As far as I know, the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act has been reasonably successful in solving access problems for handicapped people. It was the most important civil rights act passed during the George H. W. Bush administration. It benefited, as I recall, from the fact that two prominent Republican senators at the time, Bob Dole and John McCain, were both disabled. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_with_Disabilities_Act_of_1990
But I should add that my personal experience is limited mostly to watching motorized platforms lift people up into and down out of of local busess. They seem to be used more for babies in strollers than the disabled, at least where I travel.
(The last time I was in Britain, I saw a lady with a baby in a pram trying to negotiate steps in a tube station. I helped her since there didn't seem to be any officials around to do it. I hope I wasn't breaking any rules.)
I was able to go on the lash with my new Russian friends last night - because they both speak English so the entire evening was spent speaking English even tho we were in Armenia and they were two Russians with one Englishman
They simply accepted that we all should speak English, no problem
We should thank our noble ancestors who went around the world conquering it, seeding our tongue everywhere, meaning that we lazy Brits can now go anywhere we like and we can expect to be understood in our own native language, born in our land
I was able to go on the lash with my new Russian friends last night - because they both speak English so the entire evening was spent speaking English even tho we were in Armenia and they were two Russians with one Englishman
They simply accepted that we all should speak English, no problem
We should thank our noble ancestors who went around the world conquering it, seeding our tongue everywhere, meaning that we lazy Brits can now go anywhere we like and we can expect to be understood in our own native language, born in our land
No other country enjoys this good fortune
No other country except all the other English speaking countries.
Which is now quintessentially every educated country.
Russian state-controlled news agency Interfax reported, citing the Russian military, that more than 1.9 million Ukrainians have been forcibly deported to Russia since the start of the invasion, over 307,000 of them children. https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1538461156544847872
We cannot appease this Macron.
Europe will never be safe again.
Macron ?
Yes.
Macron is the one wanting to appease this. Macron needs to realise we can't and shouldn't.
Ah, a missing comma. “We cannot appease this, Macron” makes sense.
It tells you all you need know about Mélenchon that he responded to his second place, somewhat ahead of Le Pen's huge bloc, with "we have succeeded" because Ensemble lost a majority. (Note, he had also been telling people a few days ago that he was still running for Prime Minister.)
I’m just reading about him now. Uncannily similar to Corbyn, right down to the alleged anti-Semitism
He’s horrible
French politics is being assailed by the far-right and the far-left at the same time.
It is in a terrible place.
i find it quite bewildering as France seems, at least at first glance, such a fortunate country, for the most part
Eg I look at the map of France and I see some of my favourite places on earth, like Pyrenees Orientales (which includes the idyllic seaside town of Collioure, and lots of other lovely spots) and then I notice that it voted for Le Pen?! WTF? Life is obviously not as sweet as it appear, and something is happening that my superficial traveling brain does not perceive
I don't understand it, but, France has always had wildly strange and subversive politics, and plenty of revolutions, for centuries now.
Trouble is that when Paris sneezes Europe catches a cold.
Also, France successfully hides its problems away from the more casual visitor. That’s why Stade de France was such a shocking revelation, outsiders got to see what the French have known for many years: parts of their outlying suburbs are seriously deprived, and lawless
Rural France likewise has its problems. The tranquility of the countryside adored by visitors is often caused by depopulation and stagnation
Still don’t get Pyrenees Orientales, tho
For all its undoubted problems France doesn't do too badly though does it?
The food is not what it was, the famous wine is overpriced… but otherwise, bien sur
If money was not an issue and I could live anywhere on earth, Provence or Languedoc would be high on my list
There's always a good chance of a sublime lunch in the most unremarkable-looking places in rural France.
Or at least there was, it's a few years since we were there. We're back there in September - I'm hoping it's not another of those "things I thought would last forever but are now disappearing/disappeared".
Btw did you catch Stanley Tucci's series on Italian Food on BBC recently? There's another country with wonderful cuisine.
almost everyone under 40 speaks English, and doesn’t mind doing so
Complete tosh I'm afraid
It’s my experience, and I have travelled widely in France. The change has been palpable in the last ten years
I can’t remember the last time i got that peevish sigh and a shake of the head when I asked parley vous - not from anyone under 40 anyway
However, I accept you may have a deeper experience, having lived there
If you speak French with an English accent in any remotely touristy area, odds are good that they will reply in English.
Yes, it’s now a basic requirement for anyone working in tourism or tourist-oriented hospitality - in France, and around the world. A decent grasp of English
Indeed these days in France you sometimes get the opposite reaction from the old Gallic shrug. You ask them “do you speak English” and they smile and tut and say “of course” as if you have just slightly insulted them
And not just for the benefit of native anglophones - I've lost count of the number of times in various countries I've seen native service staff conversing with tourists in English because, whilst clearly the native tongue of neither, it's the language they have most of in common.
Yes, absolutely, it’s a real lingua Franca. It is now the accepted universal language of travel in a way that was not true even 15 years ago
A German talking to a Korean in Peru will speak English. If a restaurant in Armenia wants to explain its dishes on a menu it will use English, even tho they get almost zero British/American tourists
I was able to go on the lash with my new Russian friends last night - because they both speak English so the entire evening was spent speaking English even tho we were in Armenia and they were two Russians with one Englishman
They simply accepted that we all should speak English, no problem
We should thank our noble ancestors who went around the world conquering it, seeding our tongue everywhere, meaning that we lazy Brits can now go anywhere we like and we can expect to be understood in our own native language, born in our land
No other country enjoys this good fortune
No other country except all the other English speaking countries.
Which is now quintessentially every educated country.
understood in our own native language, born in our land
Looks like Petro has won the Colombian election. With 65% of the votes in he leads 51% to 47% and the outstanding votes are from more rural areas where he is more popular. With a left wing president in Colombia and soon hopefully Brazil too, South America is really changing.
Russian state-controlled news agency Interfax reported, citing the Russian military, that more than 1.9 million Ukrainians have been forcibly deported to Russia since the start of the invasion, over 307,000 of them children. https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1538461156544847872
We cannot appease this Macron.
Europe will never be safe again.
Macron ?
Yes.
Macron is the one wanting to appease this. Macron needs to realise we can't and shouldn't.
Ah, a missing comma. “We cannot appease this, Macron” makes sense.
