Do they? Is that something you have just assumed?
Thanks for your thoughts.It was just my own observation so I didn’t intend it to be right/wrong.
The only assumption is that enough of the EU citizens that work in the U.K. are working legally for the likes of Amazon so they see a reduction in staff.If the large majority of EU citizens are actually working for cash elsewhere, or not working at all as also suggested, it will have little impact.
Who has suggested the majority of EU citizens here are working for cash or not working at all?
If the supply of labour is reduced, wages will go up as we are already seeing.
Are you saying that nobody has mentionedEU migrants coming here for benefits, or washing cars, or not working at all?
I said no such thing, but nice deflection.
Perhaps you could answer a direct question. Who has suggested most EU migrants are working for cash, or not working at all?
I'm a big fan of calling out when someone is trying to paint the other side as the bad guys.
Nobody has said that most EU migrants work for cash or don't work. And certainly not here. So why did you say that, other than to portray our side of the argument as being extreme and unreasonable?
I guess you don't know how the Labour market works. Even if no EU migrants work for Amazon, reductions in the number of workers will increase demand for the remaining workers and push up wages and conditions generally.
It will also increase automation and productivity eventually too.
Oh man, we're going round in circles.Do you at least acknowledge the numerous media front pages I shared as painting generic 'EU migrants' as drains on the economy/murderers/stealing jobs?Thankfully, I haven't seen such extreme posters on this forum but there are still the generic 'car washers'/benefits comments.
I agree with your last point about increasing automation, but unfortunately I think it's more a case of companies like Amazon looking to bring that forwards when demand for workers increases than improving conditions for current UK workers.
I acknowledge that some front pages made some claims about migrants, but none support the claims you made about the majority of EU migrants.
If Amazon pursue automation that will also push up pay and conditions. Those that design, build, maintain and operate the automation will be on higher wages than box packers.
We're clearly choosing to read example headlines in different ways ;
New migrant flood on way
Britain faces migrant 'disaster'
Britain 'has too many' migrants
Every 4 minutes a migrant is arrested in britain
Immigration revolution
500,000 Migrants get social housing
There are too many migrants
The 'swarm' on our streets
Foreign workers get 3 in 4 new jobs
I don't see many of them quantifying their 'migrant' numbers/descriptions?I'm not saying they're right, I'm suggesting they're generalising.If you're not willing to agree in the face of actual examples then there's little point in discussing it further.
And yes, if Amazon push automation, those that design/implement automated systems will be recruited. Do you think that's good for those low skilled UK workers or are you assuming they will all go back to education to re-train as automated system designers?
If they replace box packers with higher skilled workers to support the automation, then those jobs are better paid. Why would anyone object to that?
And again, your headlines don't support your contention that it was suggested that most EU migrants work for cash or don't work at all. We can keep going round in this circle if you like, and I'll continue to reject your position that this side of the argument is demonising most EU migrants as working illegally or not working at all.