pongo Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 The work permit office need to make themselves 'a bit more public' over the coming months, including writing to employers, if they have any sense, as they are likely to come under a great deal of scruitiny soon IMO. There are clearly already a number of disgruntled local workers (many now unemployed) who once a bit more organised will no doubt soon start taking them to task via MHKs etc. I also think they need to start thinking about extending their 'restrictions' to far more other areas too. Yet more of your nanny state stuff Comrade Tatlock ? <- The work permit system contradicts the "freedom to flourish" message IMO since, almost invariably, an open market and the free movement of labor are indivisible. Any restrictions ultimately restrict the economy and sends out a message that this is a place where it is difficult to do business because restrictive conditions apply. I can remember hearing of a case (and the rules may now have changed) when a person was required to hold a work permit in order to open a business employing people. Crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 The work permit office need to make themselves 'a bit more public' over the coming months, including writing to employers, if they have any sense, as they are likely to come under a great deal of scruitiny soon IMO. There are clearly already a number of disgruntled local workers (many now unemployed) who once a bit more organised will no doubt soon start taking them to task via MHKs etc. I also think they need to start thinking about extending their 'restrictions' to far more other areas too. Yet more of your nanny state stuff Comrade Tatlock ? <- The work permit system contradicts the "freedom to flourish" message IMO since, almost invariably, an open market and the free movement of labor are indivisible. Any restrictions ultimately restrict the economy and sends out a message that this is a place where it is difficult to do business because restrictive conditions apply. I can remember hearing of a case (and the rules may now have changed) when a person was required to hold a work permit in order to open a business employing people. Crazy. Actually my support of the WPS is about cultural protection in the main, already the Manx have become the minority over the past 20 years. If businesses had enough market leeway, on an island this size you'd eventually possibly see only a tiny minority of Manx and the bulk of employees e.g. cut price Eastern Europeans etc. 'Freedom to Flourish' doesn't mean 'Freedom to Undercut and wipe out the indigenous population and force locals to leave'. Nothing remotely communist about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 The point about cultures is that they are alive and ever changing. If a culture is not constantly changing then it is dead. Cultures are like the old game of life computer simulation - they merge with an evolve under the influence of neighboring cultures. Set apart, they die. Your protected culture would be like a museum colony IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homarus Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 The work permit office need to make themselves 'a bit more public' over the coming months, including writing to employers, if they have any sense, as they are likely to come under a great deal of scruitiny soon IMO. There are clearly already a number of disgruntled local workers (many now unemployed) who once a bit more organised will no doubt soon start taking them to task via MHKs etc. I also think they need to start thinking about extending their 'restrictions' to far more other areas too. Yet more of your nanny state stuff Comrade Tatlock ? <- The work permit system contradicts the "freedom to flourish" message IMO since, almost invariably, an open market and the free movement of labor are indivisible. Any restrictions ultimately restrict the economy and sends out a message that this is a place where it is difficult to do business because restrictive conditions apply. I can remember hearing of a case (and the rules may now have changed) when a person was required to hold a work permit in order to open a business employing people. Crazy. The rules may have changed Pongo but the times certainly have changed , it's time to look after the native workforce !the people who's money is earned and spent here . Nobody begrudes a person the right to make a wage ,but this recession is just starting to bite here(as regards construction certainly) and for our Govm't to continue to allow migrant workers to come here earn money and send it back home to another economy whlst paying local workers to sit on their asses drawing jobseekers allowance , is madness , Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Dodgy Insurance men operating on the IOM Good grief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Nobody begrudes a person the right to make a wage ,but this recession is just starting to bite here(as regards construction certainly) and for our Govm't to continue to allow migrant workers to come here earn money and send it back home to another economy whlst paying local workers to sit on their asses drawing jobseekers allowance , is madness , People from here are allowed to look for work anywhere in the UK - just the same as people from Yorkshire, Ireland, Scotland and anywhere else in the British Isles. Same rules should apply. Construction has always been a business which has involved people going out into the world in search of the next place where people are starting to build again. People from all over these islands have always worked away for periods of time. Especially in construction. People from here would be annoyed if they suddenly found that they had been restricted from working away. It is certainly a nervous time. The danger IMO is that by imposing or enforcing restrictive protectionist regulation, the island might risk future prosperity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 The point about cultures is that they are alive and ever changing. If a culture