Archbishop of Canterbury

The world stinks.

A of C stinks

It makes you wonder about these liberal intellectuals who lecture us on morals.
Here we have another sanctimonious clown promoted above his ability, sounding off to draw attention to himself and putting his foot right in it.

In his defence the business side of the C of E is absolutely huge, and separate from the Church. I personally wouldn't expect him to know about all their their investments, and if he did it might compromise his decision to deliver such criticisms.

All religions are full of hypocrisy. I would have more respect for them if they made a stance and showed some moral scruples by withdrawing their investments in the company. This goes for all religions. One religion is totally against booze and gambling, which is fair enough if that is what they believe, but how do they make their money in their shops? Yes, you guessed, by selling alcohol and Lottery tickets.

maybe he has it about right , disagreeing with aspects of Amazon but it’s not the only company and it was a general criticism of zero hr contracts

There are ethical funds.  You would imagine that the Church invests its money in 'ethical' companies, or at least companies which its head honcho doesn't openly criticise.  The stuff about criticising companies from within might be valid if the Church can prove that their investment managers criticised the Amazon board and suggested to them that they should pay their staff more and give them better working conditions and therefore make less profit.

With regard to zero hours contracts, you might imagine that the top vicar would ensure that his own organisation don't use them before mouthing off.

Half-watching the piece on BBC News last night... did I hear right that C of E has a £12billion share portfolio?

Biggest Land owner - more than Liz !

He's not just made himself a complete hypocritical idiot over this by condemning Amazon whom the COE gives its financial support.
He did exactly the same when he condemned Wonga which the COE had also invested in.

So he's been the same fool twice.

Education: Trinity College, Cambridge · University of Cambridge · St John's College, Durham · Eton College

I wouldn't trust the buffoon to top up the water bottle for the windscreen wipers in my car.

I agree with the Archbishop on this occasion , although he may very well be a buffoon as you say dr crippen

They have to work within the framework as it exists , Amazon’s tax is a matter for the government
There’s no reason that can’t be critiqued while at the same time investing in Amazon

Anyone delivering a public statement ESPECIALLY if you're the AoC must do some homework before gobbing off like this. Ignorance of who the CofE invests in is no excuse.

He's gone all political, taking sides when he shouldn't. He made clear his opposition to leaving the EU for example.

Countless other issues he could address but instead he just trots out the 'give people more money' line. Tiresome.

He remains silent on the future of a Christian Britain and like his pal Corbyn & Merkel would welcome half of the Middle East and Africa here.

Those are seperate issues ,  he was talking about amazon avoiding tax and zero hr countracts

I think he was right

As regards immigration etc it’s for the church to take a kind and loving stance , that is their job and is why we should not be too quick to elect do gooders into parliament , they are forever looking for duties and good deeds that they feel must be done no matter how disagreeable


But it’s the rest of us who have to fulfill those disagreeable duties
That’s not good

Does he have any views on religion ?

Kind and loving to whom? To this country, aware of our heritage and faith or kind and loving to those who do and will change this nation forever?

As has been stated the C of  E and Amazon have 2 things in common. They're both worth billions and both employ people on low pay and zero hour contracts.

The church is not a business so I don’t mind them having low pay and zero hr contracts in that sense

In some ways I’m in favour of it

Sets a good example

The Church - easy job - free house - flexy hours - very rich and still they send out the begging bowl for the leaky roof and the gullible still fall for it after 2000 years.

church of England worth 8 billion...........didn't jesus tell people to sell all their belongings  and property... give it to the poor and follow him..........don't they have read that part of the bible

don't they ever* read that part of the bible

now you’re pretending to understand the bible more than the archbishop !

deary me I’ve heard it all now ( dr crippen thinks he’s a real dr as well )

"A statement from the CofE said it considered the most effective way to seek change was to be "in the room with these companies" as a shareholder."

Fair enough - can they give examples where they have done this then?

Gonna buy Wonga and up the APR to 1000%

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45534283

The majority of people on zero hour contracts are happy with them and don't want more hours.