The french need to stop pretending they can be some incredibly important mushy link and buffer between the US and RU superpowers and wake up and smell the coffee. This is a fight for european democracy and freedom and there will be only one winner.
Putin would kill every one of Macron's citizens at the drop of a hat if he could get away with it.
never really understood the ruling on prisoners voting from the ECHR - Sounds a fudge to me given its logical that prisoners shoudl not have the vote or they do have the vote - Surely its just shifting this stuff about not allowing blanket bans on voting to allowing blanket bans on certain categories of prisoners . Ie all those serving (say) five years or more cannot vote - well thats just as much a blanket ban on those prisoners as it is on all prisoners.
Never really respected the law courts (of whatever form) as much as others do on here tbh
My understanding of the ruling is that if Parliament wants to impose a ban on voting as an additional penalty for some offences or indeed for every offence, then fine, let them pass a law saying so. What is illegal is to just say "By the way, we're taking your vote away too" without a legal basis.
"Wheelchair user dragged himself up stairs ‘after rail staff refused to help’ Chris Nicholson was left stranded on platform at Milton Keynes station in 31C heat"
Tbh, if a situation occurred where I was stuck on the platform and needed to lifted up a flight of stairs to exit, I'd really want a group of people with some sort of training not a bunch of novices who might put me and themselves in danger.
I think I'd call the Fire Service - I suspect their crews have some relevant training, and if they're prepared to rescue cats from trees, I am sure they'd rescue man a in wheelchair from a railway platform.
What happened to the poster on here who was in fire service, i think in sheffield? His tag was @TwistedFireStopper ?
Loughborough I think.
Not far from you then?
Seems she/he has not been active for four years.
I feel old...
I think s/he was back on briefly a few weeks back under one of those numerical variants - TFS Mark 2 or something of the sort.
I like the idea of everyone coming out on strike at once this week - let's get it all over with, sort out the bargaining and settlements and then we can enjoy next winter's covid variant surge in peace and quiet.
I was able to go on the lash with my new Russian friends last night - because they both speak English so the entire evening was spent speaking English even tho we were in Armenia and they were two Russians with one Englishman
They simply accepted that we all should speak English, no problem
We should thank our noble ancestors who went around the world conquering it, seeding our tongue everywhere, meaning that we lazy Brits can now go anywhere we like and we can expect to be understood in our own native language, born in our land
No other country enjoys this good fortune
No other country except all the other English speaking countries.
Which is now quintessentially every educated country.
understood in our own native language, born in our land
Yes, Americans can understand people in their own native language, born in their land too.
My second line was a joke, with more than a hint of truth to it too though. English is now essentially a native language for much of the developed world even if its not officially the "first" language.
Russian state-controlled news agency Interfax reported, citing the Russian military, that more than 1.9 million Ukrainians have been forcibly deported to Russia since the start of the invasion, over 307,000 of them children. https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1538461156544847872
We cannot appease this Macron.
Europe will never be safe again.
Macron ?
Yes.
Macron is the one wanting to appease this. Macron needs to realise we can't and shouldn't.
Ah, a missing comma. “We cannot appease this, Macron” makes sense.
The french need to stop pretending they can be some incredibly important mushy link and buffer between the US and RU superpowers and wake up and smell the coffee. This is a fight for european democracy and freedom and there will be only one winner.
Putin would kill every one of Macron's citizens at the drop of a hat if he could get away with it.
No, he wouldn’t.
Putin is monstrous but he’s not Satan. He doesn’t desire death in and for itself. He wants Russia to be great. How would “killing every French person” enable that?
We have enough of an enemy in Vlad, already, we don’t need hyperbole
never really understood the ruling on prisoners voting from the ECHR - Sounds a fudge to me given its logical that prisoners shoudl not have the vote or they do have the vote - Surely its just shifting this stuff about not allowing blanket bans on voting to allowing blanket bans on certain categories of prisoners . Ie all those serving (say) five years or more cannot vote - well thats just as much a blanket ban on those prisoners as it is on all prisoners.
Never really respected the law courts (of whatever form) as much as others do on here tbh
My understanding of the ruling is that if Parliament wants to impose a ban on voting as an additional penalty for some offences or indeed for every offence, then fine, let them pass a law saying so. What is illegal is to just say "By the way, we're taking your vote away too" without a legal basis.
They did, didn't they? Representation of the People Act 1983?
Do you think that the health unions will insist on at least inflation, or settle for some kind of compromise?
I don't know. Usually the BMA are supine bootlickers, but the newer factions are more militant and have a strong campaign in the internal elections. The other unions like my own are a bit more robust.
I was able to go on the lash with my new Russian friends last night - because they both speak English so the entire evening was spent speaking English even tho we were in Armenia and they were two Russians with one Englishman
They simply accepted that we all should speak English, no problem
We should thank our noble ancestors who went around the world conquering it, seeding our tongue everywhere, meaning that we lazy Brits can now go anywhere we like and we can expect to be understood in our own native language, born in our land
No other country enjoys this good fortune
No other country except all the other English speaking countries.
Which is now quintessentially every educated country.
understood in our own native language, born in our land
Yes, Americans can understand people in their own native language, born in their land too.
My second line was a joke, with more than a hint of truth to it too though. English is now essentially a native language for much of the developed world even if its not officially the "first" language.
I sometimes wonder if English will actually replace some native languages - even in Europe
Danish? Maybe even Swedish? Dutch?
The young speak English so well they might as well be English, and they will happily speak it to each other. That’s an alarm bell for any language
Russian state-controlled news agency Interfax reported, citing the Russian military, that more than 1.9 million Ukrainians have been forcibly deported to Russia since the start of the invasion, over 307,000 of them children. https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1538461156544847872
We cannot appease this Macron.
Europe will never be safe again.
Macron ?
Yes.
Macron is the one wanting to appease this. Macron needs to realise we can't and shouldn't.
Ah, a missing comma. “We cannot appease this, Macron” makes sense.
The french need to stop pretending they can be some incredibly important mushy link and buffer between the US and RU superpowers and wake up and smell the coffee. This is a fight for european democracy and freedom and there will be only one winner.
Putin would kill every one of Macron's citizens at the drop of a hat if he could get away with it.
No, he wouldn’t.
