Why so much surprise over Corbyn calling for Labour to Abstain?

Durhamjen 12.24 and again 13.02

" Have you ever seen anything positive in anything Corbyn has said, POGS?"

I could call that a deflection from answering a question but I will answer.

Yes I have 'agreed' with Corbyn because a fact is a fact , not because I find him in anyway honourable nor agree with his principles. Anybody would agree with wanting to live in Shangri LA but I do not believe it is achievable and certainly not by the economics I hear from Labour under Corbyn/McDonnell/Momentum.

I have made mentioned 'many times' the problems for British Workers of the ' European Union Workers Directive''. It is a regulation that allowed for EU workers to work in the UK on the wages of the country they came from, UNDERCUTTING British workers wages. I believe there has recently been a vote to say the payment should be that of the country they are now working in but that comment needs checking. I believe that Corbyn and the Unions had an issue with the EU Workers Directive also, for obvious reasons.

I note neither yourself or anybody else has answered my 'repeated' question on various threads since the Referendum but I hope I have answered your question.

That's interesting and makes sense of something I was told. My ex's new partner is a lorry driver but she has packed it in because she said that EU lorry drivers were prepared to work for far less than British workers and so she struggled to find work.

21.34 2nd July
I have made mentioned 'many times' the problems for British Workers of the ' European Union Workers Directive''. It is a regulation that allowed for EU workers to work in the UK on the wages of the country they came from, UNDERCUTTING British workers wages. I believe there has recently been a vote to say the payment should be that of the country they are now working in but that comment needs checking. I believe that Corbyn and the Unions had an issue with the EU Workers Directive also, for obvious reasons.

I note neither yourself or anybody else has answered my 'repeated' question on various threads since the Referendum but I hope I have answered your question.

But, POGS, you haven’t asked that question today on this thread.
These are the questions you have asked
POGS @11.47 2nd July
I have asked so many times but 'How can the UK Government TELL the EU that it must give us the 'same benefits as we have now'?

What would happen if after negotiations the EU told the UK that if it does not agree to the Free Movement of People no deal will be offered and in March 2019, ' THEIR ' offer not ours was “take it or leave it”?

POGS @12.01 2nd July
So if Starmer has stated Labour will 'End the Free Movement of People' how can it keep expecting to keep the 'same benefits'?

Why are you now castigating dj for not answering a question today which you haven’t actually asked her?

it's very hard to follow what is going on here...

European Union Workers Directive

I've googled that term, POGS; it doesn't appear to exist.

There is the Working Time Directive and the Posted Workers Directive. Is it either of those?

Yes Maizie.

I should have used the full term not the abbreviated ,lazy term .

I don't follow your point re I have not asked a question today. Very confusing!

I was not asking a question about the EU Posted Workers Directive but I have been asking about the Single Market .

If the country you’re posted to has a higher minimum wage, your employer must give you that rate or higher.

Posted workers directive. That doesn't undercut wages here.

Your employer must follow some of the employment rules of the country you’ve been posted to. These are the ones relating to:

maximum work periods and minimum rest periods
minimum paid annual holidays
the minimum rates of pay (including overtime)
health and safety at work
protection for women who are pregnant or have just given birth
equal treatment for men and women and other rules to prevent discrimination
hiring out agency workers

Well, POGS. I have quoted directly from your last 3 posts (before the one I'm now responding to). In the third one (which I quoted from first in my post) you say you've been asking questions about the Posted Workers Directive and have had no response. I was puzzled as to why you should bring that up as your questions today (also quoted) were about the Single Market.

Anyway, dj has now responded about Posted Workers. The things I read about it said that its purpose was to prevent contractors paying their workers at rates lower than those of the country they are working in. So I don't see how posted workers can be having adverse effects on wage rates.

Just for clarity, POGS. You said this:

I have made mentioned 'many times' the problems for British Workers of the ' European Union Workers Directive''. It is a regulation that allowed for EU workers to work in the UK on the wages of the country they came from, UNDERCUTTING British workers wages.

As you can see from dj's post this is completely incorrect.

Maizie d

I DID NOT ask a question about Posted Workers Directive I was answering a question from Durhamjen.

" Have you ever seen anything positive in anything Corbyn has said, POGS?".

