

    He wasn’t defending the Teabaggers. He was pointing out that it was wrong to malign an individual through a mere Google search that took 3 seconds and call it “news.” And I agree (and called out a few friends on Facebook over it). There are probably a million people out there with the name James Holmes. (I am glad I am not one of those people right now).

    “Marriage is a legal contract, defined in law. The state determines who can get married, and who can perform weddings. A church could bless a couple (assuming the celebrant wanted to and the church hierarchy didn’t object) but it wouldn’t be marriage, and couldn’t be advertised as such. Despite what some anti same sex marriage campaigners are saying it is highly unlikely that a prosecution under the equality legislation would occur if a vicar decided not to conduct a same sex marriage.”

    Didn’t the civil unions law prohibit religious institutions from performing civil union ceremonies for same-sex couples? Forcing people within religious institutions to marry any couple they do not wish (gay or straight) is wrong. The same is true for prohibiting such ceremonies (even if they’re not recognized under the law). It’s also wrong to enact legislation legalizing same-sex marriage but treat those marriages differently under the law than those entered into by those who are straight. So saying that a church celibrarnt may legally marry a straight couple but not a gay couple even if those gay couples have other places in which they can get married is problematic. And frankly, I don’t understand why anyone is trying to create a distinction here for this.

    I doubt there would be a prosecution as well but it’s good to prohibit such a thing if it is a possibility (of course, I don’t think there needs to be any prohibition in the U.S. since the First Amendment is pretty clear about it).

    In the U.S., the state is limited in their ability to determine who may be married and who may marry whom. Marriage is a fundamental right and not simply a legal contract.

  5. @ Old Nat

    “But that more or less happened. The UK has a government roughly similar to the US Democrats.

    Fortunately, in your part of the UK, you have had much better government 2000-2012.”

    Well by your definition, I should ignore all the evils of Dubya since the California Legislature has been controlled by the Democratic Party since January 1997.

    Also, I don’t think the current government of the UK is similar to the U.S. Democrats. The Liberal Democrats are neither liberal nor Democratic (Discuss!) and the Tories are far similar to Republicans…..just minus the Christian fundamentalism, gun nuts, uneducated local loudmouth boob types, and all the other crazies who might be better suited to a mental ward. In that way, Tories might be more dangerous because they can espouse principles and enact laws that will harm lots of people in ways that Republicans are too stupid to figure out (that’s why the conservatives on the SCOTUS are so scary….unlike their Congressional and Presidential candidate brethen, they have fully functioning brains).

    I mean, the lovely Nadine Dorries has never acted this way in public has she?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DAFSuBhhvc

    h ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-XsUQHzMCI

    h ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nokTjEdaUGg

    h ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRkWebP2Q0Y&feature=related

    h ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cn9WduykYpA&feature=relmfu

    h ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYQdFZz3lUc&feature=related

    First two are classics. But I digress.

    The point is, we’re not a center-right party or a centrist party. We have centrists and even some conservatives within the party but we’re firmly a center-left party and have little in common with the right wing parties of Europe.

  6. @ Chris Lane

    “I think that the writing is on the wall for any denominational minister who wants to follow his conscience and refuse to preside over a marriage between people of the same gender.”

    I highly doubt that.

    But this whole “conscience” thing is something I’d like to address (as sleepy as I am right now). People have a right to their religious views. Religious organizations have the right to be free from government control and interference on religious matters. But people don’t have the right to ignore laws they dislike and claim not to follow them on the grounds of their personal religious “conscience.”

  7. “In the U.S., the state is limited in their ability to determine who may be married and who may marry whom. Marriage is a fundamental right and not simply a legal contract.”
    You probably would know better than me, but I’m wondering if you have any court rulings in that area to back that up. I’d be very curious to read them.

    Obviously we’d have different philosophies on how fundamental rights work (I don’t think fundamental rights exist), but I was just curious about US law itself (where my views are not what counts ;) ).

