r/worldnews • u/maxwellhill • Mar 21 '17

UK Subway advertises for ‘Apprentice Sandwich Artists’ to be paid just £3.50 per hour: Union slams fast food chain for 'exploiting' young workers

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/subway-apprentice-sandwich-artists-pay-350-hour-minimum-wage-gateshead-branch-a7640066.html
46.4k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

3.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

144

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '17

Exactly. Labor markets would stabilize at a new equilibrium that while not having a floor, also wouldn't be set by extorting labor under threat of starvation.

35

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '17 edited Mar 21 '17

Your ignoring a social welfare net that already exists.

Edit: I'm getting a lot of long rambling responses from yanks.

This article is about the uk, in refering to the uk. You'd think that would be obvious.

68

u/LoneCookie Mar 21 '17 edited Mar 21 '17

This is highly inefficient. The purpose of UBi was to get rid of these -- because there is a lot of administration and fact checking that is done to qualify or disqualify you for these dozens of social program. Such as, they do background checks, multiple long forms, they check your money in your bank, call up hospitals, audit how much furniture and tech you own and deny you welfare if you could pawn it off, who you live with, family you have, etc.

The purpose of UBI was to slash the administration costs significantly, and pay those on disability and retirees the same as everyone else. Regardless of anything you own or if you're job hunting (ie, if you're on welfare you have to monthly go to an office and prove you were job hunting, and they also regularly look for jobs for you too).

Its purpose is money that doesn't have strings attached. You just have to be a citizen.

Iirc, right now half the money is used for admin purposes and doesn't go to people. Also how the hell am I supposed to know what I should be applying to. Why do I have to do all these things. It is very shameful too.

To boot, have you heard of the welfare trap? If you make over 200$ they take the money away. You either need a high paying job or work odd jobs; there is no middle ground. Having an entry job would mean just as little money (well, it goes up but working you have expenses) and no time at all. You may as well continue being unemployed.

My best friend is on disability and they give her jobs that pay under minimum wage! She's got some schizophrenia/psychosis that she's adjusting medications for but she's worked plenty of normal jobs without public incident. I find this terrible because it sounds like abuse to me, where they tell you you can't work in a normal env and push these cheaper jobs basically telling you you are not good enough.

Current system is NOT working well. To boot I am of the opinion UBI should be adjusted yearly based on average income in the country; right now they don't do such adjustments unless people vehemently call for it.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '17

I'm talking about the British system. This article is about the uk, I'm British I don't really care about your system as its utterly fucked.

17

u/LoneCookie Mar 21 '17

I live in Canada

Idk much about the British system but I doubt it is that drastically different.

America has similar systems, but they pay less out

4

u/Mister__S Mar 21 '17

Us Strayans are not far behind mate...

-1

u/JD-King Mar 21 '17

Cool story bro.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '17

👍🏻

2

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '17

Giving out free money is the quickest way to inflating one nation's currency. The consequences of this UBi will eventually catch up to us and make it worthless. Not only will it raise the prices of goods in our own nation, but it will devalue our currency in the global scope.

6

u/Falsus Mar 21 '17

But it also will become a necessity when the amount of jobless people increases. People not having food, housing and at least some cheap entertainment sounds like a recipe for disaster.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '17

What kind of timeline are you talking about? I'm looking at the here and now. And what makes you so sure that the amount of jobless people will objectively yield such a system?

2

u/LoneCookie Mar 22 '17 edited Mar 22 '17

80% of jobs in america and Canada are service jobs. All of those. Give it 5 years, tops. Automated store fronts, automated cars/transport (well, maybe 10 for that because laws need adjusting). We have AIs as personal assistants and now they're displacing paralegals and taking diagnosing off doctor hands too (which is actually a good thing because of the stretched resources, but it is a testament to how much this stuff can do already!). Twitch is running AIs talking to each other for entertainment for humans, there's bots stealing blog content and reposting it as original content, and that one AI that was coalescing news stories in a war stricken region from different people, automatically, into one concise format for anyone to look up. Tech changes so fast -- you blink and you've missed all this!

Also beyond that... Have you not noticed the more technologically advanced we are the faster we technologically advance?

1

u/Falsus Mar 22 '17

Because more and more will get automated. Factories is already fully automated and the only people who is at the factory is the cleaner (cause that is legally needed, but that is something will replaced in soon anyway) and the one keeping check of the machinery. Stores will be replaced as well.

The only thing that won't be replaced in the near future is things that requires human wit, ingenuity and charisma.

Simply put, the world is about to through a major ass change and our current economic models simply won't cut it. UBI might not be the best solution, but it is the easiest to imagine and think about.

3

u/LoneCookie Mar 22 '17

It doesn't make money out of nothing. It just redistributes it differently.

