UK Labour Market Stats

Tromking

Generali wrote: »

Haha, yes I see what you did there. You used the 'posho' name that Mr Osbourne was given at birth, Gideon, and turned it as an insult against him. Lovin' your work. Hahaha. You know 'Tony' Benn was christened Wedgewood. Talk about an out of touch posh bloke. LOLZZZZzzzzzzz. And Tony Blair's middle name was Lynton. Posho war criminal. LOL. Here's a picture of a cat.



Awwwwwww. Or is it an otter? Still, pretty cute huh? When did this site turn into Facebook. Still cute though. And Gideon, LOLZ.

As to the rest of it. Tax receipt predictions are going to be missed by £10bn it is predicted apparently. Which tax receipts and against which prediction? Oil taxes will be down from a previously predicted c. £7-8bn to perhaps £100mn. That might be a big part of the gap, or not of course as you don't provide any sort of link to a source of data, just a vague assertion.

But yeah, I know. Stupid posh people with their out of touch names right? :rotfl:

I don't do links as I tend to remember stuff. I seem remember the fella who sets the deficit reduction target is Gideon himself? Could be wrong though. I'm reminded of the poor performing worker who was told at his yearly career chat that he was guilty of setting himself low targets which he consistently failed to achieve!
So no disconnect for you with the seemingly rosy picture re. employment and the relatively poor state of the public finances in comparison? Genuine question.

antrobus

ukcarper wrote: »

So a sizeable minority would like more hours.

Yup.

24% of them want more hours from the job. 12% of them want another job with longer hours, and 5% of them want an additional job.

At least they did when the ONS asked 'em in April to June 2015. By now probably a lot of those will have succeeded in getting what they want.

antrobus

ukcarper wrote: »

I can see that ZHC suit some types of employment and many people, but ZHC have been abused by some employers.....

I would not disagree with you.

F*** knows what Sports Direct are up to. Surely if you are running a retail outlet that is open 12 hours a day, seven days a week (or whatever) there must be at least some minimum level of staffing that is required that would dictate a need for x hundred hours worth of work that you would want the workforce to commit to.

ukcarper wrote: »

..I don't think the employment situation in the UK is as good as some of you think.

I think the employment situation in the UK is pretty much as described by the ONS.

kinger101

Generali wrote: »

I doubt that the UK will need smiths, thatchers, fullers and coopers in large numbers ever again

Generali

Tromking wrote: »

I don't do links as I tend to remember stuff. I seem remember the fella who sets the deficit reduction target is Gideon himself? Could be wrong though. I'm reminded of the poor performing worker who was told at his yearly career chat that he was guilty of setting himself low targets which he consistently failed to achieve!
So no disconnect for you with the seemingly rosy picture re. employment and the relatively poor state of the public finances in comparison? Genuine question.

It doesn't really leave much to discuss really. You have a number in your head which may or may not be a cumulative figure of tax take and that may or may not be related to employment figures.

As I say, predicted tax take from oil and gas extraction is down considerably as will be VAT on petrol. That doesn't reflect on the employment figures and to my mind is the most likely cause of the gap in figures.

As I say, if we don't have data to discuss then it's all a bit futile really.

ukcarper

antrobus wrote: »

I would not disagree with you.

F*** knows what Sports Direct are up to. Surely if you are running a retail outlet that is open 12 hours a day, seven days a week (or whatever) there must be at least some minimum level of staffing that is required that would dictate a need for x hundred hours worth of work that you would want the workforce to commit to.



I think the employment situation in the UK is pretty much as described by the ONS.

I don't dispute the figures but the figures don't tell the whole story.

ukcarper

Generali wrote: »

It doesn't really leave much to discuss really. You have a number in your head which may or may not be a cumulative figure of tax take and that may or may not be related to employment figures.

As I say, predicted tax take from oil and gas extraction is down considerably as will be VAT on petrol. That doesn't reflect on the employment figures and to my mind is the most likely cause of the gap in figures.

As I say, if we don't have data to discuss then it's all a bit futile really.

Income tax for last quarter 2015 is higher than 2014 if that reflects the additional numbers in employment I can't be bothered to work out.

antrobus

ukcarper wrote: »

I don't dispute the figures but the figures don't tell the whole story.

Any story to be told still needs to be consistent with the figures.

What story do you want to tell?

ukcarper

antrobus wrote: »

Any story to be told still needs to be consistent with the figures.

What story do you want to tell?

Just to say that finding a full time job is not always that easy,

Tromking

ukcarper wrote: »

Just to say that finding a full time job is not always that easy,

A situation not made any easier when firms like Tesco's tailor there work attendance patterns to make it easier for their private sector workers to claim and keep hold of their benefits.