    I think the simplest solution to this whole marriage issue would be to just get the state out of the institution of marriage completely.
    These sorts of laws exist to create a privilege (who can engage in an act or not) and now people who are privileged are upset that the privilege is being extended to other groups (so they’ll end up being less privileged). So let’s just abolish it (the legal privilege that is).
    If people want to engage in marriage ceremonies or not, let them – keep the state out.

    Not great news from The Sun for Osborne today –
    They’re running with a “Sack ‘work experience Chancellor’” headline.
    Even though newspaper influence is waning, Osborne needs allies in the press to get his narratives across.

  8. George Osborne does not come across as very sympathetic, which may be unfair, but that is how it seems.

  9. Other than the flagging insult incident, “work expirience chancellor” is dominating the BBC news agenda this morning. Stephanie Flanders, least illustrious member of a journalistic dynasty, is working overtime to defend the government.

    Osborne is a bit of a shrinking violet when it comes to the broadcast media, understandable given his unconvincing performance in the two set piece interviews with Paxman and Gibbon before the 2010 GE.

  10. @CL1945 – “On the Economy, much bemusement about whether the actual economy is shrinking.”

    I’m afraid there isn’t – not from anyone who has seriously followed the numbers.

    i posted around five months ago about the sharp falls in new orders for the manufacturing sector, and about three months ago about the ensuing collapse in the headline numbers for this sector.
    I’ve also been posting about the dire numbers in construction and the flatlining of retail spending. Over a year ago I was posting the numbers of the complete shredding of investment, saying that this is a leading indicator that suggests big trouble 6 – 12 months down the line.

    Meanwhile, we’ve seen the jobless claimant count still rising and a slump in productivity helping to explain why we seem to be employing more people but producing less.

    In fact, the only thing that has surprised me regarding this new recession is that I called the start of it incorrectly – I thought we would go into recession 3 – 6 months earlier than we did. My current prediction is that we will still be contracting when the Q3 figures come through.

    With three consecutive quarters of shrinkage, including a huge negative number for this most recent first estimate, it’s time for everyone to wise up and stop pretending – we’re in recession, good and proper, and this is entirely consistent with the broad tally of economic numbers over the last twelve months, the general thrust of government policy, and the global situation.

    No contradictions to see here – move along please.

  11. @Billy Bob – I was just going to write a second post on Osborne myself. In my view, he is in deep trouble. this summer has proved very difficult for him with his economic and political credibility draining away. Many in his own party are calling for him to focus on one of his two jobs, and yesterday’s GDP suggests that moving him from the Treasury would be one way to demonstrate a new impetus for the government. Even if it isn’t the chancellors fault, this kind of move can help governments in trouble.

    The problem is, the other role touted for GO is party chairman – the political attack dog. I don’t think Tories who have proposed this have really thought it through, but I can imagine Labour’s glee if the man who consistently pops up on the airwaves to attack them is the same man who led his country back into recession and got it so wrong that his own friend and boss had to sack him.

    Osborne’s entire political career in on the line, and that line is getting thinner and more wobbly by the day. I suspect what may well finish it is the deficit numbers. Largely uncommented in the press, the monthly deficit figures recently have been very poor – with the year on year figures increasing. If this continues for the next few months, Osborne’s finished.

  12. I say it is ‘unacceptable’ to ask about human rights as if they are up for discussion and change, though it is so common now when it comes to attacking workers rights.

    We have the right to strike but the media has no duty to properly report issues surrounding strikes. So we get plain propaganda and then a poll to reinforce it all designed to undermine workers.

    Why does the media concentrate solely on the effects of a strike, rather than the causes?

    Because it is biased and wants strikes banned and human rights limited even further. That’s the free market folks!

  13. On equality laws and same sex marriage – there may well be issues where celebrants who refuse to marry same sex couples are breaking equality laws.I would suspect that a challenge by same sex couples on those grounds may well succeed. The problem though is not that of same sex marriage at all.

    In fact, the problem here is the very notion of religious marriage and civil marriage having the same legal force – surely we should move to a model of only civil marriage being officially recognised by the state – and that religious marriage would be purely for religious purposes and not civil ones. In that way same sex marriage and opposite sex marriage would have equal validity and both would be conducted by employees of the state.