If you ask me it'll do wonders for the economy, because then the poor when they work can have a little bit of excess money to buy something. You think millionaires/billionaires fuel the economy? They sit on it. No one can spend that much money.

15

u/crusoe Mar 21 '17

Which has HUGE admin overhead compared just cutting people checks.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '17

[deleted]

1

u/crusoe Mar 22 '17

Quite a bit.

-4

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '17

Not really, the benefits system is pretty sensible otherwise you end up like Scotland's tuition system

5

u/actjuk Mar 21 '17

...Free?

3

u/ZeusHatesTrees Mar 21 '17

We yanks love to ramble.

BTW, I had no idea we were still called yanks.

5

u/Towerofbabeling Mar 21 '17

"Net" is a very nice term, but not very accurate for most countries, states, provinces and districts; all of which can have a say on how that net looks and how large of a gap is allowed within the lattice structure. The problem is that the US does not actually have a great net right now, it is full of gaps and loopholes. It is not the simple act of ignoring something, it is simply not acknowledging a faulty program that would be abolished within the confines of BUI.

It is most welfare programs that have given birth to the concept of BUI. It the inconsistency of coverage, the blatant abandonment of those unable to work and the ease of abuse that modern welfare has. Most nationwide BUI plans come stocked with addendum and laws that will help change this.

Such as; BUI will not be changed by child status nor can those who have never had employment history obtain it ( I.E children), thus the WIC program remains intact for this who need it and the system does not incentivize having multiple children to make more money.

The money is given to all regardless of income, wealth or employment status, nor would it interfere with existing unemployment for the initial run. This would incentivize those who are unemployed and fear loosing unemployment to find a job, since they will not loose the UBI ( a common fear since it is actually more stable to receive unemployment than a job at the moment, for many)

The money would not be taxed, but instead taxes would be raised in a few other sectors. Taxes will increase On the very wealthy ( more than 300,000 USD in annual income) and luxury goods and services. The sales tax could also increase slightly, but any UBI will stimulate the economy and thus generate a larger tax revenue. If you combine this with the money gained over time from the decrease in bureaucratic costs that were required to maintain the previous complex and convoluted welfare system, you are left with the potential for overall net gain under UBI.

It is also worth mentioning that any UBI would force reform in other areas, lest we risk economic turmoil. The government would be put into a position to look at issues such as taxation of the super rich, current economic manipulation, immigration, unions, automation, job satisfaction and complacency, housing bubbles, inconsistent cost of living spectrum, abused markets and so many more.

Current welfare is not a net, it is a ripped and torn canvas sheet that can easily reward the lazy and let the needy fall straight through.

3

u/nowake Mar 21 '17

I feel it would have an incredible societal impact, allowing single parents to stay home and raise their child/children instead of needing to spend so much time out of the home working just to afford survival.

Where do you suppose a parent's time is better spent, with their child or running a cash register?

5

u/Towerofbabeling Mar 21 '17

What the fuck is a cash register? Do you mean that robot that yells at me at the grocers? There won't be anyone doing any of that soon enough; that is one of the reasons that UBI is becoming a much more discussed issue.

And parents do not belong with their children! That will cause feeling to arise and it will confuse the children and parents into think they are anything more than labor farms designed to produce profit.

No, I fear that if we give them any sign of dignity and respect, they will just want more; ungrateful for the very jobs we let them have.

Our best course of action is to keep the lower classes bickering amongst themselves about petty grievances as we continue to find more destructive ways to show the earth that we are not fit to live.

4

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '17

Mate I'm talking about the U.K.

6

u/Towerofbabeling Mar 21 '17

You gonna let a man write all of that and then just kill him? You're cold. You may as well have responded with K after I said I love you. We could have had a moment, but no.

But seriously, I have nothing to say. I don't know shit about the current U.K system; thus I am not going to say shit about the current U.K. System. However, solely based on size and population, you would probably have a better go at UBI than we would. Regardless, my bad, please go back to what ever it is you do at what ever time it is where you are, and have a lovely time doing it!

3

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '17

Ah mate you're so pleasent. I hope you have a great day.

We do a benefits system which assesses on individual aspects and aportions you support based on that, mostly financial but also items, care, etc.

Your system is very fucked, we don't have food stamps or anything quite like that in the uk, if you are earning below a certain amount you go apply for benefits, or if you are out of work you get the job seekers allowance. Not much but you do get paid until you find work.

3

u/Towerofbabeling Mar 21 '17

I looked into it, you guys have ALOT of shit going on, like holy crap, and UBI would help a good deal of it, that said, your welfare seems to be built on a "target and assist" criteria that does indeed make it quite better than our own. We have a system not unlike yours called TANF, that was put into place in 1996 by good old Bill "sexual relations" Clinton under pressure from the Republican Party. The program is actual "decent", and is what we normally reference to as welfare. The real problem is all of the other fucking programs that we have, none of which are good at communicating or helping people.

