Only working class people are paid wages, My Dear Leader

Published: September 27, 2010 at 11:34pm

open-wide-its-a-big-one

If Joseph Muscat and his nitkellmu bil-Malti ghax ahna Maltin advisers were more familiar with idiomatic English, they would know from its very name that the ‘living wage’ is for the working class NOT the middle class.

It is working class people ONLY who are paid wages. Middle class people are paid salaries.

They are not paid salaries because they are middle class, of course – it’s just that middle class people tend to be in jobs where their pay-cheques come at the end of the month, and not at the end of the day or the end of the week.

And working class people tend to be in jobs where the pay-cheques (or more usually, the envelope of cash with a pay-slip attached) are handed out at the end of the day or the end of the week.

You see, that’s the trouble when you can’t speak a language really well or when you speak the Maltese version: you miss crucial information that’s embedded in even as few as two words.

Living wage: we know from the second word that we’re talking here about labourers and unskilled workers who are paid by the hour, by the day and by the week.

And then along comes Joseph Muscat and tells us that the middle classes need a living wage, when they don’t even have a wage in the first place. They have a salary.




129 Comments Comment

  1. ciccio2010 says:

    This evening, I heard Joseph Muscat clarify to the Bondi+ team that his court case about the car registration tax is in fact a “class action”.

    I think he is taking his class actions too far with his living wage proposals, in which he is in substance proposing to reduce the middle class to working class.

  2. Ian says:

    People who work in serious catering establishments (ex hotels) are paid at the end of the month….this includes even cleaners, dishwashers, waiters, housekeeping – these jobs are very ‘working class’ are they? Someone who washes plates cannot be called skilled can he? Or even so, it is not really a middle class profession, is it?

    I think your argument here – that working class people are all paid wages and middle class all paid salaries – is a bit too general.

    [Daphne – It isn’t. Wages are for labour, end of story. International hotels are the exception that proves the rule. Go down to the quarry and you’ll find that everyone’s paid on Friday, and casual workers like immigrants are paid by the day. Those are wages. Unskilled labour is implicit in the words ‘living wage’. You don’t need a giant brain to see that. Everybody else is considered capable of earning enough money to live on on the open market.]

    • Ian says:

      So a dishwasher at hotel XYZ. paid at the end of the month, is necessarily middle class, simply because of the timing of his paycheque?

      [Daphne – NO NO NO. Wages are for labour and are paid at the end of the day or the week. That’s standard. Managers, teachers, secretaries don’t earn wages but salaries. Sometimes, there are exceptions, as with your dishwasher, because large hotels have integrated systems and pay everyone at the same time. BUT, where the majority of employees are unskilled labour – as in factories – the wages are issued every Friday. For the umpteenth time, words have specific meanings and just because we don’t understand what the meaning is, it doesn’t follow that there is no such meaning. The word ‘wages’ has a particular meaning and is associated with a particular kind of work. That’s why all talk is of a living wage as opposed to a living salary. People on salaries are not at the bottom of the heap, but people on wages struggle.]

      • Ian says:

        Fair enough

      • Min Weber says:

        wage (wj)
        n.
        1. Payment for labor or services to a worker, especially remuneration on an hourly, daily, or weekly basis or by the piece.

        sal·a·ry (sl-r, slr)
        n. pl. sal·a·ries
        Fixed compensation for services, paid to a person on a regular basis.

        ——————————————————————————–

        [Middle English salarie, from Anglo-Norman, from Latin salrium, money given to Roman soldiers to buy salt, from neuter of salrius, pertaining to salt, from sl, salt; see sal- in Indo-European roots.]

      • John Schembri says:

        On this one Daphne you are out of touch, it is common practice that ‘pagi’ , wages or salaries are paid at the end of the month: in the manufacturing industry, hotels and building services sector.

        The only people who are paid cash in an envelope are the illegal workers; others who are legal are paid weekly or fortnightly with a cheque in an envelope.