is not constantly changing then it is dead. Cultures are like the old game of life computer simulation - they merge with an evolve under the influence of neighboring cultures. Set apart, they die. Your protected culture would be like a museum colony IMO. Absolute bollocks. The difference between the UK and the island is the population level. The working population here is 43,000. Allow 20,000 or more other immigrant workers and cut-price workers in, and there would be little of the Manx left, with people forced to move away from home to work and families broken up. 20,000 immigrant workers here would be the equivalent of allowing 16 million other workers into the UK within a few years - and can you see even the UK allowing that at the expense of its own workers and population? There are already 10,000 work permits granted here annually as it is, that's already the equivalent of allowing a quarter of the working population in the UK to be immigrants. Never mind all the pensioners and other hangers-on we have imported along with the workers. Wake up. That's not about creating cultural museums, it's about protection from effective ethnic cleansing through too much freedom of the market on a small island. Change of culture is one thing - a relative overnight wipe-out is quite another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homarus Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 In theory you are correct Pongo , But if you look at it from a purely Mathematical prospective 80.000 people into the hundreds of millions of inhabitants of the E,U for eg Computes a whole lot better than the other way around ? Edited to add sorry missed Alberts Post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pongo Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Albert, I'm happy with living in an ever changing and evolving culture which is basically the whole world. I welcome all outside influences and opportunities. I simply do not accept your doomsday scenario. And I know you have previously talked about how the UK should restrict immigration. I do not agree with you on that either. I don't want to live in your version of the culture and I do not believe that it is a sustainable or viable prospect. People have always worked away from home. That is the natural order of things. The recent boom was an exception - the downside was that it encouraged many people to leave school and get jobs locally when, perhaps, more of them should have been encouraged into further education and out into the world. In construction and engineering (in most occupations) - it is often normal to work away from home during the week. Construction especially is about doing a job and then moving to the next place. It has always been a transient and job-job sort of employment. It's also how people build their skills and life experience - and their income. It's healthy and positive. I'm fairly certain that restrictions and controls are a bad idea and send out the wrong message. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Wright Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 No a temporay advocate is an English barrister who is allowed to appear temporaily for one case As are temporary advocates, but not full time ones! Is that what is meant by a practicing lawyer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 I'm fairly certain that restrictions and controls are a bad idea and send out the wrong message. We're not talking about full restrictions or controls, even I am not arguing for that - just a sensible controllable balance v runaway scenarios. Within a population of only 80,000 (43,000 workers) - unregulated that runaway scenario could quickly arrive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebees Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 I dont remember the name of the insurance company but these chaps (or chaps similar to them) have been coming here for years. They used to have Audi cars and stay at the Hilton/Stakis/whatever it is now. I heard them talking on the boat after one 'sweep', bunch of cocks springs to mind. I would advise people against dealings with them, if the way they were talking on the boat was anything to go by. I will remember the company name soon enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 The rules may have changed Pongo but the times certainly have changed , it's time to look after the native workforce !the people who's money is earned and spent here . Nobody begrudes a person the right to make a wage ,but this recession is just starting to bite here(as regards construction certainly) and for our Govm't to continue to allow migrant workers to come here earn money and send it back home to another economy whlst paying local workers to sit on their asses drawing jobseekers allowance , is madness , But the workers who would want to come to the Island are just as much affected, if not more, by the financial crisis. That may be why some would want to come to the Island. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piebaps Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 I dont remember the name of the insurance company but these chaps (or chaps similar to them) have been coming here for years. They used to have Audi cars and stay at the Hilton/Stakis/whatever it is now. I heard them talking on the boat after one 'sweep', bunch of cocks springs to mind. I would advise people against dealings with them, if the way they were talking on the boat was anything to go by. I will remember the company name soon enough. CICA perhaps? A reputable company with good products (just in case their lawyers are watching) but have been known to use commision based "cocks" to sell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homarus Posted February 27, 2009 Share Posted February 27, 2009 Everybodys welcome here as long as they improve /enhance the quality of life of the local population ! If they don't they should not be issued work permits. It should be the responsobility of their own gov/country to find employment for them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.