Putin is monstrous but he’s not Satan. He doesn’t desire death in and for itself. He wants Russia to be great. How would “killing every French person” enable that?
We have enough of an enemy in Vlad, already, we don’t need hyperbole
Being accused of hyperbole by the travelling, aliens are amongst us, flint knapper must be a badge of honour on PB surely??
I like the idea of everyone coming out on strike at once this week - let's get it all over with, sort out the bargaining and settlements and then we can enjoy next winter's covid variant surge in peace and quiet.
Doctors industrial action will be a bit later, as there needs to be a ballot etc, so mid to late autumn, I reckon. Maybe more a ban on covering voluntary overtime and vacancies before strikes. There are so many vacancies that rotas would collapse quickly.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
I was able to go on the lash with my new Russian friends last night - because they both speak English so the entire evening was spent speaking English even tho we were in Armenia and they were two Russians with one Englishman
They simply accepted that we all should speak English, no problem
We should thank our noble ancestors who went around the world conquering it, seeding our tongue everywhere, meaning that we lazy Brits can now go anywhere we like and we can expect to be understood in our own native language, born in our land
No other country enjoys this good fortune
No other country except all the other English speaking countries.
Which is now quintessentially every educated country.
understood in our own native language, born in our land
Yes, Americans can understand people in their own native language, born in their land too.
My second line was a joke, with more than a hint of truth to it too though. English is now essentially a native language for much of the developed world even if its not officially the "first" language.
I sometimes wonder if English will actually replace some native languages - even in Europe
Danish? Maybe even Swedish? Dutch?
The young speak English so well they might as well be English, and they will happily speak it to each other. That’s an alarm bell for any language
I think it already has done. The original languages may still be spoken by some native speakers, just like Gallic has seen a resurgence in Wales, but if you want actual work done or to speak to people around the world, English is spoken by virtually all now.
It isn't just the tourist trade or business either, its allowed migration around the world and even changed such things as who you can fall in love with. I know many married couples neither of whom are from traditionally English speaking nations, neither of whom speak each other's native language, but they fell in love and can converse to each other in English rather than each other's native tongue.
I was able to go on the lash with my new Russian friends last night - because they both speak English so the entire evening was spent speaking English even tho we were in Armenia and they were two Russians with one Englishman
They simply accepted that we all should speak English, no problem
We should thank our noble ancestors who went around the world conquering it, seeding our tongue everywhere, meaning that we lazy Brits can now go anywhere we like and we can expect to be understood in our own native language, born in our land
No other country enjoys this good fortune
No other country except all the other English speaking countries.
Which is now quintessentially every educated country.
understood in our own native language, born in our land
Yes, Americans can understand people in their own native language, born in their land too.
My second line was a joke, with more than a hint of truth to it too though. English is now essentially a native language for much of the developed world even if its not officially the "first" language.
I sometimes wonder if English will actually replace some native languages - even in Europe
Danish? Maybe even Swedish? Dutch?
The young speak English so well they might as well be English, and they will happily speak it to each other. That’s an alarm bell for any language
I think it already has done. The original languages may still be spoken by some native speakers, just like Gallic has seen a resurgence in Wales, but if you want actual work done or to speak to people around the world, English is spoken by virtually all now.
It isn't just the tourist trade or business either, its allowed migration around the world and even changed such things as who you can fall in love with. I know many married couples neither of whom are from traditionally English speaking nations, neither of whom speak each other's native language, but they fell in love and can converse to each other in English rather than each other's native tongue.
I have Greek and Italian friends who are a couple, and converse in heavily accented English. Their kids are trilingual though!
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it and its benevolence.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Various ways of thinking about "how big a rise is enough?"
5% is probably sellable enough to weaken strike moves- precedent of ScotRail, share pain equally between employees and employers, that sort of thing.
Goodness only knows what's needed to stave off recruitment crunches. Quite a lot more, I suspect.
And politically, a government presiding over that big a fall in living standards will have to work awfully hard to be re-elected.
How much train driving, healthcare and teaching is the British public willing and able to pay for? And what happens if the answer to that question is "less"?
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
A bunch of reasons why they don't switch to English, as a manager of Euro English speakers: The obvious national and emotional reasons. It's highly impractical to learn the Nordic languages anywhere outside the Nordic countries. Nor do many people learn Dutch. The language is tied to nationhood in a way not true in English speaking countries. Also true in France and other places under minimal threat from English. As a corollary of the impracticality of overseas education, states like Denmark and Sweden like to use their native languages as a discretionary labour market barrier for skilled work. Want a good job in the civil service? You better speak Danish. Your kids are going to speak Finnish in the school system anyway. If you both work, your parents are going to teach your kids Finnish anyway. Your kids are going to learn English from the internets anyway.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Various ways of thinking about "how big a rise is enough?"
5% is probably sellable enough to weaken strike moves- precedent of ScotRail, share pain equally between employees and employers, that sort of thing.
Goodness only knows what's needed to stave off recruitment crunches. Quite a lot more, I suspect.
And politically, a government presiding over that big a fall in living standards will have to work awfully hard to be re-elected.
How much train driving, healthcare and teaching is the British public willing and able to pay for? And what happens if the answer to that question is "less"?
What happens is no overtime, and long waiting lists.
A bunch of reasons why they don't switch to English, as a manager of Euro English speakers: The obvious national and emotional reasons. It's highly impractical to learn the Nordic languages anywhere outside the Nordic countries. Nor do many people learn Dutch. The language is tied to nationhood in a way not true in English speaking countries. Also true in France and other places under minimal threat from English. As a corollary of the impracticality of overseas education, states like Denmark and Sweden like to use their native languages as a discretionary labour market barrier for skilled work. Want a good job in the civil service? You better speak Danish. Your kids are going to speak Finnish in the school system anyway. If you both work, your parents are going to teach your kids Finnish anyway. Your kids are going to learn English from the internets anyway.
But a language can exist, officially and formally, it can even be seen as primary, and yet it dies, as English overwhelms
Irish Gaelic is a classic example
This is a good thing. The sooner everyone on earth speaks god’s own language, the Queen’s English, the sooner we will all get on. Get rid of these silly little dialects
After that, we just have to make sure everyone plays cricket
never really understood the ruling on prisoners voting from the ECHR - Sounds a fudge to me given its logical that prisoners shoudl not have the vote or they do have the vote - Surely its just shifting this stuff about not allowing blanket bans on voting to allowing blanket bans on certain categories of prisoners . Ie all those serving (say) five years or more cannot vote - well thats just as much a blanket ban on those prisoners as it is on all prisoners.