        [Daphne – No, John, many people are still paid cash and they work legally. They are paid cash because they don’t have bank accounts, don’t want to queue at the bank to cash their cheque, and their employer accommodates them because he needs them. Many of these are labourers in the construction industry, where wages are comparably high, incidentally. The employers you mention above are all large organisations with integrated payment systems and take the ‘efficient’ (obviously) way of streamlining pay. Businesses which are smaller and able to accommodate their employees still pay wages on a weekly or fortnightly basis, because it’s what their employees want. As Karl Flores pointed out here, people on the minimum wage generally live from hand to mouth and in that scenario you can’t wait until the end of the month. True, it’s the same amount of money so why don’t they budget over a month instead of over a week? Yes, but the fact is they can’t and they don’t. Money paid every week acts as a self-restraint on spending.]

        Interestingly one will find out that sometimes people in a managerial position sometimes earn less and spend more hours at work than their workers who are entitled to overtime.

        [Daphne – I’ve known that for a long time, John.]

        Wages on a Friday in factories are a thing of the 80s.

      • John Schembri says:

        I have ‘colleagues’ with the minimum wage who are paid on a monthly wage or salary.

    • Tim Ripard says:

      I don’t think that hotels are such an exception. Maybe I’ve been away from the rock for too long now to appreciate the situation there but – for permanent employees – wages practically don’t exist, I would have thought.

      Everyone who is permanently employed gets a salary nowadays.

      I was getting mine directly transferred to my bank account 25 years ago, in Malta. Are factory workers really still paid in cash or by cheque at the end of the week?

      But, of course, you are absolutely correct in the distinction between wages and salaries.

      • Chris Ripard says:

        The factory I work at pays one-and-all monthly, direct into our bank accounts. They used to pay non admin people fortnightly but that was yonks ago.

        Although the veterans still think in terms of “paga” I hear that term less and less. Then again, due to automation, over my long years here, labourers have practically become a small minority here, so ‘salarji’ are the norm anyway.

    • David says:

      I feel I have to point out that ‘wages’ is in fact the term used to describe pay-by-the-hour, whereas a salary is not affected by number of hours worked, but divided in equal amounts for payment throughout the year.

      Neither one is dependent on how often they are given out.

      Essentially, salary is per year, wage is per hour. Nice and simple.

    • Karl Flores says:

      I’ve always known it to be the way Daphne’s saying.

      As far as I know wages were paid every week, mostly, because those earning such wages couldn’t afford to wait until the end of the month.

      • Karl Flores says:

        And hardly any wage earners had bank accounts, then. Nowadays the trend is that your salary/wage goes directly into your bank account. Those with miserable wages get a cheque/cash per week, unfortunately.

  3. Min Weber says:

    Qisu t-tifel jaghmel il-priedka tal-milied!

  4. K Farrugia says:

    “… it’s just that middle class people tend to be in jobs where their pay-cheques come at the end of the month…”

    Given the level of detail you expect from “My Dear Leader”, I think it is opportune to note that government employees (who are mostly middle class (?), and amount to half of the working population, according to Lino Spiteri) do not receive their pay-cheques at the end of the month, but rather every four weeks (the next government pay-cheque is due some time in mid-October, for example).

    [Daphne – Every four weeks is every month in payment terms, as distinct from ‘the last day of the month’. And every four weeks is a salary, not wages.]

    For the sake of accuracy which you expect from Muscat, this is significant in so far that government employees receive 13 cheques during a calendar year, and half of the working population receive their salaries at some time other than the end of the month, contrary to popular belief spread by non-working people.

    [Daphne – K Farrugia, they might receive 13 cheques instead of 12, but the average payment is the same. And it doesn’t change the fact that a cheque every four weeks is a salary and not wages. ‘Contrary to the popular belief spread by non-working people’: I have worked for almost 30 years.]

