xenia Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 That's a poor attempt at trolling, you're just making yourself look worse for what we already had taken you for. I dont know what trolling is, please explain? Also I note that your interest in "what I look like" seems to preclude you from entering into the debate. Put up or shut up is a phrase you may wish to consider. Vote Conservative Toodle pip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 What stops P&O using Brits?It may be helpful to remind ourselves of where such ships are usually registered - kinda has a bearing on overheads...such as staffing choices Not wanting to take the wind out of your sails (), but cruise (and ferry, cargo, etc.) ship staffing is not the best of analogies/examples in the context of this thread: it's an epitome of globalisation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xenia Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 It may be helpful to remind ourselves of where such ships are usually registered - kinda has a bearing on overheads...such as staffing choices Not wanting to take the wind out of your sails (), but cruise (and ferry, cargo, etc.) ship staffing is not the best of analogies/examples in the context of this thread: it's an epitome of globalisation. I am sorry but I do not understand your response? If British staff were available of the right calibre at the right cost why would a company targetting a British market not use them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan Tamudo Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 I am sorry but I do not understand your response? If British staff were available of the right calibre at the right cost why would a company targetting a British market not use them? Would you pay British staff 75p an hour? http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/apr/29/cruise-firm-performance-bonuses-tips?newsfeed=true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dosxuk Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 A common misconception, employers can pay what the market dictates he can pay. You forget that we live in a market driven world where price is very important. The fact is that the UK has made itself uncompetitive due to the ridiculously high wages that are being paid. The problem is with this is that the cost of living in the UK is significantly higher than in the countries they are using. Furthermore, there are several cruise companies which employee British staff at less than the minimum wage. They get away with this by including the accommodation, catering and transfers to/from the ship as part of the renumeration package. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xenia Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Would you pay British staff 75p an hour? http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/apr/29/cruise-firm-performance-bonuses-tips?newsfeed=true As usual you miss the point entirely, the fact is the damage is done. One hundred years of socialism, Trade Unions, self seeking hypocritical Labour politicians has lead us to a situation where we have a huge swathe of unemployable coccooned in a welfare system designed to keep them quiet. The fact that we can no longer afford such a welfare system is one we are now having to face. Would I pay British staff 75p per hour? no, because their would be no applicants, they are better off on the dole, BUT, the day is coming when the dole dries up when 75p per hour may be more attractive than you think. Vote Conservative Toodle Pip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 I am sorry but I do not understand your response? If British staff were available of the right calibre at the right cost why would a company targetting a British market not use them? In the specific context of cruises/ferries, the target market has naff all to do with the cost requirements (to run ships cost-effectively). Do not assume that because the target market is predominantly Brits, the operator would want to staff the boat with Brits as well - the operator is in it for profit, a Brit-registered ship costs vastly more to run (because subject to UK work regs/rules, taxes, H&S compliance etc. before staffing is even considered) and Brit (or other EU or US, e.g.) staff on a UK or wherever-else reg'd ship costs more (even at bargain-bucket-basement-sub NMW levels) than 3rd world country staff. Absolute minimum costs = max profit. Simples. Basic economics, nothing to do with meritocratic/"work ethic" principles. You can't get British of the right calibre at the cost required to run these ships cost-effectively. As correctly pointed out by others, Brits (and most others EU nationals) would not get a living wage (as in, sufficient to support house/family/basics back in UK/EU country). It's fine if you want to tour the world at no cost for beer money, with no or little in the way of family ties, I suppose. Definitely less dangerous than to do it with the Army. As I posted, cruise ship staffing is the epitome of globalisation - just like having goods made in China, if not still more economical than. It's the modern day equivalent of a 'posh' workhouse (better than a sweatshop factory, of course). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xenia Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 In the specific context of cruises/ferries, the target market has naff all to do with the cost requirements (to run ships cost-effectively). Do not assume that because the target market is predominantly Brits, the operator would want to staff the boat with Brits as well - the operator is in it for profit, a Brit-registered ship costs vastly more to run (because subject to UK work regs/rules, taxes, H&S compliance etc. before staffing is even considered) and Brit (or other EU or US, e.g.) staff on a UK or wherever-else reg'd ship costs more (even at bargain-bucket-basement-sub NMW levels) than 3rd world country staff. Absolute minimum costs = max profit. Simples. Basic economics, nothing to do with meritocratic/"work ethic" principles. You can't get British of the right calibre at the cost required to run these ships cost-effectively. As correctly pointed out by others, Brits (and most others EU nationals) would not get a living wage (as in, sufficient to support house/family/basics back in UK/EU country). It's fine if you want to tour the world at no cost for beer money, with no or little in the way of family ties, I suppose. Definitely less dangerous than to do it with the Army. As I posted, cruise ship staffing is the epitome of globalisation - just like having goods made in China, if not still more economical than. It's the modern day equivalent of a 'posh' workhouse (better than a sweatshop factory, of course). Thank you for your clarification, I do not disagree, reference to my previous posts outlines my take on this. Regarding you comment on family ties, we have 1 million teenagers out of work why cant they make themselves available? See the world get paid beer money get a CV? The overall question seems to boil down to "posh" workhouse ( they seemed very happy to me when I encountered them ashore, good quality clothing, laptops, mobile phones, cameras etc. ) Or sat in front of the 42inch plasma waiting for a pizza delivery and the dole office to open. I know which I would prefer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 Regarding you comment on family ties, we have 1 million teenagers out of work why cant they make themselves available? See the world get paid beer money get a CV?Fair point. I won't deny that there is a big imbalance between expectations and reality, currently (given a particular skillset/educational level). I expatriated myself in 1992 for the exact same reasons/circumstances. The overall question seems to boil down to "posh" workhouse ( they seemed very happy to me when I encountered them ashore, good quality clothing, laptops, mobile phones, cameras etc. ) Or sat in front of the 42inch plasma waiting for a pizza delivery and the dole office to open. I know which I would prefer.But you take 2 extremes (cruise ship staffing by 3rd world workers vs "benefit scroungers"), which are not that representative in the grand scheme of things, where the middle ground (or, well, opposite positions slightly offset from the middle ground) is closer to the reality. It is not completely unrealistic for UK teens (to A-level at least) to expect better jobs, pay and conditions than Goan teens in this day and age, still. But not for much longer, granted. My take on this, is that the (essentially Western/1st world) recession is having its "global levelling" effect (wealth and skills redistribution) much faster than many Gvts expected. The gradual removal of meritocratic principles in Western education systems is going to be cruelly felt in years and decades to come. Friends and acquaintances think we work our kid daughter too hard with school/homework - I like to think we're just preparing her as best we can for what's coming (for every EU or US jobseeker educated to degree level, there's at least 1000 CN with half their expectations and prepared to put twice as much in...and who soon will be just as mobile). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted April 30, 2012 Author Share Posted April 30, 2012 My redundancy was caused by uneconomical production, Workshy staff, frightened management and union barons who were more intent on lining thier own pockets and sucking up to thier Moscow based masters. Thank god for Thatcher, the greatest peace time PM we ever had. She put a bit of pride back into this country. did you get a good wage out of it thou ? what part of the uneconomical production/workshy staff did you work in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.