Best Of

So the OBR have knocked £20bn off their budget forecast as the economy isn't seeing the productivity gains they had previously expected

Reeves faces £20bn hit to UK public finances from productivity downgrade

https://www.ft.com/content/0e2de708-f7b5-470d-a716-93eb3b1ac174

I am doing my bit, massive increase in productivity thanks to incorporation of AI into my work flows and 100hr working weeks....am I the only one working in this country?

Productivity is measured as output per hour worked so working 100 hour weeks might decrease productivity not increase it.

Well the only person who knows I work ~100 hours a week is me (and Mrs U), so no it won't.

Yes, most of the rest of us have moved onto 120 hour weeks now.

Well thats the new silicon valley work week, forget 9/9/6, its all about 22/7.

I've always said that I work 24-7.

That's 24 minutes an hour, 7 hours a day.

In terms of productive time, that's not far off.

Farage on Pochin:

"The way she put it, the way she worded it was wrong and was ugly.

If I thought the intention behind it was racist, I would have taken more action than I have taken today."

https://x.com/tomhfh/status/1982815805520679110?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

I think its tricky. Its a bit odd when 4% of British people are black that over half of adverts feature black people. But its obvious why - its advertisers selling stuff and optimising who they appeal to.

But we have an issue in this country with Reform and people voting for them. What drives someone to think that the county has far more people from ethnic minority backgrounds than is the case? This is something we know - if you ask people to estimate the proportions that are black, asian etc the norm is to vastly overstate the numbers. Well just maybe having the adverts like this plays a part?

But what realistically would be done, even if you wanted to do something? How would you ensure a set of adverts has the approved ethnic make up? You can't - its stupid to even try.

But maybe all those who wonder why people are pushed to Reform should reflect a bit when people tell them why.

There was a time when an accurate reflection of society was deemed important in works of fiction

A few years ago, Brian True-May was suspended from his job. True-May was the producer of ITV drama "Midsomer Murders", a detective show set in rural England, and his crime was to admit that he didn't use black or Asian people in the series as 'it wouldn't be an English village with them"

The race equality thinktank the Runnymede Trust said True-May's comments were out of date and no longer reflected English society.

"Clearly, as a fictional work, the producers of Midsomer Murders are entitled to their flights of fancy, but to claim that the English village is purely white is no longer true and not a fair reflection of our society, particularly to this show's large international audience," said the trust's director Rob Berkeley. "It is not a major surprise that ethnic minority people choose not to watch a show that excludes them."


https://aboutasfarasdelgados.blogspot.com/2014/11/is-eastenders-more-racist-than.html

I remember this, haven’t seen Midsomer Murders in ages. All got a bit samey.

The people who for years have banged on about diversity and representation and how important it is are suddenly outraged when someone points out where it’s ended with over representation of some demographics. All the confected anger on social media was most tedious.

I suspect Luckyguys take on this was right, and one I concur.

Still, I’m sure we will get more stories along the lines of the countryside is racist, skiing is racist, sailing is racist etc etc etc.

That large parts of the English countryside are like old style Misomer Murders is true. And imagine how jarring it is for them to see a London Ad agencies idea of what Britain looks like. But I don’t think there is anything to actually be done about it, other than perhaps to not give a shit.

The Goodness Gracious Me sketch:

To see the real England you have to go to the countryside. There are people there who have never seen a brown face.

We joke, but…
At my Grammar school in Salisbury there was one black kid out of 600-700. One. Now that was a way back now, but it’s probably not changed that much.

The seventies were a different country...

Absolutely.

Back then, a discredited Labour government, following a deeply unpopular Conservative government, was leading the country to economic stagnation and decline through big state economic mismanagement and the avoidance of hard choices, following an energy crisis, wars and instability in the Middle East and in relations with Russia.

Thank God we've learned and evolved in the past half-century ..

Odds on both of these bills screwing up their target constituencies even more than they are already?

I have a nasty feeling that the changes in the Renter’s Rights Bill will result in even more property being taken off the rental market & rents climbing ever higher as a result.

The Employment Bill is going to completely screw over anyone with a spotty work history. All those people who have been out of work with anxiety / actual long covid / heart issues etc etc since 2020? Good luck getting them into work if their prospective employer can’t sack them within a six month probationary period. Why would any employer take the risk of employing them in a soft jobs market where they have other options?

2 years is too long to get normal employment rights, but why go from 2 years to first day? I think either six months, or a phased in approach with some at 3 months and the rest after a year, would be about right, but even if they made it 1 month it would give employers a chance to make a risky employment decision. Instead it will all end up with temp agencies instead, how is that better?

Bit late in the day, but I thought I'd necro this post as I've a fairly relevant perspective having just been round the hamster wheel of taking on a hard case of an employee.

Six months ago I took on a lad aged about 30. Life a bit of a mess, no job, up to his eyeballs in debt, precarious living arrangements but seemed genuinely keen to come and work.
Offered him 40hrs a week at min wage, with the possibility of his rate increasing fairly quickly if he shaped up to be any good.

When he turned up, he did generally work fairly hard. But he was forever not turning up (always with a plausible sounding sob story of an excuse).

I've not seen him for three weeks, two weeks ago he sent me a sick note because he's apparently had a nervous breakdown, so I'm now paying him SSP. Whilst he was off, I got an "Attachment of earnings order" from the local court requiring me to deduct ~£170 from his wages and send it to them for some sort of unpaid fine. Last night he messaged saying he was much better and would be in today. Today - not a sign of him.

I'm basically done with him at this point. I've given him massive benefit of the doubt, I've put up with behaviour that most employers wouldn't. It's not even what he costs directly (until the latest episode with the apparent mental breakdown, if he didn't turn up, I wasn't paying him), it's the amount of my (very limited and expensive) time that he wastes.
I'd pretty much decided he had to go (although I hadn't actually said anything to him) a few weeks ago, then he had a spurt of good behaviour and tried really hard for a week, and so I foolishly relented. Needless to say, it didn't last.

I'm now debating between sacking him whilst he's still off on the sick, or sacking him when he comes back. Neither is great, but I've got to do one of them.

Anyway - the Employment Rights Bill means to complete end of this sort of shenanigans. Never again will I try taking on a hard case if I can't boot them without repercussions if it goes wrong. Yes, in theory I could sack this lad anyway, but I run a small business - I don't have time to document everything, give him umpteen formal warnings etc.

The current 2 years before acquiring rights is probably about right. I've given my lad loads of rope because I don't have a looming cutoff to get rid. 3 or 6 months will just mean employers have to sack the borderline cases before they get rights. Even a year would feel pressured.

I can only assume the government hates people on the margins of work - there will probably be ten losers for a every winner from day one rights.

I suspect this lad I'm about to sack will never work again, because of the Employment Rights Bill. We, as taxpayers, will fund his existence for the next 30, 40, 50 years. What he actually needs is a massive kick up the arse in a "if a man will not work, neither shall he eat" sort of a way, where he literally has to hold down a job or go hungry but that's anathema to the idiots currently in power.