It just goes to show how the church has become a sad place for left wing pillocks that they are parroting the Labour/Trade union line on that.

Of course when things like picking for boxes and packign boxes and processing and delivery is all done by robots (which seems to be direction of travel), the same people complaining about workers only being on zero hour contracts will complain about them not being employed at all.

What we have now will be pined for.

As if they were fjords.

As an atheist I have no interest in what he has to say or any other left wing liberal luvee for that fact

deary me I’ve heard it all now ( dr crippen thinks he’s a real dr as well )

That's twice I've noticed you've made unprovoked comments of that nature about me.

What's your problem?

sorry drC just a poor attempt at humour ! that’s all it was, don’t pay any attention

absolutely sick to the back teeth of people in the media,mp,s, pundits commenting on zero hours contracts when they don't understand them the latest been theo pap on question time who said he asked his head of HR that very day and asked how many were on them and why, he was told they had them because those on them wanted them,thats all fine and dandy theo the problem arises when your employer who wants 8 hrs a day 2 days a week,gets a tap on the shoulder after 4 hrs on day one saying that's it for this week we don't need you anymore .stand by your phone we might need you next week, and you get paid 4 hrs

these big Tesco,asda,amazon,sports direct warehouse,s are rife with it


there was even a snowflake pundit on lastweek using muscians.people in show business as examples of zero hr,s contracts,these people in the main are not on zero hr,s contracts but are freelances hiring out their skills,

if  theo and his company and  are happy for their workers to work the days they want that's not a problem if it suits everyone but these arnt zero hr contracts but workers and employee,s using flexi working hrs to suit all parties,

these people are either ignorant on the subject or lying, they use zero hr contracts to save on holiday,sick money,pension contributions etc,etc not to give theo,s piano tuner a choice of what day he works

No problem lfc.

theo asked his hr dept because he knew he was going to be asked about it on question time

good prep by him

no good been well prept if you don't understand the concept or reasons for zero hour contracts as invoked on the majority of low paid workers, all you need top no is they arnt used for employees to work flexible hours, mp,s to busy giving that oath jo swinston  atanding ovation for sitting in the house of commons with her baby,try taking yours with you on a Tesco checkout and see what your boss says

Majority of peole on zero hour contacts are happy on them and don't want more hours. No amount of leftie angst can change the facts.

I worked years on zero hour contracts and would be very angry if some idiot left wing scumbag from the 70s like corbyn/mcdonnell, or that stupid woman from that trade union wanted to interfere between a consenting working relationship between me and the people paying me, and ban them.

Who the hell do these people think they are?

that's the point if your happy with the hrs your working and your employer is happy with the hrs your working any change to zero hour contracts wont effect you, but it will protect those who arnt happy. you say you were very happy on your hours but would you have been happy to have them hours cut by 30,50,75,90% at a seconds notice , of course you wouldn't,


you seemed to be yet another person commenting on zero hours contracts who doesn't understand them. ive heard well off media pundits,newspaper reviewers on sky etc,journo,s who write 2 ,3 articles a week for newspapers,mags etc saying their on zero hours contracts they arnt their freelance,s who,s predecessors 30,40,50 years ago before the words zero hours contract was invented were doing the exact same thing

LETRS WRITE THIS VERY SLOWLY
in its simplest format a zero hours worker is one who goes to work at a warehouse,pub, etc expecting to work say 2 8 shifts mon,tues, but after an hours work on the Monday he/she gets a tap on the shoulder saying a  delivery,s not arrived. the pubs quiet tonight get yourself home I,ll pay you for the hours work forget about tomoprrow andi,ll give you a ring next week,

think marlon brando on the waterfront from 60 years ago

there is something dehumanising about that way of living really

The ideal balance for a country and the individual is for the business to need every member of staff for at least 30 -40 hrs a week

And if at certain times due to circumstance , maybe a new order or a new computer system or machinery , whatever , they need a bit more then overtime is a beautiful solution , for the staff especially , and can be the best solution for the business also
It’s practical and efficient

When there's oversupply of labour it's very difficult to stop this kind of thing from happening.