I also said in my post.

" I believe there has recently been a vote to say the payment should be that of the country they are now working in but that comment needs checking. I believe that Corbyn and the Unions had an issue with the EU Workers Directive also, for obvious reasons."

I repeat the question I asked was about the Single Market and Labours stance!

Blimey pogs we answer your question and then you ask it again. I've given up

Durhamjen

I answered your question re Corbyn and replied:-

Yes I have 'agreed' with Corbyn because a fact is a fact , not because I find him in anyway honourable nor agree with his principles. Anybody would agree with wanting to live in Shangri LA but I do not believe it is achievable and certainly not by the economics I hear from Labour under Corbyn/McDonnell/Momentum.

I have made mentioned 'many times' the problems for British Workers of the ' European Union Workers Directive''. It is a regulation that allowed for EU workers to work in the UK on the wages of the country they came from, UNDERCUTTING British workers wages. I believe there has recently been a vote to say the payment should be that of the country they are now working in but that comment needs checking. I believe that Corbyn and the Unions had an issue with the EU Workers Directive also, for obvious reasons.

I stand by what I say.
--

I have further looked into The European Workers Directive which I clearly stated had recently been voted on for change.

This is the new Directive which does now state the following and to which you refer and I did say I thought had been introduced:-

ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=471

maximum work periods and minimum rest periods
minimum paid annual holidays
the minimum rates of pay (including overtime)
health and safety at work
protection for women who are pregnant or have just given birth
equal treatment for men and women and other rules to prevent discrimination
hiring out agency workers

What you did not post was another section in the Directive which states:-

Revision of the Posting of Workers Directive

' On the 8 of March 2016, the European Commission 'proposed' a revision of the rules on posting of workers within the EU to ensure they remain fit for purpose. Until Member States and the European Parliament have agreed on the revision and the new rules have entered into force, ' the current rules remain in place'.
-

The European Workers Directive is/was commonly known as 'Social Dumping' and as far as I can see it there is still controversy/problems surrounding the 'new' and yes improved workers rights on equal pay.

The 'new/improved' Directive has not been officially passed by the 28 EU Nation States thus far hence the Directive states :-

Until Member States and the European Parliament have agreed on the revision and the new rules have entered into force, ' the current rules remain in place'.

The European Workers Directive most certainly does UNDERCUT wages and if a company is self governing and applying the revised Directive well good on them but that may not be the case.

The European Workers Directive was started in 1996 and has been an issue ever since. An old example would be the 2009 mass walk out by Refinery Workers at the Lindsey Refinery , Immingham .

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/humber/7855752.stm

'Mass walkout over foreign labour'

"Unite shop steward Garry Scales said: "We are angry that workers have been taken on from outside the UK when people here are out of work."

This article is one of many that are informative if anybody can be bothered to read it:-

www.euractiv.com/section/social-europe-jobs/news/posted-workers-revision-gets-off-to-shaky-start/

Quotes

"The new proposal intends to redress so-called ‘social dumping’, where European companies use low-cost workers to circumvent the labour laws of the host country.

The revision of the 1996 EU law has sparked controversy in the past, as the 28-country bloc struggles to reconcile the freedom to offer cross-border services, a cornerstone of the internal market, with clear differences in wages and levels of social protection.

An average hour of work costs an employer €40 in Denmark and €39 in Belgium, but only €3.80 in Bulgaria, €4.60 in Romania or €8.40 in Poland, according to Eurostat data for 2014."

UK employment law covers ALL workers regardless of their origin in the EU.

So minimum wage will apply

WW

"Blimey pogs we answer your question and then you ask it again. I've given up ".

You haven't answered the question because the Labour position is double headed.

Yes the Labour Position is as you pointed out " Leaving the EU as we all know means leaving the single market and all that entails as well as the customs union."

The Labour position also states 'We will end free movement of people"

BUT

Labour rhetoric gives the impression to the voter by the likes of Starmer and so many Labour MP's from Jack Dromey, Barry Gardiner, Shells Creasy Labour wants 'Full access to the Single Market".

It cannot say what 'it wants' it is disingenuous. Everybody wants Full Access to the Single Market and Customs Union but the EU have said 'No Cherry Picking, ' Non Negotiable' so far.

