The Student Room Group

What is the point of low-skilled immigration?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Yaboi
To give people a chance at a better life
Which is at the expense of the established populations average standard of living.

Aspiration and upwards mobility for the vast majority of low skilled and semi-skilled workers has all but evaporated under the heat of uncontrolled immigration.

You don't seem to realise that this is causing huge resentment.
Original post by AlexanderHam

Presumably then you'll be happy for me to come out and hang out in your house, eating your food and sleeping in your bed. Why should you get the benefit of your house just because you own it?


But wages would be higher too. And anywhere businesses are profitable and competitive, they would have to bear the cost of increased wages, not the consumer.

Funnily enough, my parents have plenty of people with nowhere to stay over to their house (refugees especially) even though my parents own the house. I don't 'own' my house, my parents do because I haven't earnt the house myself. Therefore I am perfectly happy to have people come over to the house, eat our food and be part of our lives, as long as they are hard working people- which you can't deny migrant workers are. I am lucky enough to be in my family, some people aren't and have abusive parents or their homes were burnt down and they have nowhere to go- no of these situations are their fault.

I agree with your point about wages- however I would put that aside for the good of people's lives.
To clarify, I am not for massive amounts of low skilled workers but since we are all on the same planet, we should be sharing resources. Particularly, I agree with refugees being able to come to the UK.
Reply 82
Original post by uberteknik
Which is at the expense of the established populations average standard of living.

Aspiration and upwards mobility for the vast majority of low skilled and semi-skilled workers has all but evaporated under the heat of uncontrolled immigration.

You don't seem to realise that this is causing huge resentment.


I'm not justifying it or claiming the reason the reason is a good one, I'm just saying that's a potential reason lol.
Original post by AlexanderHam
Bloody well said. As a business owner I am allowed to renegotiate contracts, to do whatever is lawful to get the best price for my product.

For workers/trade unions, their product is labour. Why should it be immoral for them to band together to get the best price for what they sell?


People need to understand that fundamentally there is no difference between the industrialist who wants a high mark up on his goods and the worker who wants a higher price for his labour. The denial of this fact, in of itself runs contrary to a competitive instinct. Besides, can't be the guy who looks at his suited boss with wide eyed wonder as if he's your daddy and the manual labourer with gruesome disgust.


All the best with your business my friend.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by l'etranger
People need to understand that fundamentally there is no difference between the businessman who wants a high mark up on his goods and the worker who wants a higher price for his labour. You can't be the guy who looks at his suited boss with wide eyed wonder as if he's your daddy and the manual labourer with gruesome disgust.


All the best with your business my friend.


I don't think there's a problem with there being such thing as a trade union, no one thinks that. I think there's a problem with how much power trade unions have. Trade unions shouldn't have any more power than the employer. They certain shouldn't be able to dictate policies to a certain political party or be able to grind an entire city to a halt because of an argument over who get's to push a button on a train.
Original post by AlexanderHam
But must it continue indefinitely? What "cultural enrichment" are we going to get from the next three million Muslim immigrants that we didn't get from the last three million?


I'm not sure. My point was that it's often rejected without debate. My main point was about the philosophical discussion of whether movement is a privellege or a right and whether states ought to be able to infringe upon this right.
Original post by AlexanderHam
What you actually mean is "find natives who would accept crap wages"



that's incorrect, but it;s just trotting out the clause4ista standard response

depends on what you mean by crap wages -


coulpe of examples from the logistics world

if you think 50 + p hour over the NMW , approx 500 quid annual bonus simply for turning up on time ( paid weekly in arrears) and team performance dependant up to 6 extra leave days over and above your 5.6 weeks , and and another 250 -500 quid / year in quarterly bonuses is 'crap' , or if another 30 quid a week beginning allowance 3 months after going on an employer funded VNA truck operator course is 'crap' ...


as well as a the statutory required pensions provision, various discounts and perks depending on which parts of the business you worked for ( part of that business had a major M+S contract so staff in those depts got M+S 'one team' benefits , other parts of the business worked for other major companies and got different discounts and perks based on what was negotiated

or another company , part of a major high street retailer - everyone gets paid in excess of the NMW , usual perks, permanent staff have discount in all of the groups brands, paid for training etc ... plus various perks and freebies for all staff both perm , temp and agency...

or from healthcare a private care home operator

'unqualified' HCAs paid NMW , NVQ holders got extra even if working on nursing units and not having any managerial responsibilities

free on duty meals , tea, coffee , soft drinks ... ( so effectively an extra 20 gbp /week )

usual perks and discount deals


people often forget this sort of thing and obsess over the hourly rate being quoted ...


