Did You Vote Today?

[Doon frae Troon]

How would that work when UKIP fail to win a single seat in the next General Election.

The Scots will be looking well beyond the next election, big decision to make and we have to think of our grandchildren and beyond.

 

[FairwayDodger]

In Chris' defence, he's not alone in following this policy. I have a couple of friends who privately state the same.

It doesn't make it right, however it's the economic reality of running a small business.

I'm not sure we can judge and be idealistic until we've tried to balance his books.

Not being idealistic and having been on the other side of this you are damn right I'll judge these people as the odious individuals they are!

 

[Hacker Khan]

In Chris' defence, he's not alone in following this policy. I have a couple of friends who privately state the same.

It doesn't make it right, however it's the economic reality of running a small business.

I'm not sure we can judge and be idealistic until we've tried to balance his books.

It's OK to have follow illegal practices by not employing a women for the sole reason that they are a woman then as long as you can justify it by balancing the books? Again lots if successful business have flourished whilst at the same time employing women.

No one is being idealistic, it's the law, the rules (you know the thing us golfers love to follow or the whole thing falls down apparently) and again I'd like to live in a world where my daughter is judged on her achievements, qualifications and effort she has put in when going for a job. Not the fact she does not have a penis. And if that is idealistic then so be it.

 

[CMAC]

In Chris' defence, he's not alone in following this policy. I have a couple of friends who privately state the same.

It doesn't make it right, however it's the economic reality of running a small business.

I'm not sure we can judge and be idealistic until we've tried to balance his books.

I assure you, that's not a defence!!

 

[Hacker Khan]

i assure you, that's not a defence!!

Like as they say.

 

[User20205]

I can see both arguments, and whilst I'm not a proper dyed red leftie, I definitely occupy left of centre :thup:

I appreciate it's legislation, and for Chris to openly stated he flouts maybe shows questionable judgement

However the reality is this is common practice. Many small business owners see legislation as a barrier to growth, and those that succeed do so despite not because of it.

I wouldn't advocate it simply on basis of depriving access to a large chunk of really talented people.

Did I vote? No. Do I usually? Yes.

 

[User20205]

I assure you, that's not a defence!!

It's a defence of the economic argument. The sexism drum that you're banging is a red herring in this case.

 

[chrisd]

You know you can reclaim 92% of the SMP paid, yeh?

But I cant recoup the extra costs of recruiting and training a stand in and still have to pay the 8%

You do know you are coming across as a parody of a sexist pig?

You call it sexist, I call it economic realism - with the extra overheads, the business could fail and we'd all be out of work, I didn't much like that alternative

Blatant discrimination, as bad as someone who would refuse to consider a candidate based on their religion or ethnicity. Rationalise it all you like, your excuses are not valid, shame on you.

It's not but the same thing at all. When recruiting, all businesses, big and small, differentiate between the candidates and employ on the suitability of the candidate to their (the employers) needs. I have made no excuses but given reasons.

I don't think he wants to know! Totally blinkered and ridiculous male chauvinist attitude.

Do you run your own business?

As I assume (probably correctly) that you didn't even consider a female of child bearing age then you have no idea you hired the right candidate, you hired the right man for you out of a very small pool.

I've rarely been dissatisfied with the staff I've employed and only ever sacked one person, so I'm happy that the right man who was available has done a good job and, in fact, have never had a female applicant

In Chris' defence, he's not alone in following this policy. I have a couple of friends who privately state the same.

It doesn't make it right, however it's the economic reality of running a small business.

I'm not sure we can judge and be idealistic until we've tried to balance his books.

I agree that the 25% of firms who appear to adopt this policy aren't right, but, successive governments pile on crippling legislation that cost firm huge sums in red tape and add to costs. Micro firms, many of whom are just starting out now with the recession finishing should be exempt from much of this additional cost.

It's so easy to be an idealist when your not trying to run a business and keep 5 or 6 families in employment

 

[CMAC]

It's a defence of the economic argument. The sexism drum that you're banging is a red herring in this case.

no its a defence of the 'haven't thought it through properly' argument. The drum that your banging is at the head of a group of villagers with pitchforks and torches!