    • If you are employed by someone to do a job, you get money in exchange for the work you do, no less no more. Can someone explain to Dr Joseph Muscat what ‘tax bands’ and ‘children allowance’ are all about.

      We don’t get to take home all of the money we earn.

      So if there are two employees doing the same job for the same salary, one is married with children and the other is single, although they earn the same gross income their net income will differ.

      A married wage earner will also receive ‘children allowance’ which is calculated on his/her income.

      Tax bands in Malta have always been substantially below those in most other industrialised countries, and they have been significantly reduced over the past few years.

      The results of the uncomplicated existing system have the same effect as Dr Muscat’s gimmick ‘the living wage’.

      • Katrin says:

        Tax bands in Malta are not “substantially lower” than in most industrialised countries.

        We pay roughly 10% in Germany, with the same taxable income in Malta we would pay more than 12%, because unlike the German tax system, the Maltese tax system discriminates against foreigners, including foreign spouses.

        And no, the cost of living in Germany is not higher than in Malta. Quite the opposite in fact.

      • Vanni says:

        @ Katrin
        ‘And no, the cost of living in Germany is not higher than in Malta. Quite the opposite in fact.’

        Do you have facts and figures that can substantiate that?

        You may have forgotten unification tax, higher health insurance (15% vs 10%), church tax, higher rent costs, water and drainage costs, garbage collection cost, land tax, higher insurance premiums, higher VAT, higher TV licences, higher fuel costs………

    • K Farrugia says:

      @ Daphne:

      “Contrary to the popular belief spread by non-working people: I have worked for almost 30 years.”

      I was, obviously, not referring to you with “non-working people”. It is quite evident from your columns that you do not live off your husband’s salary.

      I was referring to most of the non-working housewives within the lower class of the society; those who are uninterested in their husband’s finances and whom they think receive their pay cheque at the very end of the month. Such housewives would probably not possess their own personal bank account, such that if something happens to their husband (death, injury, infidelity), they would find themselves in some deep trouble.

      This mentality is only one of the disgraceful shortcomings that exist within our society.

  5. Pat I says:

    Daphne, I, too, beg to differ, on this one, as I know dozens of people, doing menial jobs, NOT in hotels, and they are paid salaries.LLike bars, restaurants, canteens, hospitals,etc. So these people would not be entitled to this, said, living wage? Nahseb aqta` x`tahwid gej.

    • R. Camilleri says:

      Some labourers might get a salary, but no middle class job pays a wage.

      • Joseph A Borg says:

        This is similar to rkotta-irkotta but the subject is more serious. Do we need to split hairs on this? I understand what Muscat wanted to say.

  6. anthony says:

    I have read the entire 20-minute speech delivered by the elder Miliband yesterday in Manchester.

    I thought it was very good. It seems to me that the Labour Party has picked the wrong leader.

    David quoted the party’s post-WWI leader John Clynes:

    “We come into parliament not to practise a class war but to end it”.

    In conclusion. The current PL leadership with its harping on living wages and classes is, at least, 120 years behind the Catholic Church and 90 years behind the British Labour Party in its policies.

    Very progressive indeed.

  7. Joseph Micallef says:

    On Bondi+, Muscat’s words about his distinction between Gonzi’s alleged attempt to influence the judiciary and his documented a priori contempt of the judicary in relation to any future ruling regarding the VAT on car registration, suggest that he seems to be fixated on the class divide and this apparently goes beyond income; Gonzi’s is contempt because it is about a politician, but his is irrelevant because it is about ‘common mortals’.

  8. Albert Farrugia says:

    The meaning of a word is the result of a tacit “agreement” among its users. Example (if you allow me a rude expression). The word “mohxi” in Maltese simply means “stuffed”. The proverbial “tigiega mohxija” in Maltese means simply “stuffed chicken”.

    Yet all speakers of Maltese are aware that “mohxi” means something else altogether. Anyone who insists on the original meaning of the word will be simply considered out of sync with society.

