greenrat

This is already happening!! The industry we had in the 60s and 70s has been shipped abroad to countries such as China and India which use slave labour in many cases ... and all with the support of successive UK governments. And too much management is becoming a big problem in this country, in many cases leeching off public funds. Some examples here: - http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/woman/health/article2341948.ece http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/teacher-talk-too-much-performance-management-is-divisive-658188.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/essex/7708689.stm

I'm glad you agree that nationalisation of the infrastrucure and mandatory life sentences do have merit - these would improve society immeasurably. The fascist systems claiming to be "socialist" are nothing of the kind ... the same goes for the Soviet Union. The system I would condone would be the total opposite ... more democracy not less. I am totally opposed to any kind of extremism.

Perhaps within the present system of doing things this would not work however I would propose this change as part of a number of measures to improve our society, some other reforms being: - *Renationalisation of all public transport operations, including all bus, train and tram services currently operated by private companies and highway maintenance. *Nationalisation of the banking system. *A cap of £50,000 per annum on all salaries. *Building enough new council housing to accomodate all people currently on council housing waiting lists and the homeless in the UK's major cities. *Mandatory life sentences for taking someone elses life. *Banning the tabloid press. *Imposing trade embargos on countries that use slave labour to undercut the UK manufacturing industry. *Creating a new branch of the civil service to rate employers on how they treat employees, with harsh penalties for those who treat their staff badly. *Scrapping the planned renewal of the UK's nuclear weapons system and using the funds allocated for something useful such as Cancer research. *Ending the use of private companies and other organisations to run the NHS and our schools and prisons.

You are twisting my words ... equal pay for everyone would be much fairer than the current system where "spotty 16 year olds" as you call them (who are often more intelligent & hard working than the management) work for 70 quid a week "wages" whilst doing the hard graft while managers get paid pay in 50 grand plus for doing sod all. That is wrong. I did not suggest everyone taking equal responsibility ... there needs to be some kind of order to things.

There are plenty of people who are capable but for various reasons aren't in management. Face it ... in the vast majority of organisations the only way to get promoted to management is to kiss the bosses backside which more principled people than yourself refuse to do.

Actually I think you'll find that some people in management jobs ARE there only for the money / power. Equalling out pay would prevent this. Also in my knowledge of many organisations the people on the bottom wrung in the workplace are more intelligent and have more common sense than most or all of the management - the University of Life can teach you a lot more than any posh school.

Or perhaps the staff would draw one up themselves?

On the contrary what I am suggesting is that through equal pay people would be in management jobs because they aspire to them, not because of the salary.

I take it that in this hypothetical company the manager would have the responsibility of produsing the rota in question; this would seem to suggest that as they 'don't have rge correct cover for the jobs that need doing, don't know what they're supposed to be working on next' this would seem to imply the manager in question was incompetent. As I have said in my previous posts some managers do a good job of managing their staff but sadly the majority are only in jobs because they have friends in high places or have a big gob or both. I'm sure I'm not the only one on the forum that has seen front line staff reduced while more layers of management are added to an organisation.

With all respect you are skirting round the subject. Perhaps you would like instead to comment on my last post?

I too have experiences of this kind ... basically out of the countless managers / team leaders I've come across, only 3 have been good at their jobs and had people skills. The class system rules the workplace ... If you've been to a posh school and have friends in high places you can look forward to a job with good pay and prospects regardless of how good you are at it. The senior management at the council in my experience are a fantastic example of this. On the other hand if you've gone to a school on for example the manor estate and all your friends are working clas, what chance do you have of succeeding? Basically the more of an areshole you are, the better businessman you'll be.

No-one forces people to work for someone else but 9 times out of 10 people have no choice in the matter. Skilled jobs (i.e. jobs that are rewarding, interesting and offer good pay and conditions) are fast becoming a rarity in this country as companies take advantage of what is basically slave labour in third world countries. The result is that the only jobs left to take are boring, dead end mimimum wage jobs. I would not call this fair. In addition to this most people stuck in jobs they hate often don't have any choice but to stay in them due to no alternative work being available and having bills to pay. I can guarantee that you could get rid of at least half of the managers in this country and no-one would notice any difference. Since the unions have lost their power incresingly the only way people have been able to progress has been to brown nose management or be appointed into jobs which they have absolutely no ability to do but have friends in high places. And finally ... shareholder is someone who owns shares in a business, who provides investment and receives a share of the profits in return. Management are people brought in to run a business on behalf of the owners.