Never really respected the law courts (of whatever form) as much as others do on here tbh
My understanding of the ruling is that if Parliament wants to impose a ban on voting as an additional penalty for some offences or indeed for every offence, then fine, let them pass a law saying so. What is illegal is to just say "By the way, we're taking your vote away too" without a legal basis.
Am I to understand it was done without any legal basis? That sounds rather improbable and surely would have come up long before an ECHR ruling 10 years ago or whenever on the subject. Surely domestic courts would have noticed if masses of incarcerated people were being denied their rights, prisoners can and do challenge things in the courts.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Only if you think Primary School kids need a regular teacher. In your world that is bizarre I realise.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
A bunch of reasons why they don't switch to English, as a manager of Euro English speakers: The obvious national and emotional reasons. It's highly impractical to learn the Nordic languages anywhere outside the Nordic countries. Nor do many people learn Dutch. The language is tied to nationhood in a way not true in English speaking countries. Also true in France and other places under minimal threat from English. As a corollary of the impracticality of overseas education, states like Denmark and Sweden like to use their native languages as a discretionary labour market barrier for skilled work. Want a good job in the civil service? You better speak Danish. Your kids are going to speak Finnish in the school system anyway. If you both work, your parents are going to teach your kids Finnish anyway. Your kids are going to learn English from the internets anyway.
But a language can exist, officially and formally, it can even be seen as primary, and yet it dies, as English overwhelms
Irish Gaelic is a classic example
This is a good thing. The sooner everyone on earth speaks god’s own language, the Queen’s English, the sooner we will all get on. Get rid of these silly little dialects
After that, we just have to make sure everyone plays cricket
Well, that switch was achieved 180 to 250 years ago. There were no modern welfare state governments you had to interact with every few weeks or months; no national school system; and in that case, not even a market for any written material at all in the native language. You switched your household language to English so that your kids could acquire schooling and move to a town or emigrate. It's not a peril facing the yuppies who would be at the leading edge of any Dutch-to-English language shift.
A bunch of reasons why they don't switch to English, as a manager of Euro English speakers: The obvious national and emotional reasons. It's highly impractical to learn the Nordic languages anywhere outside the Nordic countries. Nor do many people learn Dutch. The language is tied to nationhood in a way not true in English speaking countries. Also true in France and other places under minimal threat from English. As a corollary of the impracticality of overseas education, states like Denmark and Sweden like to use their native languages as a discretionary labour market barrier for skilled work. Want a good job in the civil service? You better speak Danish. Your kids are going to speak Finnish in the school system anyway. If you both work, your parents are going to teach your kids Finnish anyway. Your kids are going to learn English from the internets anyway.
But a language can exist, officially and formally, it can even be seen as primary, and yet it dies, as English overwhelms
Irish Gaelic is a classic example
This is a good thing. The sooner everyone on earth speaks god’s own language, the Queen’s English, the sooner we will all get on. Get rid of these silly little dialects
After that, we just have to make sure everyone plays cricket
Don't be ridiculous, we can't beat most of the few countries that already play it.
If Germany takes up cricket we'll never win another Super Over.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Only if you think Primary School kids need a regular teacher. In your world that is bizarre I realise.
In my world my kids have a regular teacher.
If they don't, the school should sort it out so that they do. Any schools incapable of ensuring their classes are taught by a regular teacher ought to be able to sort themselves out.
A bunch of reasons why they don't switch to English, as a manager of Euro English speakers: The obvious national and emotional reasons. It's highly impractical to learn the Nordic languages anywhere outside the Nordic countries. Nor do many people learn Dutch. The language is tied to nationhood in a way not true in English speaking countries. Also true in France and other places under minimal threat from English. As a corollary of the impracticality of overseas education, states like Denmark and Sweden like to use their native languages as a discretionary labour market barrier for skilled work. Want a good job in the civil service? You better speak Danish. Your kids are going to speak Finnish in the school system anyway. If you both work, your parents are going to teach your kids Finnish anyway. Your kids are going to learn English from the internets anyway.
But a language can exist, officially and formally, it can even be seen as primary, and yet it dies, as English overwhelms
Irish Gaelic is a classic example
This is a good thing. The sooner everyone on earth speaks god’s own language, the Queen’s English, the sooner we will all get on. Get rid of these silly little dialects
After that, we just have to make sure everyone plays cricket
It would be interesting to know what measures, if any, different countries take to protect native linguas. If places are simply raised to be essentially bilingual then the native one won't die out as it is equally convenient at home, and time and effort can preserve places which could be overwhelmed. Even if estimates are way off in terms of actual proficiency or daily use, a lot of time and effort has gone into it encouraing Welsh after all.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Only if you think Primary School kids need a regular teacher. In your world that is bizarre I realise.
In my world my kids have a regular teacher.
If they don't, the school should sort it out so that they do. Any schools incapable of ensuring their classes are taught by a regular teacher ought to be able to sort themselves out.
Alas, American English is the lingua Franca. You ‘realize’ that when you have your perfectly good English ‘corrected’ by a German.
Meh. Minor issues of spelling and pronunciation don't matter, if English speakers cared about that it wouldn't be so widespread even with american cultural dominance.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Various ways of thinking about "how big a rise is enough?"
5% is probably sellable enough to weaken strike moves- precedent of ScotRail, share pain equally between employees and employers, that sort of thing.
Goodness only knows what's needed to stave off recruitment crunches. Quite a lot more, I suspect.
And politically, a government presiding over that big a fall in living standards will have to work awfully hard to be re-elected.
How much train driving, healthcare and teaching is the British public willing and able to pay for? And what happens if the answer to that question is "less"?
Repeat after me: TRAIN DRIVERS ARE NOT ON STRIKE (Yet!)
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
Alas, American English is the lingua Franca. You ‘realize’ that when you have your perfectly good English ‘corrected’ by a German.
Meh. Minor issues of spelling and pronunciation don't matter, if English speakers cared about that it wouldn't be so widespread even with american cultural dominance.