    Religious marriage would have no legal status and would serve purely as a blessing or as a record within the church confines itself.

    The problems of iniquity and inequality within marriage law – it seems to me – stem from allowing religious organisations to conduct legally binding marriages in the first place. This muddies the role of church and state and causes conflicts over what are and are not legitimate religious organisations. Surely a simple civil marriage should be the only legitimate form of marriage and should of course be available to same sex as well as opposite sex couples.

  14. @Alec

    One thing being picked up on this morning is that the cancellation of so many construction projects appeared to help deficit reduction, but is in fact scuppering it. Gus O’Donnell’s call for a plan B back in 2010 fell on deaf ears, Osborne went on holiday that Christmas saying “everything is now in place to secure the recovery”.

    Earlier this year there was a scramble to work up some infrastructure projects… but treasury officials opined that it would be 2014 before they would start to have any effect. There seems to be an emerging narrative about two wasted years.

  15. Prediction. UK Banks will need to be bailed out again in the Autumn.

    I am getting a feeling looking at various comments by analysts that there could be another round of bank bailouts by the end of the year. Could we see RBS fully nationalised and the government taking up more shares in Lloyds ?

  16. OLD NAT

    @”Your assumption that I am bigoted against English Tories, I totally refute.”

    :)) :)) :)) :))

  17. Just a topical joke to lighten the bad financial news.

    North Korean athlete relaxing in the Olympic village sitting in the sun reading 50 shades of Grey she thought it was a decorating magazine

  18. Centrica to invest £1.4bn & create 4000 jobs after new tax break.

    Jaguar LR to create 1100 new jobs in W. Midlands with inward investment

    Hitachi to create 730 jobs & building new factory in Co. Durham.

    BT to create 2000 new jobs.

    431,000 house purchases were completed in Q1& Q2-up 11% on last year.

    181,000 jobs created in three mths to may.

    Unemployment rate eased from 8.2% to 8.1%

    Inflation at 2.4% vs 4.2% in June last year.

    VAT revenues up 6% yoy ( it being over a year since the rate went up).

    “Truly shocking”

    Ed Balls.

    :D

  19. @COLIN

    I see from your analysis that we must be approaching the 5% growth in 2 years that Osborne predicted in 2010 when he took office

  20. @Colin – the investments are all very welcome, but unfortunately picking on individual examples rather than overall trends is unhelpful. No one is saying that there is no economic activity, so there will always be good news stories, just like some people will be made redundant in a boom. What is clear is that the overall picture of investment is one of a large collapse which hasn’t yet been rectified.

    The house price data is interesting – and largely reflects the end of the stamp duty holiday. Last month new mortgage approvals slumps to their lowest level for 15 years. That isn’t quite a disastrous as it sounds, as it will almost certainly be an adjustment for the higher activity preceding the tax holiday, but on balance it’s still a really quite poor number and bodes ill for the next few months in the housing market.

    Employment – yes, we know it’s up, but productivity has slumped. In part this could also be linked to the slump in investment as generally higher investment improves productivity.

    The VAT number is more interesting. The more accurate April – June quarterly figure shows only a 2% increase, and from the HMRC data I’m not certain that this is inflation adjusted. If it isn’t, this means real terms VAT has declined, but if it is, it still means a relatively marginal yoy increase, encompassing a 6 month period when the economy was actually growing, alongside the next period of contraction. HMRC also suggest that the nature of VAT collection is influenced by accounting periods. The July figures are part of the ‘stagger’ when the oil and gas industry reports, and these figures therefore tend to be distorted upwards when oil prices have been high.

    While we can argue about individual stats, if the situation really was rosy, we would be seeing first estimates of +0.7%. It’s clear that there is a lot wrong with the economy and growth is at least absent.