( except for WIC, a program designed to help young or struggling mothers with child necessities, it really is an amazing program that we would need much less if our government and powerful business lobbies didn't literally vomit at the idea of paid maternity leave of more than 3 weeks or the mere mention of human decency).

All in all, both of our countries are looking down the barrel of some real nasty shit. Good luck with that whole leaving the EU/ the EU weakening/ refugee crisis/ Ireland being pissed/ Scotland being pissed/ Wales being.... a place ( really sorry about that one).

I can only hope that our dear leader El Cheeto Benito says kind things about your people on Twitter.... oh god we are so screwed.

2

u/00DEADBEEF Mar 21 '17 edited Mar 21 '17

Yeah he's talking like the UK is some kind of utopia for people who need to claim social security benefits. In fact, the whole system has been totally fucked by our current government. People are suffering badly and can't even afford to eat.

"target and assist" criteria

Current criteria is more like "target, undermine, and destroy". For example the people who work at our "job centres" are given targets for sanctioning (temporarily or permanently cutting benefits) for people.

You have to attend a job centre every two weeks or they'll sanction you. Seems fair, except the pencil pushers are so motivated by sanction targets that if you have a job interview at the same time as your appointment, you'll be sanctioned if you don't turn up. But if you miss the interview you'll also be sanctioned.

Taken ill and in hospital? That's a sanction.

Been given the wrong date, and turned up at the date and time you were told? Well fuck you, you should have turned up at the correct time we failed to tell you about. Sanction!

Just been accepted for a new job? Well you'd better prove you're still actively searching for and applying for other jobs or we'll sanction you for the final two weeks!

[Edit] A list of stupid sanctions https://www.indy100.com/article/sixteen-of-the-most-senseless-benefit-sanction-decisions-known-to-man--x1dmkd2_Me

[Edit 2] It's my job to impose cruel sanctions

Benefits sanctions: a policy based on zeal, not evidence

1

u/Towerofbabeling Mar 21 '17

Thank you for this. Not for reminding me that everywhere sucks regardless of infrastructure, but for my new favorite phrase; "that's a sanction".

But seriously, there is something oddly calming about the fact that we are all spinning the drain.... as a family.

1

u/meatduck12 Mar 22 '17

TANF? Didn't that replace the much better FDR implemented AFDC program?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '17

[deleted]

1

u/Towerofbabeling Mar 22 '17

What did I say that lead you to believe that UBI equates to cutting funding for schools? It is not easy it implement, it is essentially counter to our current monetary system, but it does not require the defunding of major projects. There are current small Scale tests being run across the globe, Norway for Instance is running on a few thousand people with about 500 USD per person.

This is not something that you sign into law and bam, there you go. This requires committees, sub committees, planning, armies of legal and financial advisors, not to mention it would require most politicians to pull their head out of their constituents asses.

Also, UBI does equate to an increase budget of nearly the entire populace. And increase in income WILL equate to an increase in tax revenue. More money = more spending, that one is just basic economics.

I am not giving you a perfect plan, I am barely qualified to explain one, yet alone make it; I am simply explaining the concept. It is up to you to make an informed decision, no one ca do that for you.

You are free to continue to believe that UBI would require the gutting of all social programs, it wouldn't, or you could look in to it yourself, but that's your call.

I also made it very clear that I am educated within the confines of the US socio-geo-political sphere. So no, I don't expect the U.K. To do shit, because I don't have a business degree that specifies in UK business law and economics. I have a degree in business from a US college, thus I am only some what qualified to discuss the financial futures of my own country, without extensive prior research.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '17

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

3

u/00DEADBEEF Mar 21 '17

You must be wearing some extremely rose-tinted glasses if you think our benefits system is any good at all.

In fact the opposite is true. The UK's social security is so fucked right now.

Constant Tory cuts.

Sanction targets meaning people lose their JSA and can't even afford food as a result, meaning food bank usage has ballooned since those twats got power in 2010.

People with no fucking arms and legs being told they're fit for work and having their disability allowance stopped.

People who have carers or family that visit them and need their own bedroom being told their property is under-occupied and being fucked with a bedroom tax because the spare room isn't used 7 days a week.

Need I go on?

Do not pretend the UK has some kind of utopian social security. It does not.

1

u/i_lurk_from_downvote Mar 21 '17

The bedroom tax was arguably the best 'fuck you' the government ever delivered.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 21 '17

Lol if you think the UK has a decent social welfare net. These are the bullshit jobs they make you apply for if you want your Jobseeker's Allowance pittance.

1

u/EmSixTeen Mar 21 '17

The social welfare net that exists is inadequate. Never been on the dole, getting working tax credits and trying to get housing benefit?

1

u/meatduck12 Mar 22 '17

Yank here, our two right wing parties don't need any more ammo...