And you're basing this on what? Where does your knowledge of the workforce come from?


nearly 20 years in the workforce including various training and management roles across a number of industries and businesses
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by AlexanderHam
Indeed. They call British people lazy because they don't want to accept minimum wage to work a zero hours contract cleaning toilets. If you pay decent money, you can find British workers to do anything. And in the high-skill industries, British people are among the best in the world.



This also brings up immigration in "high skilled industries". There is clearly a level of intersectionality to this. Should we limit immigration in academia for example? My UKIP voting mum thinks there are too many foreign students for example. The discussion on whether we should accept foreign students, postgrads, postdocs and lecturers is obviously going to require a different approach to polish warehouse workers. Having been either a student or a warehouse worker my entire adult life I have first hand experience of both. IMO a load of the problems encountered in neo-Victorian-workhouse warehouses could be solved with labour laws and unions. Having these working class people focused on immigration at the expense of class solidarity is harmful to them. There are studies out there that show a diverse working class(this includes women being in work) tends to lead to less class solidarity which is disappointing. So it depends how far someone like me is willing to throw their beliefs down the toilette just to get somewhere.

Students/academics don't tend to mind there being foreigners anyway, even if it does have a -ve effect on them.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by AlexanderHam
I see your perspective on that, but you still haven't explained what the fundamental policy justification for low-skilled immigration is.


I can't really give a knowledgeable answer other than I know it isn't as simple as reducing immigration always makes things better. So... I just go with my ideological gut. I don't feel the urge to kick down at my old fellow warehouse working poles.
Original post by AlexanderHam
I see your perspective on that, but you still haven't explained what the fundamental policy justification for low-skilled immigration is.


Per Simon Walker about to be Senior non-exec Director at Liam Fox's Department for International Trade

“The reality is an advanced welfare state can’t operate without low-skilled but hardworking labour,” he said. “That is generally a need fulfilled by migrants. If they don’t come from Europe, they are going to need to come from somewhere else.
“The alternative is going to be the closure or running down of many of our industries. The other option is to close down the welfare state.”
Walker highlighted care homes, the restaurant industry and fruit picking as areas that are reliant on migrant labour. “We are going to continue needing many highly motivated but low-skilled migrants who are willing to do the jobs that, frankly, British workers aren’t willing to do. There are an awful lot of jobs in that category,” he said."

This is from today's Sunday Times (obviously behind Rupert's paywall)
(edited 7 years ago)
Kindness
Original post by Yaboi
To give people a chance at a better life


you're nice i like you
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Having these working class people focused on immigration at the expense of class solidarity is harmful to them. There are studies out there that show a diverse working class(this includes women being in work) tends to lead to less class solidarity which is disappointing.


The problem with class solidarity is that it is an ideology formulated during the 19th and early 20th century before mass immigration when Britain was a more ethnically and cultural homogeneous society. The largest immigrant group at the time was the Irish, although they were people from the British Isles rather than faraway lands.

People of one particular ethnic group usually prefer to associate with people from that group more so than people from other ethnic groups regardless of their social class, with the possible exception of the top 1% or so of society. As a result it is commonplace for people of foreign origin in Britain who are technically working class to have stronger social ties with people of the same origin who are technically middle or even upper class. A self made millionaire of Indian origin told me this. His parents were factory workers and he spent his childhood in what would be considered to be a working class community but he preferred to associate with other people of Indian origin who were businessmen or had professional careers rather than white British working class folk. He also thought that the British working class is dominated by people with inverted snobbery who are wasting their lives and do little to better themselves or, even worse, the lives of their children.

Working class solidarity is largely based on a platform of "we are working class and proud of it" and it actually runs counter to the concept of class mobility and people bettering themselves and the futures of their children.

