(no subject)

[sobrique]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jan/30/brown-british-jobs-workers
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7859968.stm

OK, so "British jobs for British workers".

I think the worlds of the great philosopher 'Jean Luc Picard' best expresses my reaction to this:



I mean, seriously. When did racism sneak in the door and become 'ok' again? It looks like someone's parroting the BNP manifesto or something.

I mean, that's even before you get to the inherent stupidity of assuming that jobs are a finite quantity, and that 'johhny foreigner' is stealing _yours_. More jobs means more cash circulating, which means yet more jobs.

But here's where the problem kicks in - it's far easier to blame 'someone
else' for stealing a job, than it is to face up to the reality - companies aren't stupid, they'll employ based on what does them most good as a company. The guys who've been motivated enough to travel overseas to work for a living, are generally also the ones who are more motivated than the average dole dodger. They're probably also working harder for less pay than the average "British worker".

Cultural diversity is a good thing. We don't _want_ to be a minimum wage, manual labour economy. It's the influx of new ideas, cultures and the attracting of motivated people, that stimulate the kind of economy and society that we.... well I want to live in. I accept there's people out there who'd much rather hate on people for having oddly coloured skin, and abuse the staff of the restaurant they're in, because they don't do chips to go with their curry.
But frankly, that's the kind of person that we _are_ better off without.

If 'foreigners' are stealing your jobs, then stop for a moment and ask why? Why is a company going to the effort of recruiting in another part of the world to do the same job you could. Maybe, just maybe, it's because of _your_ failings.
I have seen it in action, and can very definitely tell you that it's very
rarely the polish people at work that are the ones that will be slacking off,
being sloppy on timekeeping, and generally being slapdash about the job they do.

So seriously. Let's lose this nonsense, and actually go on with doing
something more constructive about whining about the unfairness of the world.
Yes, it's unfair, now what are you going to do about it?

Comments

[malal.livejournal.com]

No. Because that's nothing to do with race & everything to do with wanting to work with people they've worked well with before. If you know someone who'll do the job well, plus they are willing & able to do the job, why bother interviewing for people who might not be as good?

There are probably employment laws against it though, as new contracts, don't they have to effectively be put out for tender?

I'll admit that this is something that becomes more obvious once you've worked in a job where the competency of your colleges can be rather, varied. You'll do an awful lot to work with Decent Bloke X, rather than Muppet Y, or New Bloke Z.

[kalkyrie.livejournal.com]

*shrug*
Bear in mind they are also bringing in floating hotels to house their workers, so the price to hire them is probably noticably larger.
The 'not racist, but...' comment is partially a gut reaction of mine, and an attempt to constrast the situation on the ground with some of the above posts which are implying that all of the people protesting are racist.
Whether it falls within racist or not, the fact that they are not even giving people a chance does seem a bit... close minded. The *point* of interviews is to tell if people are any good or not. Following the 'we only work with people we know' logic to it's conclusion would probably lead to cronyism and "Old Boys' Clubs".

[sobrique.livejournal.com]

Not at all. I would expect any company to use/relocate it's own workforce/known contacts first, and then look to hire second.
Every time you hire someone there is always a delay of 'integrateion' time.

[malal.livejournal.com]

Actually, it's probably more noticeable with jobs that have lower entry requirements. With higher requirements, you've got some idea that the guy is competent enough for someone to have trained him up. Without that, there's no promise that they aren't an irredeemable Muppet (they exist, I've worked with people whose net effect was causing more work for everyone else).

Following the 'we only work with people we know' logic to it's conclusion would probably lead to cronyism and "Old Boys' Clubs".

Yes, and you'll always get that to some extent. But if you take the opposite view to it's extreme, you'll open interviews for everyone in every job on a regular basis, just in case you'll find someone better....

[kalkyrie.livejournal.com]

*nods*
It's probably best to try to strike a path between the two extreme camps. To be honest the last few posts of mine were probably me going off on one about the assumption that Grimsbians are racist. Not true, they hate everyone equally ^^. (Apart from travellers. *sigh at hometown* ).

The media seems to be centring around the 'British jobs for British workers' slogan for the protesters (with all the undercurrents that has), while at least for the original case, a more accurate slogan would probably be 'Give us a chance, we're not all muppets'.

[Note that I have no idea about the 'copycat' strikes what so ever. I'm also aware of the irony at jumping to the defense of people because they belong to the same town as you, compared to my 'don't care about where people come from' arguments].

[malal.livejournal.com]

Yeah, there are various employment laws about new posts being reasonably open to a wide variety of people. They exist for a reason.