    [Daphne – You’re wrong about ‘mohxi’, Albert. It has exactly the same meaning, sexual and otherwise, as ‘stuffed’. But we still talk about stuffed vegetables while telling those who annoy us to get stuffed. Being too ‘delicate’ to say ‘mohxi’ is akin to saying ‘skuzi xkupa’.]

    In modern usage, “wage” and “salary” have become interchangeable.

    [Daphne – Wrong again. They might be interchangeable in Malta, where people don’t really speak English, but they are not interchangeable. The prime minister isn’t paid a wage, and nor is HSBC’s CEO. If you call what they earn ‘wages’, you’ll raise a few smirks at your expense. Generally, I find that people who speak about their salary as a ‘wage’ – in Malta – come from backgrounds where members of their family were paid wages, not salaries, and they don’t realise there’s a distinction. It’s all ‘paga’ to them. It’s the same with the expression ‘niehu f’idejja’ as a description of pay net of tax and NI. That’s because the cash was literally put into their hands.]

    I am not aware of anyone working legally who is paid cash in an envelope on Friday, as was normal up till about 25 years ago. In any case, what is the difference?

    [Daphne – Many people still are, and they expect it. You would be astonished to know just how many don’t have a bank account. But these are ways and mores. Even payment by cheque is now stone-age practice elsewhere in Europe. Your salary goes straight into your bank account – no cheques.]

    A wage or a salary is the reward you get for your work as agreed with your employer. Call it living wage, living salary, what’s the difference?

    [Daphne – A huge difference. Words have meanings and English has so many of them because the meanings are differentiated even though roughly similar. Unlike Maltese, it is a very precise language: where we have ‘sabiha’, English has hundreds of permutations to suit. They are not interchangeable. It’s the same with wages and salaries. A native English speaker takes the first to be payment for jobs that are on the more menial side and would never say ‘David Cameron earns a a large wage.’]

    • Scerri S says:

      “A wage is a compensation, usually financial, received by workers in exchange for their labor.
      Compensation in terms of wages is given to workers and compensation in terms of salary is given to employees. Compensation is a monetary benefit given to employees in return for the services provided by them.”

      Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage

  9. David Gatt says:

    Daphne, I tend to agree with Albert Farrugia. In modern usage, “wage” and “salary” have indeed become interchangeable.

    [Daphne – Excuse me for raising my voice, but NO, THEY HAVE NOT. IN MALTA PERHAPS, BUT THAT’S BECAUSE YOU ALMOST NEVER SEE THE WORD ‘SALARY’ USED.]

    The term “wages” is defined in the Employment and Industrial Relations Act as follows:

    “wages” means remuneration or earnings, payable by an
    employer to an employee and includes any bonus payable under article 23 other than any bonus or allowance related to performance or production.

    No mention of payment by the end of the week or payment by the end of the month.

    [Daphne – Calculated on an hourly basis and usually paid by the day or month. Salaries, on the other hand, are calculated on a yearly basis and are paid on the last Friday (generally) of every month. They are not tied to the number of hours worked.]

    Furthermore, you are also implying that the national minimum wage in Malta is not applicable to salaries … which is plainly not the case.

    [Daphne – I am not implying anything of the sort. The person who is paid the minimum wage, even if it is paid to him every month, has his working hours strictly tied to the hourly rate that makes up the minimum wage, which tells you that – effectively – he is paid by the hour.]

    • Karl Flores says:

      Although they might seem to be interchangeable, wage/salary: since it is a fact that a wage has been known to be paid every week for such a long time, it is now established and remains to be known as is.

  10. LG says:

    Many years ago, as a student, I worked as “wages clerk”. We used to distinguish between wages and salaries depending on how the employee’s earnings were calculated.

    Those who were paid according to the hours they clocked in were paid a wage.

    The wage was actually based on an hourly rate.

    On the other hand, people paid to “do the job” irrespective of the hours they put in, were paid a salary. And yes, wages were paid every two weeks while salaries were paid on the last day of the month.

