A law proposed by Nigel Farage to “strengthen women’s rights” could cost female workers money by removing equal pay for work of equal value, unions have said.
Killing that very idea of equal value is a dman good idea. Getting judges to set wages really does not have a good track record.
It’s the direct cause of the bins strike in Brum for example….
Under Reform UK’s plan, Farage’s party has suggested women’s rights are better protected by laws made in the 1970s and 90s. It has said that the Equal Pay Act 1970 ensures that women and men receive the same pay for the same work and that the Employment Rights Act 1996 ensured rights to parental leave and protection against unfair dismissal.
The same work? Werl – but “equal value”? Naaah.
The Equality Act was a ludicrous and unnecessary piece of legislation and it shows Cameron’s utter traitorousness that he didnt kill it before it became law.
A lot of the legislation from the 70s,80s and 90s was properly thought through by serious politicians, rather than brainless floozies like Harriet Harperson.
Having Britain’s leftist nonce judiciary involved in criminal justice doesn’t work too well either.
Anyone who thinks it is fair that binmen earn the same as office cleaners should work as a binman for week.
The only job being a bin man is equal to is being a bin man.
Given that we now have laws allowing for female bin men, and few females apply, we can safely say that working in an office is nicer work, and thus not equal to, being a bin man.
“Go on the bins, love, and get a binman’s wages. Don’t want to go on the bins? Don’t get a binman’s wages, then.”
This is all that need be said. Nothing and no-one is stopping wimmin going on the bins.
We demand that women make up half of all CEOs and MPs!
How about nasty jobs like roofers & bin men?
Wot?
Another peerless legend , Ottokring, has it surrounded. The Equality Act needs to be repealed post haste. I’d actually have a specific sitting on Day 1 which puts all the legislation passed under Starmer into abeyance immediately, and we’d do something similar, progressively for every statute passed since Major.
It’s certainly arguable that wokeness predates Blair, but you have to start somewhere. I think as part of the remigration program I’d also look to repeal the legislation of the 1970s as well relating to Race. I think that will help solidify the vote for either Reform or Restore.
Thank you VP, I am honoured.
Haven’t seen much discussion of s250 of the Crime and Policing Act 2026 yet. From the end of the month it makes companies potentially liable for any criminal offence committed by a “senior manager” in the course of his work. Including in theory fraud committed against the company itself. Cue more burdensome compliance work and a massive massive disincentive for foreign companies to set up in this country.
It looked to me like s.250 was just a way to go after the deeper pockets of a company. It looks a bit like collective punishment. It probably ought to have some exception for the case where the company didn’t know or had no means to prevent, but much of this bill is very fuzzily worded and it’s hard to interpret.
However, glancing through the rest of the bill, I noticed a few other bits that might be very, very slightly controversial.
s.157 About anonymity at protests.
s.160 They tried to be scientific, but the definition appears to cover cigarette lighters, candles for vigils, vapes, and mobile phones with lithium batteries in them. (Probably not serious, just funny.)
s.241 looks pretty broad. Up to birth?
s.72 inserts an exception 46B(1)(b) and s99 inserts 66J(2) which raise questions as to what the hell would those guys want this power for?
That would be an interesting situation for the SNP if Murrell hadn’t already been dealt with.
I thought our host had identified that the comparable jobs part of the legislation was basically straight outta Marx, had been slipped in by (I think Harriet Harperson) and had been comprehensively debunked by a Nobel winning Economist.
It’s to do with the Value Theory of Labour, which is so easily debunked it’s embarrassing.
Just checked with my elderly mum… bra-burning feminist in the ’60s…
Explained what the thing was about and she just …. flipped….
Let’s just say that *one* classic feminist agrees with the general gist here….
Been a while since I’ve seen her that …testy…..
That generation of feminists were proud of the fact that they were demanding equality of access not special treatment.
“Work of equal value”. Ah, Marx’s Value of Labour fallacy. Output has value: it’s what we buy. We don’t care how much work went into it. we want and value the result, not the process, therefore the work itself is of no value, so judging whether two kind of work are of equal value is irrelevant and absurd.
No one explained to Marx how marketing works.
No-one could explain anything to Marx….
He was a Spud who simply was Always Right….
His seminal work is just as tedious and *wrong* as Mein Kampf.
How about ALL council workers get the same pay, on the condition that council jobs are allocated by the council, rather than the job the applicant is applying for? Any refusal to accept that allocated job leads to no council employment for that person. It apparently worked well in the Soviet Union, and isn’t that what the unions are aiming for?