So how can Labour keep saying that is what Labour would negotiate . A Labour negotiating team of Starmer, Thornberry and Gardiner. It is a persistent round of bull s--t and whenever asked 'How' there can be no answer as it is all spin.

pogs don't forget that this is the Tory position as well according to Davis, it is simply phrased in a different way.

I think in any case things are moving so quickly that we are in danger of missing what is really happening if we obsess about about one particular point.

I can keep going around in circles with you if that is what you want but it does seem a bit pointless.

WW

Yes it is the same as the Conservative stance I have already said so in this thread and others:-.

" Yes, obviously negotiations are taking place but the only way this 'Mexican Stand Off' is for the EU to drop the 4 Freedoms/Pillars is none negotiable stance or the UK to drop the 'We will end the free movement of people' stance. The latter stated by both the Labour and Conservative Parties."

That brings us back to the point that Corbyn did not ask his MP's to vote in favour of Chuka Umunas Queens Speech Amendment calling for ' The UK should remain in the single market and in the customs union.'.

Corbyn and most of his MP's know it was all rhetoric and not a practical Amendment.

However it told the Labour voter to rethink the idea that Labour can do as it spins, keeps saying, we will leave the European Union but have access to the Single Market because Labour say it will and can negotiate it . It is disingenuous of ANY party to say that.

I still think there will be Labour voters who voted tactically who should have stuck to the principle of voting for the Lib Dems or Green who at least have been honest in their not wanting to leave the EU full stop.

POGS, we will always disagree on Corbyn, as I find him completely honourable. Therefore there is no point in ever answering any of your screeds about the Labour party.

The rest of it, I really can't be arsed to read again.

Honourable??really, Clever yes,opportunistic yes,devious yes, dangerous very & I am not a great lover of TM . I've said it before & I will say it again Pied Piper & it will all end badly !!

OK we've heard you now norose, I think that message had already come across. It is a great pity that we don't have a cross-party negotiating team to avoid these 'he said/she said' exchanges.

Wow Devongirl. That's my first post for several days , did not know I need to ask for permission. What are you Corbyn supporters like comes across as very very dictatorial, my point has been proven ?

Durhamjen

Your prerogative.

You can't be assed you say. Hmm, I expect that sort of comment when your view is challenged .

Oddly my posts re the Posted Workers Directive were 'agreeing' with Corbyn/Labour in answer to your question do I ever agree with him .

Facts are facts and whilst it is unpalatable for some to accept the original Posted Workers Directive prior to the 2016 Revision did not guarantee minimum pay to Posted Workers. The Revision is still not conclusively passed in the EU by the way , I hope it get's 'signed off' soon.

example.

www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/macrons-proposals-wreak-havoc-on-posted-worker-negotiations/

"Tough French proposals have derailed talks on controversial EU labour mobility rules and dashed Malta’s hopes of brokering a compromise deal by the end of this month.

Employment ministers were supposed to sign off on their proposal for the so-called posted worker directive at a meeting on Thursday (15 June) in Luxembourg. But they ended up pushing an agreement until autumn at the earliest."
----

The Chuka Umuna Amendment and Corbyns position is I suppose self evident.

I will say if you don't want an answer 'don't ask a question' . If you do ask a question or make a statement be prepared for a response to give detailed information , or as you call it 'screed'.

So pogs after all your posts, I wonder if it is possible for you to summarise your thoughts in one or two sentences, as I end up not being able to see the wood for the trees.

POGS
I see that the new directive is going to be 3 days for a Lorry driver to work in another country and then receive the rate for that country.
As some of you don't believe that Eastern European Lorry drivers are being screwed, why is the eu bring in a law to change the practice?

Actually norose, your post says "I've said it before & I will say it again"!

WW

"So pogs after all your posts, I wonder if it is possible for you to summarise your thoughts in one or two sentences"

' No '.

If something needs defining it requires evidence. Actually something you and others ask for on occasion. Irony me thinks.

Do you always stick to 1 or 2 sentences, other than when you are being personal or at best dictatorial? I think not.

Perhaps now you have just a precedence for how you must post or you could look a tad hypocritical.

devongirl

Shame you have no contribution but to try and belittle. Why bother?

Oh for the days Gransnet was argumentative but capable of debate / discussion.