  21. @Billy Bob

    One thing that really struck me from the radio yesterday was a representative of the construction industry rightly bemoaning the fact that the value of the remaining government construction contracts underway was ten times greater than in London than in Yorkshire for example. His point I think was that, putting aside the overall scale of investment, its regional imbalance was such that many of his small and medium sized members outside of the South East risked going to the wall, which would not have been the case if contracts had been spread around the UK more evenly.

  22. Good Morning again all, Joachim and Anna today.

    COLIN is just pointing to growth figures.

    In my seaside town we have plenty of full cafes and shops alongside areas of poverty and decline.

    Osborne cannot be blamed for the long term decline of the UK economy which has been taking place since 1951.

  23. Nick P

    No tax is payable if it isn’t done “with a view to profit” even if there is a profit.

    It doesn’t look as if that excuse would do.

  24. @ Colin

    h ttp://www.hmrc.gov.uk/taxcredits/start/claiming/income-hours/self-employed-income.htm

    h ttp://www.nihe.gov.uk/index/benefits/housingbenefit/housing_benefit_advice/self-employed.htm

    h ttp://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/unemployed_people/self_employed_and_unemployment.html#l794df
    —————————–
    Over half the rise in employment numbers is people moving to self-employed status. You can file a zero return & claim tax credits &/or supplementary welfare allowance, housing benefit & council tax relief.

    This is how you ‘get around’ many of the restrictions in benefits which are being introduced.

    A few hours cleaning for a neighbour or doing ironing via an ‘agency’ may make you eligible for benefits & allowances which you don’t get if you are unemployed, or working a few hours, in a low paid job.

    This is a trend which results in hours worked & employment rising but productivity per worker falling. Alec has remarked on that trend but maybe didn’t consider this aspect as a possible contributory factor.
    8-)

  25. @ Colin

    181,000 jobs created in three mths to may.
    ————————
    FYI, 96,000 of these 181,000 jobs are ‘self-employed’.
    8-)

  26. The former secretary general of Spain’s ruling party and current regional president of Asturias has called today for Spain to exit the Euro unless it is substantially reformed.

    I’ve no idea how significant a figure he is (@Virigilo – as you out there?) but is this the start of a shift of opinion in parts of the Eurozone?

  27. Another little snippet to set against the list of positive’s @Colin posted; Honda have announced today that they will commence short time working at their Swindon plant in September, switching workers to a 4 day week due to weak sales.

    Again, this won’t be reflected in employment stats as the workers are on flexible contracts and will still be paid for a full 37hr week, but it’s clear that if you are cutting production by 20% something is amiss. Along with @Amberstar’s observations on self employment, this is another small example of how rising jobs numbers and falling GDP are entirely consistent once productivity is taken into consideration.

  28. SMUKESH

    No

    ALEC
    @” there is a lot wrong with the economy”

    Agreed

    PHIL
    @”You still seem to be in denial.”

    Of what ?

    CROSSBAT
    @” have to hand it to you; ”

    Cheers :-)

    CHRISLANE

    …gosh….thanks :-)

    AMBER STAR

    Oh-dear -that bad huh?

  29. @ Colin

    Sorry, my mistake. :oops:

    96,000 are the actual jobs with an employer (full-time, part-time & temporary), of which approx. 61,000 are for the Olympics.

    The rest are self-employed & unpaid workers/ government training for work schemes.

    “Truly shocking”

    Ed Balls? Anybody who looks into the actual numbers?
    8-)

  30. ALEC

    Bet Ed new best friend would still swap Honda UK for Peugot.

    I see Le President is coming to terms with reality quite quickly:-

    http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/07/25/uk-france-auto-idUKLNE86O01Y20120725

    A very interesting discussion last night on Randall about UK auto industry vs French auto industry.

    Peugot is an object lesson -one we learned here many years ago.

  31. Socaliberal

    ” Why does this take so long to do? This seems like something fairly simple (at least legislatively) to do.”

    Here is a view from Partick Harvie

    • Is the date now known when the vote will take place?