After that, we just have to make sure everyone plays cricket
Standing around in a field all day is NOT a sport!
A true English gentleman knows one should only engage in sports which can be done sitting down, or sedately enough that you need not break out into a sweat like some common labourer.
The point is of course that we have a government that professes to believe in market forces. Except they refuse to offer the market rate
Yeah right, they are keen on market forces up to the point that it is to the workers advantage, then they couldn't give a damn.
Not 100% true. The treasury are doing everything they can to avoid a new employment act because they are petrified of the impact it may have on the £60bn raised from employer NI
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
Which is why schools should have the flexibility to set wages themselves and the state should not be involved in them whatsoever.
"National pay rates" are an anachronism that should never exist.
I sometimes wonder if English will actually replace some native languages - even in Europe
Danish? Maybe even Swedish? Dutch?
The young speak English so well they might as well be English, and they will happily speak it to each other. That’s an alarm bell for any language
Doubt it. As you say, Danes mostly speak excellent English, but everything that happens in Denmark that doesn't involve foreign partners is in Danish.
It's an incredibly easy language to learn to read, by the way. No variation by parts of speech (i.e. I read, you read, he read, we read, they read), massive overlap with English and German.
Alas, American English is the lingua Franca. You ‘realize’ that when you have your perfectly good English ‘corrected’ by a German.
Meh. Minor issues of spelling and pronunciation don't matter, if English speakers cared about that it wouldn't be so widespread even with american cultural dominance.
Well, I was annoyed. Color me senseless.
The individual cares, but the collective does not.
It's good to hear the younger French can presumably see that they can preserve and use their tongue without the rather desperate attempt to excise it of external influence by official bodies.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
Which is why schools should have the flexibility to set wages themselves and the state should not be involved in them whatsoever.
"National pay rates" are an anachronism that should never exist.
Academies can pay more - for some reason or other they don’t
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
...fewer teachers...
(Sorry)
No need to be sorry! Less or fewer are both clearly fine in this context.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
Which is why schools should have the flexibility to set wages themselves and the state should not be involved in them whatsoever.
"National pay rates" are an anachronism that should never exist.
Academies can pay more - for some reason or other they don’t
In which case, presumably they aren't struggling to fill their vacancies, going back to where we started the conversation.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
Which is why schools should have the flexibility to set wages themselves and the state should not be involved in them whatsoever.
"National pay rates" are an anachronism that should never exist.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
Which is why schools should have the flexibility to set wages themselves and the state should not be involved in them whatsoever.
"National pay rates" are an anachronism that should never exist.
Academies can pay more - for some reason or other they don’t
In which case, presumably they aren't struggling to fill their vacancies, going back to where we started the conversation.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
Which is why schools should have the flexibility to set wages themselves and the state should not be involved in them whatsoever.
"National pay rates" are an anachronism that should never exist.
And who exactly funds this?
That's for the school to sort out from its budget.
I don't know about teaching in particular but in most industries supply staff are more expensive than permanent staff, not cheaper. So a school over-relying on supply staff ought to have the budget to pay a decent wage to reliable permanent staff members instead. Supply staff tend to be a very false economy.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
Which is why schools should have the flexibility to set wages themselves and the state should not be involved in them whatsoever.
"National pay rates" are an anachronism that should never exist.
Academies can pay more - for some reason or other they don’t
In which case, presumably they aren't struggling to fill their vacancies, going back to where we started the conversation.
Academies can pay more but they can’t because the budget (set by the department of education) doesn’t allow them to do so.
Remember my previous point - a lot of schools are not replacing teachers because they need to safe money to pay the expected fuel bills.
Given that we are referring back to previous points - remember I used to be a school governor specializing in school finances…
It tells you all you need know about Mélenchon that he responded to his second place, somewhat ahead of Le Pen's huge bloc, with "we have succeeded" because Ensemble lost a majority. (Note, he had also been telling people a few days ago that he was still running for Prime Minister.)
I’m just reading about him now. Uncannily similar to Corbyn, right down to the alleged anti-Semitism
He’s horrible
French politics is being assailed by the far-right and the far-left at the same time.
It is in a terrible place.
i find it quite bewildering as France seems, at least at first glance, such a fortunate country, for the most part
Eg I look at the map of France and I see some of my favourite places on earth, like Pyrenees Orientales (which includes the idyllic seaside town of Collioure, and lots of other lovely spots) and then I notice that it voted for Le Pen?! WTF? Life is obviously not as sweet as it appear, and something is happening that my superficial traveling brain does not perceive
I don't understand it, but, France has always had wildly strange and subversive politics, and plenty of revolutions, for centuries now.
Trouble is that when Paris sneezes Europe catches a cold.
Also, France successfully hides its problems away from the more casual visitor. That’s why Stade de France was such a shocking revelation, outsiders got to see what the French have known for many years: parts of their outlying suburbs are seriously deprived, and lawless
Rural France likewise has its problems. The tranquility of the countryside adored by visitors is often caused by depopulation and stagnation
Still don’t get Pyrenees Orientales, tho
For all its undoubted problems France doesn't do too badly though does it?
The food is not what it was, the famous wine is overpriced… but otherwise, bien sur
If money was not an issue and I could live anywhere on earth, Provence or Languedoc would be high on my list
There's always a good chance of a sublime lunch in the most unremarkable-looking places in rural France.
Or at least there was, it's a few years since we were there. We're back there in September - I'm hoping it's not another of those "things I thought would last forever but are now disappearing/disappeared".
Btw did you catch Stanley Tucci's series on Italian Food on BBC recently? There's another country with wonderful cuisine.
almost everyone under 40 speaks English, and doesn’t mind doing so
Complete tosh I'm afraid
I think @leon is correct provided you don't act in an arrogant way by expecting it. Unfortunately I have witnessed several Brits who just do seem to think it is their right to shout in English and be understood. Under those scenarios you will encounter a lack of comprehension and deservingly so.
A few years ago I had just started a holiday in Europe and arrived at the first Services in France on the road to Belgium. In front of me in the queue to be served was an American speaking loudly to the young lady who was at the counter saying "My soup is cold, can you reheat it?" She just looked at him blankly. After 30s of listening to an American getting more and more frustrated I picked up courage and said "Mademoiselle, il est froid". Her eyes lit up, the soup went into the microwave and a minute later the American was thanking me profusely and then I got served. (Those of you who know French will jump on me for saying "il est" rather than "il fait" but in my defence I got 22% in my French O Level 40 years earlier).