  11. claire abela triganza says:

    It-tahwid li nhawwdu meta nitkellmu. Il-bolla minflok kontribuzzjoni. Anke bl-ingliz smajtha “stamps” minflok “contributions”.

    • John Schembri says:

      Forsi int ma’ tiftakarx, Claire, imma ghadni niftakar meta darba mort naqdi lil-imghallem ta’ missieri nixtrilu l-bolol jew bolli u beda jwahhalhom fuq il-kotba tax-xoghol(?) tal-lavranti tieghu.

      Mid-dehra kien ikun hemm spezzjonijiet ghal-gharrieda min-nies tad-dipartiment tax-xoghol, li kienu jiflu l-kotba mimlijin bolol.

      [Daphne – Ghalhekk is-sigurta socjali bil-Malti hija ‘il-bolla’.]

  12. Charles Cauchi says:

    Actually the distinction between wages and salaries is not simply based on when it is paid, but on how it is calculated.

    A wage can be paid every week, every two weeks, every four weeks or every month but the calculation is based on an hourly rate.

    A salary on the other hand is based on an agreed annual sum divided by 12, and each month is one-twelfth of the agreed annual remuneration. A monthly salary is paid in equal amounts, irrespective of the number of hours worked in the month.

    As always, there are exceptions to this rule, but in general that is the defining difference between a wage and a salary.

  13. Paul Borg says:

    All leaders in the world are talking about globalization, the “global village” and Interdependence of countries but Joseph Muscat in his NEW political season still talks about class divide. How sad, very sad!

  14. Alan says:

    If he were remotely serious about any of this hogwash, he should just say, putting any discussion of the logic aside, that he will double the minimum wage.

    Full of hot air and throwing bombastic-sounding ideas around is all it seems he is good for. Everything at arms-length this fellow. In Maltese we simply say ‘bla ba*t’.

    Divorce – yes, but not I will decide.

    Living wage – yes, but let the employer’s decide.

    Figures.

    Nice tie – yes, Michelle decided.

  15. Alex Plays On says:

    Interchangeable? No way!

    Here’s to prove Daphne’s point:

    “A salary is a form of periodic payment from an employer to an employee, which may be specified in an employment contract. It is contrasted with piece wages, where each job, hour or other unit is paid separately, rather than on a periodic basis.

    From the point of a business, salary can also be viewed as the cost of acquiring human resources for running operations, and is then termed personnel expense or salary expense. In accounting, salaries are recorded in payroll accounts.”

    Taken from Wiki.

    Now, generally (and yes, for a change Malta is no exception), ‘workers’ are paid wages. “L-Imghallem” would check how many hours of work his labourers would have performed and then pay according to a stipulated hourly rate.

    Just because Joesph Muscat can’t tell the difference does not mean that all his followers should try to make his ignorance sound right, or give anyone the right to say that word’s with significantly different meanings can be used interchangeably. Does Joseph Muscat have a wage?

    Now just get back to work because you will get an hour’s worth off your ‘salary’!

  16. anthony says:

    The words wage and salary are not interchangeable in English.

    I admit there might be grey areas but interchangeable? No way.

    Let us keep in mind that there are, at least, a quarter of a million words in the English language. In this sense the Maltese language is pathetically poor.

  17. Frans Sammut says:

    I have followed your discussion on linguistics, both Maltese and English, with great interest.

    I give great importance to language as a means of human communication both on the intellectual level and common day usage.

    I must say you are very attentive when using English but rather sloppy when commenting on the Maltese.

    For instance your views on Maltese synonyms leave much to be desired since Maltese is much richer in this area than you seem to think.

    Given your command of English I would expect you could adequately specify what you mean, exactly, when you declare that citizens who vote Labour are sub-literate morons.

    [Daphne – Did I say that? I didn’t.]