    No. The Government is expected to announce its decision in light of the consultation very soon (perhaps later this week, or maybe they’ll wait till Pride next weekend), and would then publish a draft bill later this year. They would again consult on the detail of the bill, and introduce it formally to Parliament some time in 2013. I am pushing for this timetable to be accelerated.

    • Can you tell us when the date of the vote is likely to be determined and how it is determined?

    It is really a matter for the Scottish Government when they choose to introduce a bill. Once it has been introduced to Parliament, there will be discussion with the relevant committee about how much time they require for scrutiny.

    • Am I right in thinking that the Royal Assent usually follows after a period of only a few days, maybe even a fixed or determinable number of days? If so how many days?

    This will most likely depend on the views of registrars. They may feel that they need additional time between the bill being passed and its provisions coming into effect, to take account of any last minute changes in the detail.

    • Will the effective date of the legislation be fixed as a date later than the vote, allowing a period for the Royal assent? If so, that will be known from the draft bill, and maybe is known or determinable even now.

    As above.

    • The point of the bill is equality. Can I be assured that as things stand, there are no differences from or changes to existing law on registration and cognate matters being introduced, and that nothing in that respect is new?

    Not as things stand, but as I have explained we don’t yet have a bill to examine.

    • Can we look to you to inform us at the earliest opportunity as we move to the point where the effective date is known.

    I will do my best, but your best option would be to keep in touch with the Government in the first instance, and the clerk to the relevant parliamentary committee once the bill has been introduced. You may indeed want to give evidence to the committee during the scrutiny period.

    There you have it. From the horse’s mouth.

  32. @ Colin,

    Yes, it is bad. Productivity per worker is one of the key statistics considered by corporations which are considering inward investment. We must hope that they are not put off by the headline, falling, productivity numbers & access statistics by industry.

    It is also a key benchmark for bond buyers & credit rating agencies: Are UK workers productive enough to earn the country out of the hole which it is in?

    So, we must hope that all the jobs being created, which you mention above, are productive full-time employment which we need to get our stats back up. And hope that there will be more to come asap.
    8-)

  33. @colin – re the UK auto industry – fully agree. It’s a lesson n the need for investment and the positive involvement of unions.

  34. AMBER

    I can read too !

    “The number of people in work climbed by 181,000 to 29.4m, the highest since September-November 2008, with a rise in full-time working and full-time self-employment accounting for most of the increase.
    Of the gain in employment, London accounted for 61,000, thought to be driven by the London Olympic games creating roles for thousands of support, customer service and hospitality staff.
    The figures suggest private sector employers are beginning to create enough jobs to offset redundancies from the public sector.
    Last month, official figures from the ONS showed companies created 166,000 jobs in the three months to April – more than offsetting the 39,000 fall in employment in the public sector over the period.”

    DT

    I don’t worry about the term “self employed” like you do.
    In fact I’m pretty much in favour of people who try to make it that way.

    I also generally approve of “government training for work schemes.”. I think they are a good idea.

    This isn’t 2007-we know now that was an illusion.

    It may never be like that again.

    It may be a good thing that it isn’t.

  35. ALEC

    @”It’s a lesson n the need for investment and the positive involvement of unions.”

    ……………….erm…….that wasn’t QUITE the conclusion they came to on Randall.

    The Jaguar turnaround under TATA, compared with the approach of it’s previous owner was most interesting.

    But we can agree, I’m sure, that Hollande’s “seventies” approach to his car makers is doomed to failure.

    And he doesn’t have the dosh anyway.

  36. @ Colin

    I can read too !
    ——————–
    By posting the 181,000 jobs created in your ‘good news list’ without any caveats, you made it look like you thought the rest of us can’t. ;-)

  37. AMBER

    My “good news” list was :-

    a) to express my positive feelings on this glorious sunny morning

    &

    b) to trigger the usual doom laden response from the usual quarters.

    …thought I pretty much succeeded on both counts :-)

  38. Colin:

    Is “erm” shorthand for something or do you just type it while you are thinking of something to write?