And so you can have a laugh at my expense. It might well have been that same hoilday and we arrived at the French/Belgium border for the night. Went to a local French restaurant for a meal and the menu was totally in French. I scanned the list looking for a word or two that I might recognise. The word "hommard" stood out and I guessed that was "duck" so I ordered it. A plastic bib was placed around my neck, a tool kit that would see good use in an operating theatre was placed next to me and "half a firkin" lobster arrived, looking up dolefully at me from the plate. I can't eat anything that looks at me whilst I am eating it (whether it is fish, lobster or whatever). I sent the whole meal back, untouched, paid the bill and left hungry. Two weeks later we were in Maastricht (Netherlands) and staying at the hotel that the UK delegation had stayed at (or so the pictures suggested). Headlining the "Set Menu" was Hommard, I asked for the "A La Carte" menu.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
Which is why schools should have the flexibility to set wages themselves and the state should not be involved in them whatsoever.
"National pay rates" are an anachronism that should never exist.
Academies can pay more - for some reason or other they don’t
In which case, presumably they aren't struggling to fill their vacancies, going back to where we started the conversation.
But they are. Big time.
Where's your evidence for that?
My daughter's school is excellent and has really good, reliable staff there. They've never had a supply teacher, apart from regular teachers or assistants employed by the school covering when their own teacher is off for a particular reason.
Decent schools ought to be able to afford decent teachers. If they aren't, then that should set alarm bells ringing about the quality of the teaching there.
A bunch of reasons why they don't switch to English, as a manager of Euro English speakers: The obvious national and emotional reasons. It's highly impractical to learn the Nordic languages anywhere outside the Nordic countries. Nor do many people learn Dutch. The language is tied to nationhood in a way not true in English speaking countries. Also true in France and other places under minimal threat from English. As a corollary of the impracticality of overseas education, states like Denmark and Sweden like to use their native languages as a discretionary labour market barrier for skilled work. Want a good job in the civil service? You better speak Danish. Your kids are going to speak Finnish in the school system anyway. If you both work, your parents are going to teach your kids Finnish anyway. Your kids are going to learn English from the internets anyway.
But a language can exist, officially and formally, it can even be seen as primary, and yet it dies, as English overwhelms
Irish Gaelic is a classic example
This is a good thing. The sooner everyone on earth speaks god’s own language, the Queen’s English, the sooner we will all get on. Get rid of these silly little dialects
After that, we just have to make sure everyone plays cricket
It would be interesting to know what measures, if any, different countries take to protect native linguas. If places are simply raised to be essentially bilingual then the native one won't die out as it is equally convenient at home, and time and effort can preserve places which could be overwhelmed. Even if estimates are way off in terms of actual proficiency or daily use, a lot of time and effort has gone into it encouraing Welsh after all.
Well, there is a big difference between Welsh (or Breton or Sicilian) and Dutch. Dutch has a governmental apparatus involving millions of people who are either employed in jobs where they speak Dutch or learn curricula through Dutch. The minority languages don't have this, and sometimes have governments that set out to deny people anything like it.
But more to the point, inferring language shift from the behaviour of yuppie Dutch in their 20s is like inferring Labour Party domination from the behaviour of Brits in their 20s. The question for language shift is what do kids hear every day? Even if it's English at home with parents, any grandparent role any any role for local schools exposes them to hours of Finnish or Icelandic every week. The English-speaking child is a real phenomenon among families like Germans and Dutch working in an English-language big job, or a Spaniard and Italian married and living in the UK. But outside an English-speaking country, contact with schools melts any notion of language shift for kids of nationals. (In fact, it seems to do the same for attempts to raise a child fully bilingually.)
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
Which is why schools should have the flexibility to set wages themselves and the state should not be involved in them whatsoever.
"National pay rates" are an anachronism that should never exist.
Academies can pay more - for some reason or other they don’t
In which case, presumably they aren't struggling to fill their vacancies, going back to where we started the conversation.
Academies can pay more but they can’t because the budget (set by the department of education) doesn’t allow them to do so.
Remember my previous point - a lot of schools are not replacing teachers because they need to safe money to pay the expected fuel bills.
Given that we are referring back to previous points - remember I used to be a school governor specializing in school finances…
If they deliberately aren't replacing teachers, then presumably they think they have enough. A school with fuel but no teachers is hardly a school now, is it?
Either way, that should be their choice - and if wage rises are going to cause problems, then presumably the school should be thinking carefully before agreeing any. You as a Governor ought to be able to get involved in wage discussions for your school, rather someone from Whitehall deciding what is appropriate for your school then applying that to every single school in the country uniformly as if there's no local factors involved.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Only if you think Primary School kids need a regular teacher. In your world that is bizarre I realise.
In my world my kids have a regular teacher.
If they don't, the school should sort it out so that they do. Any schools incapable of ensuring their classes are taught by a regular teacher ought to be able to sort themselves out.
And if the finance isn't there?
If the finance isn't there, how are they paying supply teachers? Which in almost every industry normally are more expensive not cheaper?
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
Which is why schools should have the flexibility to set wages themselves and the state should not be involved in them whatsoever.
"National pay rates" are an anachronism that should never exist.
And who exactly funds this?
That's for the school to sort out from its budget.
I don't know about teaching in particular but in most industries supply staff are more expensive than permanent staff, not cheaper. So a school over-relying on supply staff ought to have the budget to pay a decent wage to reliable permanent staff members instead. Supply staff tend to be a very false economy.
Supply staff aren’t actually that much different in price it’s agency fees that used to be the killer.
However, supply staff costs usually don’t come from the yearly budget (no school budgets for significant supply staff costs) instead they will run a negative budget for that finance year and then claw it back the following year.