But then again this doesn't address the issue of is it fair for someone to earn money from other people doing the work? In my opinion no - everyone should be working earning a living not leeching off other people. Sick pay, redundancy pay etc. have only come about because workers have fought long and hard for decades even centuries for basic minimum rights at work, if left upto the employers everyone would be working for slave wages with no rights. Like I say the main issue is that far too many people in this country get rich from exploiting others ... managers, lawyers, shareholders etc. This needs to change. No argument.

Self employed is different - you are doing the work yourself. I'm referring to large businesses where the owners often earn millions for doing sod all while those on the bottom rung who do the work often cannot even afford the goods they are making. Every employee should have a share in the company's profits regardless of whether he / she buys shares.

There should be no such thing as "shareholders" - the profits should go to the people who have actually made the goods.

There is still no justification for anyone to earn £100,000 a year when the same organisation is making staff redundant and reducing the wages of those remaining - you do not need to earn more than £50,000 a year to have a decent standard of living. I hear your opinions and respect them but you did mention that you own a business and therefore your opinions on management / wages / workers are always going to be different from people such as myself who work for other people. And finally as for shareholders the main problem is that when a company's prime motive is to maximise profits for shareholders, it's workers, communities, taxpayers who lose out when it all goes t*ts up, especially when a company is running a public service.

I would fully support them ... First have made a habit of hiking up fares and cutting services while treating passengers like cattle and drivers like sh*t. The buses should be taken back into public ownership.

On the first point you've just pointed out one of the problems with the system at the minute - shareholders earn money by doing nothing and simply paying someone (usually a very small amount) to do work to earn them money for doing nothing. The only way for people to earn a living should be that ... EARN it by working i.e. by making things, doing work yourself. If you are not allowed tio pay more than 50k you equal out pay among the other staff i.e. management can keep a good wage (50k a year is a very good wage) while the people who do the actual work can get paid a wage that reflects their contribution to the company. Taking a recent example what justification is there for Sheffield council appointing a new Deputy Chief Executive on a salary of £100,000 a year (http://www.sheffieldtelegraph.co.uk/news/Executive-role-filled-at-council.5064527.jp) when workers at the bottom end of the pay scale are facing wage reductions & job cuts?

Additionally I'd like to add that many jobs I've been in have had managers who don't know what they're doing and are only in a job because of the money / friends in high places / brown nosing. Would be interested to know what anyone elses experiences of their managers through the course of their career were like ...

Hi just wondered if anyone on the forum is on a fixed term contract at work like myself? I'm wondering where I stand legally if my contract isn't renewed (I've heard you can sue for constructive dismissal if it isn't)

For starters any role which is making money off other peoples work immorally e.g. employment agencies, shareholders et al. And then any managers that are not needed e.g. why pay your CEO 100 times what your frontline staff are earning. Noone should be able to earn more than 50 grand a year. Any profits made by companies should be put back into finding ways to employ more people especially in this recession. And as I said above companies should not be able to make people redundant / outsource jobs when there is no need as has happened on many occasions.

No just stating the facts

In my experience of many businesses done by people called Salespeople, not management.

Bad workers would still face the sack for being lazy ... I'm not talking about workplace anarchy! What I present to you are two options which are much better alternatives to the present system of most workplaces: - Option 1 - appoint an overall head of a business then the employees (who would all be paid the same) would be able to vote for someone to represent them. Option 2 - Make the pay of all positions the same so that people go for jobs higher up because they want them and are able to do them, not just because they have friends in high places or are after them money. In addition I would suggest making illegal any redudancies / outsourcing of work by companies who are making a profit.

Well lol without being flippant Middle England can go fupp themselves. It's about time the government started doing what is best for this country not what the Daily Mail / Church Of England / Rupert Murdoch thinks is best for us. As for taxation, I'm sure that the risk element being taken away would allow the legal stuff to be cheaper.