The Consequences of Brexit [part 4]

[tzijlstra]

Not necessarily as a good deal of those EU workers rights actually originated from the UK in the first place and were adopted by the EU. In fact a great deal of consumer rights, H&S legislation, and many others also originated from here as well.

 

Some did, some didn't. That is the beauty of the EU - the collective can bring through new rules after all parties agree. Turns out that quite a lot of that British legislation was simply agreed on as being sensible and adopted elsewhere.

 

---------- Post added 19-12-2017 at 20:58 ----------

 

EU 'directives' have little impact on workers’ terms and conditions, and do not protect union rights.

 

The EU deliberately does not have any unfair dismissal 'directives', and it does not want a minimum wage in any of the member states.

 

If workers’ rights clash with the sacrosanct 'four freedoms' the EU always supports the bosses’ and not the workers.

 

And more fluff - you are right, they don't protect terms and conditions nor union rights - reason being, it is down to member states to sort that out, yet you are happy to vote on leaving the EU on the grounds of oppression of the workers. How does that add up Car Boot?

[chalga]

EU 'directives' have little impact on workers’ terms and conditions, and do not protect union rights.

 

The EU deliberately does not have any unfair dismissal 'directives', and it does not want a minimum wage in any of the member states.

 

If workers’ rights clash with the sacrosanct 'four freedoms' the EU always supports the bosses’ and not the workers.

 

I'm talking about the EU ones that are being enshrined in UK law,answer the question,stop moving the goalposts.

 

---------- Post added 19-12-2017 at 21:08 ----------

 

Not necessarily as a good deal of those EU workers rights actually originated from the UK in the first place and were adopted by the EU. In fact a great deal of consumer rights, H&S legislation, and many others also originated from here as well.

 

I'm talking about the ones that did originate in the EU,if they originated in the UK,how can they have gone out of UK law to be enshrined back in it?

[Car Boot]

And more fluff - you are right, they don't protect terms and conditions nor union rights - reason being, it is down to member states to sort that out, yet you are happy to vote on leaving the EU on the grounds of oppression of the workers. How does that add up Car Boot?

 

The EU 'protection' for UK workers has been greatly exaggerated.

 

Most UK employment law has been implemented through UK legislation enacted by a sovereign UK parliament - and is usually far stronger than the weak measures that the EU has set.

 

For instance, the EU’s minimum annual holiday period is 4 weeks, yet in the UK it’s 5.6 weeks.

 

Under EU directives on maternity pay all women are entitled to 14 weeks’ leave. But parents here can qualify for up to 50 weeks of shared leave, 37 of which are paid.

[The Joker]

Were you in the queue of people condemning the death threats that caused Nigel Farage to resign the UKIP leadership?

 

Sir Nige’ resigned because he knew Brexit was going to be a political and economic disaster and didn’t want to be left holding the bag.

 

Well, that and the egg incident

 

Waste of a perfectly good egg, that were

[Car Boot]

Just to add.. A report was also commissioned by the EU into the effects of too much bureaucratic red-tape surrounding some rights and also H&S legislation, cant remember the Lord who undertook it though. IIFC the conclusion was that legislation needed relaxing as it was restricting companies and especially small businesses.

 

That's correct, apelike.

 

The EU’s 'Better Regulation' agenda certainly won’t give workers any more protections. It makes it clear that 'minimising unnecessary administrative burdens' (such as employment and health and safety regulations) are crucial for business.

[chalga]

That's correct, apelike.

 

The EU’s 'Better Regulation' agenda certainly won’t give workers any more protections. It makes it clear that 'minimising unnecessary administrative burdens' (such as employment and health and safety regulations) are crucial for business.

 

The UK voted Brexit because it wanted to 'take back control'...............of its laws and the making of them,the fact that you,or anybody else, are now trying to make anti EU comments because they are not making more laws to affect UK workers shows how disingenuous any poster is by doing this,trying to argue one way,then the other when it suits them,but you are only showing yourselves up,and making a mockery of the reason for Brexit.

[tzijlstra]

The EU 'protection' for UK workers has been greatly exaggerated.

 

Most UK employment law has been implemented through UK legislation enacted by a sovereign UK parliament - and is usually far stronger than the weak measures that the EU has set.

 

For instance, the EU’s minimum annual holiday period is 4 weeks, yet in the UK it’s 5.6 weeks.

 

Under EU directives on maternity pay all women are entitled to 14 weeks’ leave. But parents here can qualify for up to 50 weeks of shared leave, 37 of which are paid.

 

Yes it has been greatly exaggerated, to the point where Brexiteers keep harping up about 'taking back sovereignty'. Simple fact is that the UK already had sovereignty.

 

Good deal? Not so much.

 

Also, you've never answered a question I asked weeks ago - how do you explain the UK being the most 'neoliberal' (ie. capitalist) country in the EU right now? It is easy to blame the 'big evil EU' it is damned hard to justify it, as is clear from your constant deranged and ill-informed comments re. euhmmmm... neoliberalism.

[Magilla]

Brexit will cause loss of influence on scale of 1970s, says ex-MI6 chief

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/19/brexit-loss-influence-1970s-ex-mi6-chief-sir-john-sawers

[apelike]

I'm talking about the ones that did originate in the EU,if they originated in the UK,how can they have gone out of UK law to be enshrined back in it?

 

Because a lot of our legislation, and other countries as tzijlstra pointed out, were adopted by the EU and then re-adopted by us as EU laws which then superseded ours. A prime example is the UK's consumer laws which date as far back as 1893. They had been amended several times before we joined the EU and amended again with additions since, they are now EU directives enshrined in UK law. This is where some bogus reports come about as just because we leave the EU it does not mean that those rights we have now are automatically eroded. All it means is that most, if not all will then become UK law again and that is what the so called "great Repeal Bill" is all about.

 

---------- Post added 19-12-2017 at 22:27 ----------

 

Brexit will cause loss of influence on scale of 1970s, says ex-MI6 chief

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/19/brexit-loss-influence-1970s-ex-mi6-chief-sir-john-sawers

 

 

Maybe, possibly, could be. But he is also calling for greater funding for the security services so that also has a bareing on his stance.

Edited December 19, 2017 by apelike

[I1L2T3]

I think it’s time we all faced reality to work together for the best form of soft Brexit we can get.