A school with 20 teachers using 3 long term supply teachers will the following year have 22 rather than 23 teachers because of the money spent in the previous year
A bunch of reasons why they don't switch to English, as a manager of Euro English speakers: The obvious national and emotional reasons. It's highly impractical to learn the Nordic languages anywhere outside the Nordic countries. Nor do many people learn Dutch. The language is tied to nationhood in a way not true in English speaking countries. Also true in France and other places under minimal threat from English. As a corollary of the impracticality of overseas education, states like Denmark and Sweden like to use their native languages as a discretionary labour market barrier for skilled work. Want a good job in the civil service? You better speak Danish. Your kids are going to speak Finnish in the school system anyway. If you both work, your parents are going to teach your kids Finnish anyway. Your kids are going to learn English from the internets anyway.
But a language can exist, officially and formally, it can even be seen as primary, and yet it dies, as English overwhelms
Irish Gaelic is a classic example
This is a good thing. The sooner everyone on earth speaks god’s own language, the Queen’s English, the sooner we will all get on. Get rid of these silly little dialects
After that, we just have to make sure everyone plays cricket
It would be interesting to know what measures, if any, different countries take to protect native linguas. If places are simply raised to be essentially bilingual then the native one won't die out as it is equally convenient at home, and time and effort can preserve places which could be overwhelmed. Even if estimates are way off in terms of actual proficiency or daily use, a lot of time and effort has gone into it encouraing Welsh after all.
Well, there is a big difference between Welsh (or Breton or Sicilian) and Dutch. Dutch has a governmental apparatus involving millions of people who are either employed in jobs where they speak Dutch or learn curricula through Dutch. The minority languages don't have this, and sometimes have governments that set out to deny people anything like it.
But more to the point, inferring language shift from the behaviour of yuppie Dutch in their 20s is like inferring Labour Party domination from the behaviour of Brits in their 20s. The question for language shift is what do kids hear every day? Even if it's English at home with parents, any grandparent role any any role for local schools exposes them to hours of Finnish or Icelandic every week. The English-speaking child is a real phenomenon among families like Germans and Dutch working in an English-language big job, or a Spaniard and Italian married and living in the UK. But outside an English-speaking country, contact with schools melts any notion of language shift for kids of nationals. (In fact, it seems to do the same for attempts to raise a child fully bilingually.)
I mentioned Welsh as an example of one where it was not as widespread and needed a bit of help to prevent being overwhelmed, but indeed has not been entirely overwhelmed. The threat to dutch or any other is, as you note, very different and much minimised because of the extent of use even if everyone else also speaks English. If they do, there's advantages outside the nation but still no particular benefit to dropping the original.
"Average total pay growth for the private sector was 8.2% in January to March 2022, and for the public sector was 1.6% in the same time period; the finance and business services sector showed the largest growth rate (10.7%), partly because of strong bonus payments"
Key point. Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before. Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it.
Absolutely, if public sector staff are prepared to quit to get better paid jobs elsewhere, and nobody else is queueing up to fill the roles, then their employers will have no alternative but to pay more to replace them.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
They are. Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand. And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor. You may like that. But millions won't.
If that's the case, there's absolutely no reason to strike, is there?
Many people strike as the final attempt to get something fixed before they leave the industry.
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
If they aren't, deregulate wages and let the market sort it out.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
You’ve clearly never been a school governor then (and clearly not one who deals with finance).
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
Which is why schools should have the flexibility to set wages themselves and the state should not be involved in them whatsoever.
"National pay rates" are an anachronism that should never exist.
Academies can pay more - for some reason or other they don’t
In which case, presumably they aren't struggling to fill their vacancies, going back to where we started the conversation.
Academies can pay more but they can’t because the budget (set by the department of education) doesn’t allow them to do so.
Remember my previous point - a lot of schools are not replacing teachers because they need to safe money to pay the expected fuel bills.
Given that we are referring back to previous points - remember I used to be a school governor specializing in school finances…
If they deliberately aren't replacing teachers, then presumably they think they have enough. A school with fuel but no teachers is hardly a school now, is it?
Either way, that should be their choice - and if wage rises are going to cause problems, then presumably the school should be thinking carefully before agreeing any. You as a Governor ought to be able to get involved in wage discussions for your school, rather someone from Whitehall deciding what is appropriate for your school then applying that to every single school in the country uniformly as if there's no local factors involved.
Depends on the budget - you may well find that there are now teaching periods that are covered by teaching assistants rather than teachers themselves
Oh and the last thing I should be doing as a governor is negotiating wages - outside of senior management it’s the responsibility of others. Governors are there to set policy and ensure standards are maintained not day to day issues
Comments
But I should add that my personal experience is limited mostly to watching motorized platforms lift people up into and down out of of local busess. They seem to be used more for babies in strollers than the disabled, at least where I travel.
(The last time I was in Britain, I saw a lady with a baby in a pram trying to negotiate steps in a tube station. I helped her since there didn't seem to be any officials around to do it. I hope I wasn't breaking any rules.)
I was able to go on the lash with my new Russian friends last night - because they both speak English so the entire evening was spent speaking English even tho we were in Armenia and they were two Russians with one Englishman
They simply accepted that we all should speak English, no problem
We should thank our noble ancestors who went around the world conquering it, seeding our tongue everywhere, meaning that we lazy Brits can now go anywhere we like and we can expect to be understood in our own native language, born in our land
No other country enjoys this good fortune
Which is now quintessentially every educated country.
“We cannot appease this, Macron” makes sense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXpkttGcG5I
A German talking to a Korean in Peru will speak English. If a restaurant in Armenia wants to explain its dishes on a menu it will use English, even tho they get almost zero British/American tourists
Putin would kill every one of Macron's citizens at the drop of a hat if he could get away with it.
My second line was a joke, with more than a hint of truth to it too though. English is now essentially a native language for much of the developed world even if its not officially the "first" language.
So no early starts and no ironing of work clothes.
Thank you Comrades!
Shit, where's the wine section of the supermarket gone?
Putin is monstrous but he’s not Satan. He doesn’t desire death in and for itself. He wants Russia to be great. How would “killing every French person” enable that?
We have enough of an enemy in Vlad, already, we don’t need hyperbole
Danish? Maybe even Swedish? Dutch?
The young speak English so well they might as well be English, and they will happily speak it to each other. That’s an alarm bell for any language
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/06/russia-ukraine-putin-chechnya/661321/
Still way short of a majority
From:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/averageweeklyearningsingreatbritain/may2022
It isn't just the tourist trade or business either, its allowed migration around the world and even changed such things as who you can fall in love with. I know many married couples neither of whom are from traditionally English speaking nations, neither of whom speak each other's native language, but they fell in love and can converse to each other in English rather than each other's native tongue.