It's self explanatory why the anti-immigration ideological movement in British society is dominated by white British folk but it does seem strange how the working class solidarity ideological movement is also dominated by white British folk and gets very little support from certain ethnic groups, especially those with a stronger interest in social mobility.

George Galloway tried to build the Respect party as a broad left party but only Muslims supported it and it was shunned by both working class and poorer white British people and non-Muslim ethnics. The Muslims eventually abandoned Respect because they knew it was all George Galloway and he did everything in his power to stop it from becoming a political party for Muslims.

People of foreign origin usually have interests in certain foreign affairs that are of little interest or relevance to all but a tiny handful of the white British working class folk but there is interest in the same foreign affairs by a number of white British middle and upper class individuals, some of which may hold a degree of influence. This foreign affairs dimension separates people of foreign origin who are technically working class from white British working class folk who are very parochial in their outlook.
Original post by Arran90
The problem with class solidarity is that it is an ideology formulated during the 19th and early 20th century before mass immigration when Britain was a more ethnically and cultural homogeneous society. The largest immigrant group at the time was the Irish, although they were people from the British Isles rather than faraway lands.



Racism and xenophobia was a problem for class solidarity during the 1800s. It's always been a problem. Fascism was partly a result of class solidarity at the expense of certain groups.
It's businesses that support it.

Put the minimum wage up to £10 an hour and see how many "low skilled immigrants" get hired.

Of course then the right wingers that complain about immigration all the time, will tell us that that will lead to mass unemployment / high inflation, because "businesses can't afford to pay those kind of wages". In which case, if we want a pro-business cheap labour economy, keep the door open to cheap labour.
(edited 7 years ago)
There is no point, it's stupid to have low skilled immigration.

British people might have a poor work ethic, but the current levels of low skilled immigration are only exacerbating the existing problems. That's why we should have an Australian points style Immigration system. So, that we can reduce overall immigration levels and encourage only skills based immigration to meet skills shortages.
Original post by Lord Gaben
There is no point, it's stupid to have low skilled immigration.

British people might have a poor work ethic, but the current levels of low skilled immigration are only exacerbating the existing problems. That's why we should have an Australian points style Immigration system. So, that we can reduce overall immigration levels and encourage only skills based immigration to meet skills shortages.


See

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/we-need-a-new-class-of-visa-for-lowskilled-migrant-workers-20150504-ggu47j.html
Original post by ChaoticButterfly
Racism and xenophobia was a problem for class solidarity during the 1800s. It's always been a problem. Fascism was partly a result of class solidarity at the expense of certain groups.


Working class solidarity, socialism, and the labour movement was in its infancy in the 1800s and Britain was a far more homogeneous society (in terms of race, religion, and country of origin) than it is today. If racism and xenophobia were problems for class solidarity back in the 1800s then it indicates that promoters of working class solidarity have not learned from findings (or mistakes made) over the decades.

I myself believe that identity politics is the way forwards and the old broad class based socioeconomic structure will fade away. There are some organisations like the IWCA which vehemently oppose identity politics and continue to uphold the notion that society is divided on class alone but they are trying to stop the tide like Canute.

http://www.iwca.info/

https://www.facebook.com/IndependentWorkingClassAssociation/

The media likes to keep a bit quiet about this but there is anger and resentment towards eastern European immigrants by long term immigrants from New Commonwealth countries and their British born descendents over matters like taking jobs, taking houses, draining resources in schools, and a general failure to integrate with the community.
Original post by Trapz99
Reduced labour costs = cheaper goods and services


You think businesses pass on the savings they make from cheap labour to you, rather than into the pockets of the shareholders? How charmingly naive.
Original post by Quady
Cheaper goods.


D'aww, that's so cute. You think businesses pass on the margin they make from cheap labour to you, rather than into the pockets of their shareholders.

Personally I don't think they've driven down my wages. Have they driven down yours? Do you pack boxes for a living?


I'm about to start a training contract with a city firm, it doesn't affect me personally. Five years from now I'll be in the top 1% of earners. But I'm not a **** so I don't judge the moral value of things according to whether they only affect me.

But please tell us; what is your salary and what job do you do?

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending