Frances O’Grady seems somewhat confused here

O’Grady said: “Swedish derogation contracts are just one more example of a new and growing type of employment that offers no job security, poor career progression and often low pay.”

Hmm. So what actually is this Swedish derogation?

The TUC has become increasingly frustrated about the growing use of the loophole known as the Swedish derogation, which allows agency workers placed with companies to be paid less than direct employees, provided the agency agrees to continue paying them for at least four weeks at times when it is unable to find them work.

So, greater security of pay is now evidence of less security of pay is it?

4 thoughts on “Frances O’Grady seems somewhat confused here”

  1. They really can’t get past this 19th century thing where generation after generation of proles in hobnailed boots work in the same mill, factory or mine, in a feudal master/serf relationship, can they?

    Like I said t’other day, “progressives” are really just reactionaries.

  2. That kind of set-up was the chief recruiting ground for working-class leftists.
    Ironic considering that the left now consists (apart from “legacy” working class idiots who vote labour “’cause my Dad did”) largely of middle/upper-middle and a few upper class twats who despise the working class–esp the white working class, whatever is left of us

  3. I hadn’t heard of this. Now I have, I suspect my own employer (who act as a kind of agency) are probably taking advantage of it. Had no idea I was an oppressed victim. In fact, my employer are ranked one of the best in Ireland, North or South. We’re all aware that we could make more per month as contractors, yet we stick with the firm for the salary security. In fact, we keep recruiting contractors, who seem to think it’s a good deal. In summary, WTF?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *