Does This Reveal British Hypocrisy On Immigration?

[Kromovaracun]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-24108665

As a native of Cambs, I've always had the impression that this is something that absolutely everybody knew was happening and wilfully turned a blind eye to. Migrant labourers have been exploited to provide cheaper food prices.

Are the British willing to complain about youth unemployment (or migrants "stealing jobs"), but unwilling to pay more for the alternative?

[jno]

I didn't know about it, but then I wouldn't, there's not a lot of leek-picking in my part of London. But yes, I've always thought the British had two firm but conflicting principles: they don't want immigrants to take jobs from natives by undercutting their prices; and they don't want to pay a penny more than they have to for anything whatever.

Having said that, this kind of virtual slavery ought to be stamped out regardless of the reasons behind it.

[ichkeria]

Yes it does. And of course irony of ironies there are now loads of complaints about government restrictions on migrant labour.

[DaisyNonna]

No it does not. Has anybody asked me how I feel about it? No.
Does whatever I think, feel or say make a difference? No.
Yes, I would pay more.
Who is going to encourage youngsters to move to Cambridgeshire to find work?

[ichkeria]

"Who is going to encourage youngsters to move to Cambridgeshire to find work? "

George Osborne perhaps? As part of his master plan for the unemployed.
Then again, perhaps not :-)

[Hypognosis]

No, the Panorama program that was shown a few years ago was first to break the story about the trend of worker exploitation; low salary levels plus deductions from salary for rent and in-house travel to the work sites (the words 'rural' and 'bus service' are a meaningless combination of words in the early a.m., I'd guess).

Arbitrary fines for minor misbehaviour, keeping the worker in debt on a permanent basis, with virtually no prospect of them ever digging themselves out of their hole is nothing new - look up "indentured servant" from our own past, up to and including the 1800s.

I agree, we are all hypocritical, IF we simultaneously harp on about immigration AND want cheap vegetables on the shelves.

p.s. If anyone has a right to complain about the Lithuanians (in this example) it is the gypsy/traveller community, who used to make a good living by being itinerant labour, picking crops when and where demand arose and took their accommodation with them. Rumour has it they are changing to a more permanently settled way of life, which, thinking about it, is opening up vacancies for these Gangmasters to exploit all over the country.

[Svejk]

There are indian lads working on sites,allegedly,earning £5 a day. I say allegedly because none of them speak english and the only people I know who speak Indian and English are their 'gang-masters' and they're not saying. Its one of those areas where until very recently you couldn't comment without being accused of racism and/or bigotry.

[1ndex]

If they dont like the work they can leave. No one shackled and if they are they can call police. There probly illegals.

[Svejk]

They're deftly illegal, index. Not the point really. Do you work for £5 a day.

[Hypognosis]

@1index,

to save you the time of reading the news item Kromo linked to, the key points are: -

1) The victims were shown photos of sizeable paychecks and given descriptions of the kind of work they'd be doing to tempt them away from alternative work options in their own country.
2) They pay people smugglers to get them into the UK (not necessarily illegal entry, just the paperwork and the language skills to get through immigration control)
3) They don't realise that the've been duped until they find themselves at the accommodation.
4) After deductions for rent, meals and transportation, their remaining pay is at pocket money levels and would barely get them to the nearest ferry port let alone a ticket home.

They couldn't up sticks and leave, even if they wanted to.

(Well they could but maybe they're too accustomed to comfy living to sleep rough).

[Ric.ror]

Probably same level of hypocrisy we show when buying clothes from cheap fashion stores
I spent £7 on a baby tshirt and cardigan last week
Forgot totally about child labour issues
Had they asked me to contribute say 50p for under a fiver and £1 for anything above I would have jumped at the chance
Not much I know but considering the huge footfall in these stores it would certainly make a difference
As for migrant labourers - my son lost one job when the firm could and did employ one and a half workers for the same money

[Svejk]

^^^^^
Don't tell me they're importing pygmies now. ;)

[anotheoldgit]

jno

/// Having said that, this kind of virtual slavery ought to be stamped out regardless of the reasons behind it. ///

Slavery??? surely no one is chain ganging them into the fields?

[emmie]

i buy what i can afford, for me at least it's simple economics.

[emmie]

the people who picked crops, fruit once upon a time were British working class, who took time out during the hopping season to go picking, family did this years ago, same with fruit picking, mostly they gave up because modern methods came into play and many just got too old. Their children didn't do it much after as they got jobs in other areas, like factory work, better conditions, better pay

[emmie]

many on farms are paid a decent wage, and those immigrant labourers save money by living on the site, not ideal but in caravans, mobile homes, it was a piece featured just recently on the news, their wages were not poor, it depends on how much you pick, and these guys had got it down pat, faster you pick the more money they earned, many said that sent much of the money home.

[Old_Geezer]

Virtual slavery oag. It’s a question of degree isn't it; pay zero and force labour and it's slavery, pay insufficient and let desperation do the forcing for you and one uses the description "slavery" just to emphasis the injustice.

The problem is that the population is not just one person and one person's views. Some will argue it is fine that someone willing to work for little can be employed by someone willing to pay little. Whilst others think exploitation is wrong and ought not to be allowed. Some do not feel that the processes to get food on the plate further down the line should be to do with them when they are only managing the money they have to buy food already on offer: others feel we are all responsible for the whole process.

I don't think it is hypocritical to find different priorities/needs clash, and to feel uneasy about being unable to solve that dilemma. Life is like that. One has a moral framework but often one finds one belief can not be supported without neglecting another belief. So we all try to balance and juggle and find the best compromise on a case by case basis. But this doesn’t deny us the chance to nail our colours to the mast and moan about the things that we believe are wrong.

[Old_Geezer]

~I take 10 mins to write a post and emmie gets in twice :-)
Sending money home eh ? More wealth leaving this country for another then.

[emmie]

first off no one makes them do it, and sometimes the BBC has a propensity to overegg the pudding.

[emmie]

there are plenty of farms and plenty of information on conditions, rates of pay, and feedback like these people

http://www.anyworkanywhere.com/jexp_farms.html

[McMouse]

I'm British but not a hypocrite. We buy British grown produce from reputable suppliers and are not aware that immigrant workers are being exploited.