Public sector hasn't been struggling to recruit before.
Market forces are at work. The invisible hand will ensure a large pay settlement. If you have faith in it and its benevolence.
If they're not prepared to though, that's not the invisible hand that's acting.
5% is probably sellable enough to weaken strike moves- precedent of ScotRail, share pain equally between employees and employers, that sort of thing.
Goodness only knows what's needed to stave off recruitment crunches. Quite a lot more, I suspect.
And politically, a government presiding over that big a fall in living standards will have to work awfully hard to be re-elected.
How much train driving, healthcare and teaching is the British public willing and able to pay for? And what happens if the answer to that question is "less"?
(*to do the Trafford Centre tram line, opened 2020)
Which is why 2 or 3% won't stand.
And why your kids won't have a teacher. But a week by week contractor.
You may like that. But millions won't.
The obvious national and emotional reasons. It's highly impractical to learn the Nordic languages anywhere outside the Nordic countries. Nor do many people learn Dutch. The language is tied to nationhood in a way not true in English speaking countries. Also true in France and other places under minimal threat from English.
As a corollary of the impracticality of overseas education, states like Denmark and Sweden like to use their native languages as a discretionary labour market barrier for skilled work. Want a good job in the civil service? You better speak Danish.
Your kids are going to speak Finnish in the school system anyway.
If you both work, your parents are going to teach your kids Finnish anyway.
Your kids are going to learn English from the internets anyway.
Except they refuse to offer the market rate
Irish Gaelic is a classic example
This is a good thing. The sooner everyone on earth speaks god’s own language, the Queen’s English, the sooner we will all get on. Get rid of these silly little dialects
After that, we just have to make sure everyone plays cricket
And supply teachers are getting harder to find so don’t think the week by week contractors exist to fix the problem
In your world that is bizarre I realise.
There is no reason the state should be getting involved in wage levels. If the supply of teachers are short in a particular area, then wages should be able to go up, if there's an overabundance elsewhere then wages might stagnate. Why should the government be involved either way?
If Germany takes up cricket we'll never win another Super Over.
If they don't, the school should sort it out so that they do. Any schools incapable of ensuring their classes are taught by a regular teacher ought to be able to sort themselves out.
Simple fact is that if wages go up schools need either more money or the number of teachers will drop because there really isn’t anything else that can be cut.
Heck a lot of schools will have less teachers come September to reflect higher fuel costs
TRAIN
DRIVERS
ARE
NOT
ON
STRIKE
(Yet!)
(Sorry)
"National pay rates" are an anachronism that should never exist.
It's an incredibly easy language to learn to read, by the way. No variation by parts of speech (i.e. I read, you read, he read, we read, they read), massive overlap with English and German.
It's good to hear the younger French can presumably see that they can preserve and use their tongue without the rather desperate attempt to excise it of external influence by official bodies.
They refer to train carriages as "bogeys", whereas, as we all know, bogeys are the things carrying the wheels BENEATH the carriages!
I don't know about teaching in particular but in most industries supply staff are more expensive than permanent staff, not cheaper. So a school over-relying on supply staff ought to have the budget to pay a decent wage to reliable permanent staff members instead. Supply staff tend to be a very false economy.
Remember my previous point - a lot of schools are not replacing teachers because they need to safe money to pay the expected fuel bills.
Given that we are referring back to previous points - remember I used to be a school governor specializing in school finances…
And so you can have a laugh at my expense. It might well have been that same hoilday and we arrived at the French/Belgium border for the night. Went to a local French restaurant for a meal and the menu was totally in French. I scanned the list looking for a word or two that I might recognise. The word "hommard" stood out and I guessed that was "duck" so I ordered it. A plastic bib was placed around my neck, a tool kit that would see good use in an operating theatre was placed next to me and "half a firkin" lobster arrived, looking up dolefully at me from the plate. I can't eat anything that looks at me whilst I am eating it (whether it is fish, lobster or whatever). I sent the whole meal back, untouched, paid the bill and left hungry. Two weeks later we were in Maastricht (Netherlands) and staying at the hotel that the UK delegation had stayed at (or so the pictures suggested). Headlining the "Set Menu" was Hommard, I asked for the "A La Carte" menu.
My daughter's school is excellent and has really good, reliable staff there. They've never had a supply teacher, apart from regular teachers or assistants employed by the school covering when their own teacher is off for a particular reason.
Decent schools ought to be able to afford decent teachers. If they aren't, then that should set alarm bells ringing about the quality of the teaching there.
https://www.bbc.com/pidgin/tori-61698057
Boris Johnson don win one confidence vote of Tory MPs by 211 to 148.
E mean say e go continue wit im job as prime minister.
Conservative MPs bin dey reason weda dem wan replace Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
But more to the point, inferring language shift from the behaviour of yuppie Dutch in their 20s is like inferring Labour Party domination from the behaviour of Brits in their 20s. The question for language shift is what do kids hear every day? Even if it's English at home with parents, any grandparent role any any role for local schools exposes them to hours of Finnish or Icelandic every week. The English-speaking child is a real phenomenon among families like Germans and Dutch working in an English-language big job, or a Spaniard and Italian married and living in the UK. But outside an English-speaking country, contact with schools melts any notion of language shift for kids of nationals. (In fact, it seems to do the same for attempts to raise a child fully bilingually.)
Either way, that should be their choice - and if wage rises are going to cause problems, then presumably the school should be thinking carefully before agreeing any. You as a Governor ought to be able to get involved in wage discussions for your school, rather someone from Whitehall deciding what is appropriate for your school then applying that to every single school in the country uniformly as if there's no local factors involved.
However, supply staff costs usually don’t come from the yearly budget (no school budgets for significant supply staff costs) instead they will run a negative budget for that finance year and then claw it back the following year.
A school with 20 teachers using 3 long term supply teachers will the following year have 22 rather than 23 teachers because of the money spent in the previous year
Oh and the last thing I should be doing as a governor is negotiating wages - outside of senior management it’s the responsibility of others. Governors are there to set policy and ensure standards are maintained not day to day issues
Or potentially if you are dealing with a mass quantity of teachers.
Not English Language teachers though, I hope.