    It is a declaration charged with meanings and it may be opportune to elucidate further on their significance and implications. A clarification would not be out of order. If you really knew what you meant in the first place.

    • Frans Sammut says:

      You must have a short memory.

      It was only five days back that you wrote the following: “Sub-literate morons with a vote, the lot of them – and then when I say that Labour invariably rides to power on the back of ignorance and lanzit, they go crazy. But it’s true.”

      [Daphne – I think you’ll find that I was speaking about the people writing in to support Dom Mintoff. But then you’ll probably agree with me on that.]

      This is the declaration I asked you to elucidate, particularly the part “sub-literate morons”.

      I expect an answer, if you have one.

      [Daphne – Once a teacher, always a teacher, Frans.]

      • Frans Sammut says:

        No amount of evasive action, on your part, will deflect my curiosity as to whether you were classifying, for instance me and who knows how many others as sub-literate morons, and Mintoff has nothing to do with this.

        First you deny you wrote the excerpt I brought to your attention, now you seek to change the context.

        I’m not writing as a teacher but as a citizen who is eager to know whether he is being publicized on your blog as a “sub-literate moron”. Why are you daunted by this simple question?

        [Daphne – Are you a sub-literate moron? No? Then what are you worried about? Perhaps I should have classified Labour supporters as men who try to take guns on planes and then wonder why they’re stopped at security, if that would make you happier.]

      • Frans Sammut says:

        Your rhetorical question goes a long way to answer my question. What you saying, repeating rather, is that you may advertise me as a “sub-literate moron” because of my electoral preferences.

        I resent that and am advising you, madam, that we will settle the matter in a court of law.

        [Daphne – Well, Frans, do remember to leave any guns at the door.]

      • David Buttigieg says:

        Hello Frans,

        Not allowed to write under about five different names here as you do in timesofmalta.com are you, to pretend to drum up support for people who think it’s OK to carry guns around?

        Let’s not even go into being dumb enough to try boarding a plane with one.

        Oh well, instead we can always insist on nudist beaches on Comino while sucking up to North Korea.

        “Sub-literate morons” – No, sir, I don’t think ‘sub-literate’ is fair.

      • Dem-ON says:

        Frans Sammut said:

        “Given your command of English I would expect you could adequately specify what you mean, exactly, when you declare that citizens who vote Labour are sub-literate morons.”

        and:

        “I resent that and am advising you, madam, that we will settle the matter in a court of law.”

        I wonder how Frans Sammut will prove to a Court of law that he votes Labour.

      • TROY says:

        Is this the same Frans Sammut who used to teach at Sir Temi Zammit?

      • Min Weber says:

        David

        I wonder whether these people have done anything to you.

        Anything you might want to share with us?

      • Alan says:

        “..am advising you, madam, that we will settle the matter in a court of law.”

        Geez, how pedantically pathetic. Are you by any chance retired and is this is how you generate your thrill of the day?

      • David Buttigieg says:

        @Min Weber

        Who are “these people” that you are referring to?

      • Josephine says:

        Frans Sammut seems to have forgotten Charles Mangion stating publicly “Dawk ghandhom xi haga hazina fid-DNA in-Nazzjonalisti!”, and George Vella quoting him (for emphasis) shortly afterwards.

        Oh, and another thing – Frans Sammut is lucky that there are stills court of law where he may address any grievances. In 1984, (Labour) prime minister Karmenu Mifsud Bonnici was accompanying the same crowd that smashed them up, signing autographs immediately after the rampage, on their way to the next “smashing” stop – the Curia.

      • Min Weber says:

        @ David Buttigieg

        “These people” = Frans Sammut and his sons.

    • Rover says:

      Oh dear, here we go again getting all offended and hot under the collar. There is no escaping the facts Mr Sammut. We have all seen the comments in the recent contributions by Labour morons (your words not mine).