Companies have workers over a barrel.

It'll be hard to reverse it now with many workers simply accepting it.

It's hard to imagine that it was a Labour government that did so much to perpetuate the situation of low wages and conditions by subsidising poor wages with tax credits.

Then when the Tories tried to end tax credits it was Labour who stopped them again by voting the bill down.

And the plebs still think the Labour party represents their interests.

the number of zero hour contracts that theo spoke of do not seem excessive.

companies should have some allowance for their use but some companies
use them as standard, which seems counter to natural fairness.

most folk on zero hour contracts have no choice over the matter and whilst
conditions remain that plenty of work exists they may continue to say they
are happy. if they get bumped around they are less likely to remain content.

I'll correct that for you:
It'll be hard to reverse it now with many workers simply wanting it.

simple test is offer them a proper contract....or remain on zero hours


that wont be happening either, .....i wonder why not!

Many businesses exist from hand to mouth. They get an order in and they hire people on zero hour contracts to meet that order.

Such operations could NEVER survive if they had to offer full time contracts to staff with all that entails (HR department, pensions, maternity, paternity etc etc)

I'm not saying Amazon is a hand to mouth company but even they will see sudden spurts in demand that have to be met by a flexible workforce.

Constant meddling within business by politicians have made it VERY expensive to employ people. Holiday/sick pay for part time workers?? Give me strength. The award of permanent contracts when you have no idea in 3 months if you have any work for them???

Try sacking someone on a contract and they'll take you to a tribunal costing your business thousands.

Patrick Hosking's (yesterday's Times) brilliant dissection of the C of Es finances is well worth a read.. Subscription online.. The tax breaks they get are incredible including reclaiming 100% of  VAT.



I'm self employed but according to Welby I'm most probably in the gig economy. The man has no idea.

It's become the norm, but if I were looking for employment I'd certainly want something better than a zero hour contract.

Come to think of it I don't know anyone working in this way.
All the people I know have got proper jobs with proper terms and conditions.

None of this ''can you pop in tomorrow, we've got a job for you for a few days this week.''
Which I think is about as low as one can sink in terms of employment.
Except of course for the handful of people it might suit.

Try sacking someone on a contract and they'll take you to a tribunal costing your business thousands.

Of course that's a valid point as well.

it is what drives zero hr contracts that is the problem
some people will want to work part time of course , that’s fine
That had always been part of the economy in Britain

But there should be no need , and more than that no possibility of zero hr contracts
Because the very nature of our economy should see that it is not practical

And how is that achieved ? By stopping the oversupply of labour as dr crippen says
That and only that drives zero he contracts

it is not a question of how many companies survive , it is the nature of these countries how they employ people who they employ what they pay what terms and conditions etc

There is no point creating jobs for the sake of it , it’s a lot of trouble to do that
Stop the input of labour from all over the world

"Handful of people"

I find it amazing, as always when this subject comes up, you get people who don't work these contracts, who don't know people who works these contracts, lording over them saying they should be banned and they are so bad and second guessing all the people who work these contracts.

You are as bad as the snowflakes who get "offended" on the behalf of black or ghey people when those people themeselves aren't giving a sh1t.

If people want to work these contracts it's none of your business or a communist waste of space like corbyn, it's between them and their employer. It's a free country (well will be unless we vote in authoritarian excrement like Corbyn).

Totally agree that an oversupply of labour drives terms and conditions into the dust.

In a thriving and well run economy and country there will be , almost by definition , a shortage of labour

That’s a SHORTAGE
And guess what ? You will be able to work as few hrs as you want
Without undercutting anyone else

Oversupply of labour? Unemployment is at it's lowest in 40 years and the remoaners are constantly saying that with Brexit there won't be enough people to do the jobs!

Is there unemployment or isn’t there ?

Are there people on zero hr contracts or not , are there people afraid to lose their job and fearful if being able to buy a house etc
How many millions now are at university who 20 years ago would be having to find a job how many on housing benefit etc
Millions are unemployed but not classed as such

Unemployment is at its highest level it has been in Britain since certainly WW2,
Possibly before that

-kin 'ell I give up.