  39. COLIN.

    That is fine; it is after all Summer, and I am on holiday, and all my family are home, and I have been able to get to Mass everyday, so I am empowered to be nice to people from across the poltiical divide. LOL, it won’t last!

    (have no smiley face here)

  40. re those employment figures, I think this recession is different in that there is less willingness to reduce headcount, companies instead reducing working hours, offering people unpaid sabbaticals, etc, instead of paying redundancy fees and then having to pay again to re-hire or find alternative staff.

    (or perhaps some of the immigrants went home to look for work?)

    even so, any unemployment isn’t good.

  41. I do admire Colins optimism and heroic support for the present coalition government.

    However, lets face it, we are f*cked, until we replace the income that we have lost from the FInancial Services sector. The chances are that many of the Banks and Insurance companies are going to make b*gger all profits for the forseeable future, so the treasury are not going to enjoy the revenues they once received.

    The government are caught between a rock and a hard place, as they don’t have the sufficient money to invest in major infrastructure projects or incentives for a major house building programme or anything else on a scale that is going to make any difference. The private sector is reluctant to invest any money they are sat on, without governments underwriting the risk.

    Then there is a demand issue in the economy, as people with falling incomes are not spending as much. Businesses are not investing any spare money they might have and those that could create jobs, but don’t have the money, can’t borrow the money from their banks.

    In my opinion, we could do with a fresh pair of eyes in charge at the treasury and Cameron should therefore think about what changes he can make. Perhaps we need to change the structure of the government, so it is capable of being much more hands on than it is. One idea from Lord Oakeshot to fully nationalise RBS and to use it as the nations investment bank, might be a good idea. We own 82% of RBS and the additional 18% is not going to cost much.

  42. @ Colin

    http://www.metro.co.uk/news/401158-bt-planning-to-axe-10-000-jobs
    ———————
    Have the Metro got it wrong? They appear to be saying 10,000 jobs will go at BT. At least 5,000, maybe more, are expected to be in the UK – according to another Metro article (it’s linked to the one above).

    “Tony Chanmugam, BT’s finance director, is understood to be aiming to cut at least a further 5,000 posts during the coming year. The group had pledged to cut 15,000 jobs in the year to the end of April, on top of the 15,000 it had already cut during 2008. It is thought the majority of the reduction was to UK jobs, although the cuts applied mostly to agency staff and temporary workers, rather than full-time BT employees.”

  43. @ Colin

    Okay, point taken. You were trawling for rebuttals; glad to have been of service. Enjoy the rest of your day. :-)

  44. KeithP

    “(or perhaps some of the immigrants went home to look for work?)”

    Of all the debtable statistics we challenge on his site, migrants must be the most questionable. I suspect that some migrants come and leave many times over, but not to look for work. They call it “Christmas” ” family weddings” and the like.

    How are they counted?

  45. PAULCROFT

    @”Is “erm” shorthand for something or do you just type it while you are thinking of something to write?”

    Good question.

    I hate it actually-but it is used often on UKPR, and one kind of gets dragged in.

    I suppose it signals something like ” well yes……..but….”

    It’s always a problem with cyberspace communication isn’t it?-trying to add the equivalent of tone & body language.

    Perhaps I should be more like Rob Sheffield ? :-) :-)

    AMBER

    Cheers

    Off to Short Mat Bowls , with a smile & a song :-)

  46. Colin: “more like Rob.”

    One’s enough, ta very much.

  47. @Colin

    We agree on something!

    I also hate the use of “Erm”, and for that matter “Er” too.

  48. I’ve alway read “er” or “erm” to mean “how can I put this politely? You are so wrong that any right thing person will just gaffaw and sneer, but I am going to attempt in words of one syllable to lead you by your stupid nose towards the light”

  49. If GO has to focus on one job it will be chancellor for now. DC may wish to shift him but it would seem like capitulation to the expansionisttendency and repudiation of the strategy.
    Also GO more popular with the right of the Tory party (or at least less unpopular than Cammo)

  50. NickP

    I’d always felt it to be a lot more condescending than that

1 2 3 4 5 6