    • Dem-ON says:

      Daphne, do you mind if I post this here for the benefit of your readers?

      http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/2010/09/23/note-to-all-mintoffjani-hodor-who-cant-write-spell-or-think/

      I am morally convinced that this way, only sub-literate morons can make false claims of what you said and the context in which you said it.

  18. red nose says:

    A simple question to which I hope to receive a simple answer: this morning I read that a third of Maltese households, watch TV by satellite. To my mind (perhaps I am wrong) this practice costs a packet – well – if this is so, will these people receive the “living wage” being talked about by PL?

    • C Falzon says:

      Watching TV by satellite may cost anywhere between almost nothing and a few hundred euros a month. To watch the free channels there is only the one time cost of the satellite dish and receiver – about one or two hundred euro in total and no monthly costs.
      To date that is the only way to watch satellite legally in Malta.

      Those who watch it illegally have three options:
      1. buy a foreign card such as Sky Italia and pay them the monthly fee
      2. buy the stolen service from one of the so called ‘card sharing’ providers
      3. if one has the technical skills and patience one can break the codes of various pay channels and watch them for free

      The first option is the typically (but not necessarily) the most expensive.
      The second has a cost similar to that of Go and Melita (depending on what channels you want to have can be considerably more or less)
      The third is practically free.

      • Pat says:

        Is using a foreign service illegal?

      • C Falzon says:

        Pat, yes, it is illegal because the foreign operators do not have a licence to sell their service in Malta.

        They could, of course, apply for such a licence and perhaps be granted one in which case it would become legal. That might happen soon actually but as of today there is no foreign operator licensed to broadcast in Malta.

  19. Min Weber says:

    Daphne, I do not agree with you that Maltese is not precise. Maltese is precise, but few want to exert themselves to seek out that precision.

    It is a question of mental laziness. This is the enemy you are fighting. The same mental laziness which brings people not to see the semantic difference between “salary” and “wage”.

    I have quoted two dictionary entries above. I will quote another one here:

    sti·pend (stpnd, -pnd)
    n.
    A fixed and regular payment, such as a salary for services rendered or an allowance.

    ——————————————————————————–

    [Middle English stipendie, from Old French, from Latin stpendium, soldier’s pay, from *stipipendium : stips, stip-, a small payment + pendere, to weigh, pay; see suspend.]

    It would therefore seem that a stipend may be both a salary and a wage. A salary might include a wage, but a wage would never include a salary.

    This semantic relationship – if I perceive it correctly – is known as hypernymy.

  20. Antoine Vella says:

    From what one or two Labour sympathisers have said, here on this blog and elsewhere, it appears that Joseph Muscat’s ‘living wage’ is just a fancy buzzword for ‘pay rise’.

    Basically, what Joseph Muscat is saying is therefore: “Vote for us and we’ll see you get a pay rise”. Not terribly innovative as a gimmick.

    • Milone says:

      And, of course, he’s not going to tell us how he plans to finance that pay rise. Why bother? “Innehhu l-VAT” worked well enough as a battle cry.

  21. If I am a worker at a factory and I work 40hours a week, I get a wage. My manager who works more than 40 hours a week (his working hours are not stipulated in his contract and he doesn’t get overtime payments) receives a salary.

  22. Albert Farrugia says:

    The BBC reporting Ed Milliband’s keynote speech at Labour Conference today:

    “It’s wrong”, he says, that the banker can earn in a day what the care worker earns in a year.” (end of quote)

    THAT is the simple, plain, justification for the living wage or salary.

    [Daphne – WHY is it wrong that a banker can earn in a day what the care worker earns in a year? Why is it any skin off the care worker’s nose if a banker earns in a day what s/he earns in a year?]

    • Ian says:

      Ed Miliband clearly doesn’t understand market forces.

      There are far more people capable of doing what a care worker does than what a “banker” (obviously referring to those higher up in the banking sector, with far greater responsibilities than depositing customers’ cash) does.