Incapacity benefits is another way they hide the true unemployment figures , just look around to see the truth
Don’t believe any statistic from the government , they are all lies

Successive governments have taken millions of people out of the unemployment figures , then also millions more go to uni etc
Can’t compare these figures across decades ,sorry

The official unemployment figures belie the true rate , in reality over 20% of all people between the ages of 16 and 65 are unemployed
Not the 3 % or whatever they claim it is

Blinking hell if they aren't actively seeking work regardless of the reason for it they are not part of the "supply of labour" so aren't involved in the "oversupply of labour". Just because someone has lost the argument you can't just pull in totally irrelevant things to desperately move the goalposts.

The # of people in actual employment and the # of people who aren't seeking work who you think could or SHOULD be (but aren't) is absolutely nothing to do with the competitive nature of the supply and demand for those posts needing filled and the number of people seeking to fill them!

Then how  do you truly know when unemployment is falling ?

There is only one way , wages are rising

Just checking it’s not about what you think.  or what the government tries to tell you

It’s very simple , if wages are not rising don’t believe a word of their  nonsense

My dad used to tell me that if he or one of his mates took a day of work, they felt self-conscious walking through the town because they stood out with so few able bodied men there. Most would be women.
They'd imagine people would be thinking why isn't he at work?

Go to any town these days and they're full of able-bodied blokes walking around. Don't tell me as a nation we've all suddenly become ill.

Anyone with any sense knows that unemployment is not what the official figures say

Now it’s quite simple, there will of course always be done unemployment even in  the best economy
In fact there should be as people move between jobs

But it is the nature of that unemployment , and the nature of employment that is important
The fact is that many millions are not working and not counted as unemployed

7 day week crippen, shift work, and some retired folk dont look like old folk
from back then.

my dad was same, and if we were ill and off school we had to stay in the house.

If unemployment was truly at the level that the government says

Then we would be in very good shape and wages correspondingly would be rising across all sectors
That hasn’t been the case for 10 , 20 years
Perhaps longer

unemployed as classified by the government is thoise claiming job seekers allowance,anyone getting made redundant living off savings,partners wages,taking early pension withdrawls,etc are not classified as unemployed and seeking work, I,m one of them, working shutdowns,maintenance down days etc,probably working 4 or 5 months a year but not signing on in between jobs

of course its the over supply of cheap labour thatds the problem,without it companies would have to offer decent contracts,wgaes,benefits etc to retain the people they,ve got and trained,skilled up etc

Many of those classified as in work are not working full time even though they would like to, so they have to claim working tax credits which is basically the dole for people who are not regarded as unemployed.

briliant stuff from the archbishop , telling the truth about the Spivs and their rotten bent system

Why do the the tory fanboys defend this rotten bent system , are they truly brainwashed completely ?

Never liked any of the As of C with their phoney bullshine

^ and hypocritical.  That black dude a while back was okay … or is he Arch of somewhere else?

Assumed office
25 January 2006
John Tucker Mugabi Sentamu (/ˈsɛntəmuː/;[4] Luganda: [sːéːntámû]; born 10 June 1949) is an Anglican bishop, serving as the 97th Archbishop of York, Metropolitan of York, and Primate of England. The position of Archbishop of York is the second most senior clerical position in the Church of England after that of Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of All England.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1492271/Sentamu-becomes-Britains-first-black-archbishop.html
.

First black Archbishop enthroned - Wednesday, 30 November 2005

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/north_yorkshire/4481796.stm
.

"What is it to be English?," he asked. "It is a very serious question. When you ask a lot of people in this country they are very vague.

"Multiculturalism has seemed to imply, wrongly for me, 'Let other cultures be allowed to express themselves but do not let the majority culture at all tell us its glories, its struggles, its joys, its pains'."

^^ 12:01AM BST 18 Jun 2005

Dr John Sentamu, an outspoken critic of racism who once lambasted the Church of England for being dominated by a white elite, became Britain's first black archbishop yesterday.