Really?
Continuing my series of one-word blog posts, really?
Vicky got a new job in September, and I'm pretty certain she isn't a migrant.
Posted by bart at Fri Nov 2 09:52:55 2007:
I guess they mean that the total of newly created job posts equal the total of immigrants that started working for the first time in the UK. Which basically means that for that job Vicky took up, someone else (or herself even) lost or quit his/her job. For example if Vicky replaced someone, then yes, that job is new to her but not to the economy : it is an existing job simply filled by someone else.
Posted by Ross at Fri Nov 2 10:03:08 2007:
Vicky's job is entirely new, the position didn't exist before she started in it. Therefore, she is an immigrant. Or, not.
I'll just quote from the Guardian's newsletter:
'The first part of the headline is drawn from an idiosyncratic interpretation of figures: the total of foreign workers has risen, the number of Britons in work has dropped, so therefore "foreign workers filled all the extra 620,000 jobs which were created during those four years". As a spokesman for the Department for Work and Pensions points out, this fails to allow for the decline in the British working-age population.'
I'll just quote from the Guardian's newsletter:
'The first part of the headline is drawn from an idiosyncratic interpretation of figures: the total of foreign workers has risen, the number of Britons in work has dropped, so therefore "foreign workers filled all the extra 620,000 jobs which were created during those four years". As a spokesman for the Department for Work and Pensions points out, this fails to allow for the decline in the British working-age population.'
