No work for lottery winners.

[Cyclone]

I didn't introduce doctors and nurses or their salaries into this discussion Cyclone. What point are you trying to make here?

 

I thought I made it pretty clear.

You're not at all interested in freeing up a job for someone else (as your comment about allowing the doctors and nurses to stay on makes clear). But you are interested in making sure that someone who's won money can't continue to earn any more (as indicated by your comment that they should then work for free).

[Cyclone]

I was presenting a possible solution to Harleyman's scenario where the seven members of staff might not want to leave or if the hospital found it difficult to replace them due to a shortage of doctors and nurses.

 

There are many many jobs where it would be difficult or at least undesirable to replace the staff.

And the example shows a weakness in your suggestion (ignoring all the moral and ethical problems it presents).

[danot]

Regulations designed to protect employees from exploitation. Minimum wage, working hours, unfair dismissal, that sort of stuff.

 

You're confusing right with need. Sure, there's no need for the millionaire to be working for a wage. But if they still desire to work, and their employer still wishes to keep them, the random who might be able to do the job is unfortunately not required.

But the DWP would expect the random to accept the first minimum paid job that was presented to him/her regardless of their occupation or salary bracket if they were unable to find a job where their key skills can be utilised.

[danot]

I thought I made it pretty clear.

You're not at all interested in freeing up a job for someone else (as your comment about allowing the doctors and nurses to stay on makes clear). But you are interested in making sure that someone who's won money can't continue to earn any more (as indicated by your comment that they should then work for free).

That's not true. I was presented with a specific scenario where Two doctors and seven nurses each scooped a substantial sum of money( £1million plus)Then I was asked how this might affect the running of the hospital and patient care should they not want to leave their job, and/or might be difficult to replace. My comments relate to this scenario, not any personal feelings I might have on doctors and nurses or the salaries they earn.

[danot]

There are many many jobs where it would be difficult or at least undesirable to replace the staff.

And the example shows a weakness in your suggestion (ignoring all the moral and ethical problems it presents).

No Cyclone. It shows a weakness in Harleyman's scenario if that's your argument.

[Alcoblog]

I'm Danot. The founder of Danotechtonics.

Are you incapable of making your own jokes?

[danot]

Are you incapable of making your own jokes?

Apologies. Thankyou for the suggestion Alcoblog.

[Cyclone]

No Cyclone. It shows a weakness in Harleyman's scenario if that's your argument.

 

Ermmm, no. Scenario's, particularly ones that could exist can't have weaknesses. They serve to illustrate weaknesses in hypothetical situations like one where lottery winners have to give up work... So that is my argument, your responses to Harleymans scenario make it clear that you're interested in stopping lottery winners earn money, not in freeing up jobs for anyone else.

[Cyclone]

But the DWP would expect the random to accept the first minimum paid job that was presented to him/her regardless of their occupation or salary bracket if they were unable to find a job where their key skills can be utilised.

 

After a reasonable period of time, yes. What's that got to do with the course they might have to abandon?

[danot]

Ermmm, no. Scenario's, particularly ones that could exist can't have weaknesses. They serve to illustrate weaknesses in hypothetical situations like one where lottery winners have to give up work... So that is my argument, your responses to Harleymans scenario make it clear that you're interested in stopping lottery winners earn money, not in freeing up jobs for anyone else.

Why can't scenarios have weaknesses Cyclone?

 

Harleyman pointed out in the scenario he presented to me that the two doctors and seven nurses may not be easy to replace. Which would imply that in this scenario the doctors and nurses being forced to leave their jobs due to their lottery win may have a counter productive affect on the way in which the hospital functions and operates and may reduce the level of care it can offer to its patients.

 

You pointed out that

- There are many jobs where it would be difficult or at least undesirable to replace the staff.

 

You're argument is undermining Harleyman's argument in the scenario he presented, it is not undermining my suggestion of how to resolve the problem which he pointed out.

 

By your own admission, there are jobs where it would be difficult or undesirable to replace the staff. This could be one of those jobs. And by your line of reasoning- in a scenario that could happen there can't be a weakness.. yet you've managed to find one.