Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The point being that said Spaniards are both employable and showing willing.

Wasabi is a british company, I've almost never seen a Brit working in there...how comes? Doesn't take so very much on your cv to do the job so why the high youth unemployment, the Spaniards (and indians, japanese, koreans, italians, poles etc etc) aren't taking those jobs, they are filling the deserately needed vacancies.


Like I say, cultural!!

Agree with that. British people think certain jobs (particularly low and unskilled) are beneath them. There is absolutely nothing preventing a British worker getting an unskilled job vis-a-vis a foreigner.


Skilled jobs is a different matter but the truth is that requires an overhall of the system rather than coercing employers to hire sub-par candidates based on public pressure.

Who on Earth was doing all the low-skilled work (fruit picking, shop work, cleaning etc) before the influx of foreigners- we were. In Brighton for example, a friend's daughter had worked in a hotel in her school vacations and at weekends for 2 years. She liked the work and decided to go into hospitality after leaving school. She went to the hotel at one point to be informed that she no longer had any work there and found that almost the whole place was staffed with foreigners. I wonder if they were being paid the going rate?

As far as skills are concerned, it was a lot 'easier' for the previous government to allow an influx of already trained building workers to come in than to train our youngsters and create enough apprenticeships- and they also had an eye on the potential votes of the future I'll wager.

So you think the hotel should have kept the position open for her in anticipation of her wanting it? For unskilled work, a British applicant should be at an advantage because of the language / communication skills they have in English. I?m not sure that employers are specifically discriminating against low / unskilled British workers.
She didn't actually leave the job which was part-time, but what happened was a Spanish man got a job there and the manager gave the girl's part-time job to his wife. When I was a student I had a job in a restaurant bar and the kitchen staff were mostly Italian- the manager employed them because the chef was Italian and could not speak English so it was easier to employ Italians to work with him.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • But actually, replacing council housing, or more accurately adding to housing stock and doing so via expanding council estates was precisely what we should have been doing, financed by selling off old housing stock. As the population grows adding to housing built by councils is surely the right thing to do, and financing it through sales is a good model, it's the one commercial house builders follow for instance. In the end the issue is about having the right volumes of the appropriate sort of housing to meet national needs. Thatcher stopped that by forbidding councils to use sales revenues to increase housing stock. That was the error. 
    • Had council stock not been sold off then it wouldn't have needed replacing. Whilst I agree that the prohibition on spending revenue from sales on new council housing was a contributory factor, where, in places where building land is scarce and expensive such as London, would these replacement homes have been built. Don't mention infill land! The whole right to buy issue made me so angry when it was introduced and I'm still fuming 40 odd years later. If I could see it was just creating problems for the future, how come Thatcher didn't. I suspect though she did, was more interested in buying votes, and just didn't care about a scarcity of housing impacting the next generations.
    • Actually I don't think so. What caused the problem was the ban on councils using the revenues from sales to build more houses. Had councils been able to reinvest in more housing then we would have had a boom in building. And councils would have been relieved, through the sales, of the cost of maintaining old housing stock. Thatcher believed that council tenants didn't vote Conservative, and home owners did. Which may have been, at the time a correct assumption. But it was the ban on councils building more from the sales revenues which was the real killer here. Not the sales themselves. 
    • I agree with Jenjenjen. Guarantees are provided for works and services actually carried out; they are not an insurance policy for leaks anywhere else on the roof. Assuming that the rendering at the chimney stopped the leak that you asked the roofer to repair, then the guarantee will cover that rendering work. Indeed, if at some time in the future it leaked again at that exact same spot but by another cause, that would not be covered. Failure of rendering around a chimney is pretty common so, if re-rendering did resolve that leak, there is no particular reason to link it to the holes in the felt elsewhere across the roof. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...