LA QUESTION
Why does a steady life take more than it used to?
Dites ce que vous vouliez dire. Deux fiches ne fusionnent que si leurs deux auteurs sont d’accord.
fermé · retour à la phase Actions
Mode invité. Choisissez un pseudo pour rejoindre la salle et participer.
Fusionner les doublons
Uniquement pour deux fiches qui font la même affirmation.
pourquoi
Une fusion n’a lieu que si les deux auteurs donnent leur accord. Débattez du sens dans le fil de discussion de la fiche avant de fusionner quoi que ce soit.
fusionnée "Nobody trains anyone, and then…" → "So nobody trains and everyone …"
The apprenticeship system is designed for firms with an HR department
Rien n’a encore été dit.
Assets rose faster than wages for four decades
Every cost that rose was passed to us and could not be passed on
Narrower than it reads — the wider claim is someone else's card.
Every new rule consolidates the market a little more
Not an accusation: an institution can do this with everyone acting in good faith.
The rules make dismissal costly, so we do not hire in the first place
Automation is subsidised through the tax code and hiring is not
Meaning the general pattern, not one case.
Employers' taxes are charged on the person, so people are the thing to cut
Narrower than it reads — the wider claim is someone else's card.
The apprenticeship system is designed for firms with an HR department
The chain that replaced the shop pays less and takes the money out of town
We would take the risk on a person if the risk were shared
Energy, rent and insurance tripled and the invoice did not
One large buyer sets our margin and our payment terms
We are the ones who see it and nobody asks us anything
Compliance costs the same for nine employees as for nine hundred
famille 2discuter
So nobody trains and everyone complains about skills
Hiring someone permanently now feels like signing a mortgage
Cash flow, not profit, decides whether anyone is hired
Nobody in a ministry has ever met a payroll
The things that used to be bought once are now rented forever
famille 1discuter
We are paid in ninety days and pay wages in thirty
I mean this as an observation; I would want it tested.
So we use contracts and agencies and everyone loses
To be precise: this is about the mechanism, not anyone's motives.
The customer chooses on price and always has
A large competitor can absorb a regulation that would close us
Narrower than it reads — the wider claim is someone else's card.
famille 2discuter
What used to be a job is now a series of contracts
famille 1discuter
A single wage no longer supports a household
Consolidation removes the employer competition that raised wages
The policies are written for a company with a government affairs team
We train people and a larger firm hires them at more
Not an accusation: an institution can do this with everyone acting in good faith.
A machine is a capital allowance and a worker is a liability
I mean this as an observation; I would want it tested.
Business representation is dominated by firms unlike ours
Agencies take a margin for work we used to do ourselves
I mean this as an observation; I would want it tested.