 

[CMAC]

As I assume (probably correctly) that you didn't even consider a female of child bearing age then you have no idea you hired the right candidate, you hired the right man for you out of a very small pool.

Mind if I ask whats your business? as there is legislation where its legal for certain size business's and areas of expertise to legally discriminate and for reasons I understand.

there are 'get out of jail free cards' depending on your business?

 

[SocketRocket]

You do know you are coming across as a parody of a sexist pig?

You are coming across as a blinkered left wing activist. You use the traditional socialist method of throwing insults rather than debate and reason.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

So you are the authority on what views are extreme? Would that be people with a different view to you then.

Regarding UKIP, a lot of people in this country will vote for them, does this mean they are all swivel eyed fruitcakes or people that have genuine concerns for the direction the current politic is taking us?

If you get elected those with extreme views then by definition those elected do not represent the views of the majority - because if they were representative then they wouldn't be extreme views. And I am not thinking of anything specific when I say 'extreme' views. This is only an observation about voting in general.

 

[bladeplayer]

Just back. Almost didn't bother but my Dad always told me it was a privilege never to be taken for granted.

So very true , our voting is today over here , i always vote , i have no faith in most of the clowns , but when you vote you have a right to voice an opinion , even if you vote for someone who will never get in , you can honestly say i tried to change it so i will voice my disapproval of what they are doing ..

I think alot of people dont value their right to vote , there are countries over the world fighting for the right to,
people in Afghanastan [sp] que'd among shooting and bombings for a chance to change their destiny ..

Maybe we all just take it for granted :rant:

 

[User20205]

no its a defence of the 'haven't thought it through properly' argument. The drum that your banging is at the head of a group of villagers with pitchforks and torches!

Really?? There was me thinking it was empathetic !

Surely attempting to understand is the direct opposite of image you portray.

I don't necessarily agree, but can see his point of view. That's a lot more helpful in the reference of the OP than your Mary Shelley allegory:thup:

 

[bladeplayer]

Blatant discrimination, as bad as someone who would refuse to consider a candidate based on their religion or ethnicity. Rationalise it all you like, your excuses are not valid, shame on you.

For the record I do agree with you 100% Karen.. but do you think its not the truth ?

Chris where i agree its wrong i do see your point and i say fair play for saying it , its easy to NOT say it and tip along in a comfy conversation . so being honest is respected

 

[Hobbit]

If you get elected those with extreme views then by definition those elected do not represent the views of the majority - because if they were representative then they wouldn't be extreme views. And I am not thinking of anything specific when I say 'extreme' views. This is only an observation about voting in general.

You'll have to explain the above in language I can understand...

 

[bladeplayer]

That decision is yours obviously, but do you not think it is sexist?

Might well be Cian but in reality there are alot of small business doing the same .. Chris has to put the best interests of his business and his familys future first .. is it right ? maybe not, probably not , well no its not .. in a politicaly correct world ..

but i will say to all the people its easy to be judgemental when you dont have to be the one making the decision ..

 

[FairwayDodger]

It's not but the same thing at all. When recruiting, all businesses, big and small, differentiate between the candidates and employ on the suitability of the candidate to their (the employers) needs. I have made no excuses but given reasons.

It is exactly the same thing. Yes, you need to evaluate the suitability of each candidate but certain criteria are not relevant and cannot legally be used to discriminate; race, religion, sexuality and gender.

Chris, you're in a hole - please stop digging. I am so angry not just that I know this goes on but that you feel so little concern about it that you're happy to come on here and boast about it.

 

[CMAC]

Really?? There was me thinking it was empathetic !

Surely attempting to understand is the direct opposite of image you portray.

I don't necessarily agree, but can see his point of view. That's a lot more helpful in the reference of the OP than your Mary Shelley allegory:thup:

you weren't- reread your post

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Interesting that Chris employs mature men but not mature women. Tends to weaken his argument.