      Also, all that about employers ‘exploiting’ immigrants by charging them low wages and thus lowering wages for everyone else…what bullocks. Immigrants’ wages are a perfect representation of market forces, of a pure market. If that lowers wages for other British workers, so be it. It means the same work is getting done for less. The country, in effect, gets richer.

      • Joseph A Borg says:

        Your explanation is not good enough. There are many qualified to do the banker’s job than there are posts.

        More often than not, those that make the grade either have better connections, know how to network better or have the classical parrinu.

        [Daphne – You’ve just contradicted yourself. Good connections and networking are PART of the requirement. So no, there are NOT many who are qualified to do the job.]

        Some undeniably are more qualified than the rest and in the end, there can only be one. To say that the banker has higher responsibilities so he has to be paid more implies that a nurse in ITU should be paid more than the banker.

        [Daphne – Nurses actually have few responsibilities. When a nurse does her job badly, maybe people are uncomfortable for a while until she gets sacked. When bankers do their job badly, the entire world goes into crisis – as we have seen.]

        You are trying to justify the greed of the top earners in wanting to get more of the pie for themselves… You always end up fudging actual value of work done and piles of money shovelled, depending on how you want to mislead the audience.

        [Daphne – No, Joseph. I’m a liberal. If bankers can make more money than nurses, jolly good luck to them. If it were as easy as you say to become a banker, then more people would be doing it, but they’re not. It’s a hell of a lot easier to become a nurse.]

        According to wikipedia’s GINI table we are one of the most egalitarian societies (from the limited data available) but I’m suspicious of that reference. The richest 1% here finds it easier to invest their worth out of the government’s view… and they still like to look middle class.

        [Daphne – Oh, do please stop quoting Wikipedia.]

      • Joseph A Borg says:

        daph you should re-read what I wrote — or leave it as is as you should be paying more attention to your deadlines… not that my opinion counts for much in the general scheme of things.

    • R. Camilleri says:

      This is a rather unfortunate comparison. There are many valid reasons why bankers’ excessive remuneration is bad for the economy. However these reasons are unrelated to what the care worker earns.

      • Joseph A Borg says:

        there are many valid reasons why a care worker’s pitiable remuneration*. However both are tied to a limited pie. If the people who have leverage want a bigger share, then those without leverage can either suck it or spill blood…

        *shall we demean them further and call it a wage now, you know since class is back in fashion

        [Daphne – I believe the Malta Communist Party has been resuscitated. They’re looking for members.]

      • Milone says:

        Since when have investment banks employed care workers?
        Your pie is only limited by your imagination.

    • Stefan Vella says:

      THAT is no justification at all. Daphne’s comment is spot on.

      Miliband’s statement displays a worrying lack of free market economics. I can safely assume that he has no clue of simple concepts such as “supply and demand” which are also applied to the human resources market.

      Life is not fair, and I for one, am not ready to carry the self-entitled, living wage, lazy buggers to make it fairer.

      If this concept does actually get implemented, I want, nay demand, a living wage on par with Muscat’s fireworks business’ gross profits. Fair enough?

    • David Buttigieg says:

      “Why is it any skin off the care worker’s nose if a banker earns in a day what s/he earns in a year?”

      The word envy comes to mind!

    • Milone says:

      @Albert Farrugia

      “THAT is the simple, plain, justification for the living wage or salary.”

      Please explain that non-sequitur. How is a ‘living wage’ going to reduce the income difference between the proverbial banker and the stereotypical care worker?

    • ciccio2010 says:

      @Albert Farrugia
      THAT is simply politics of envy.

  23. Lino Cert says:

    Let me get this right, I’m paid every week, does that make me working class? Hawwadni ha nifmhek.

    • Joseph A Borg says:

      lino, class distinctions are so passe, it’s all about income difference now and it’s ok to let a bit of yesteryear’s bigotry get through and demean wage workers with a distinctly feudal description.

      [Daphne – Actually, what is passe is the patronising attitude that people in menial jobs can’t do anything to help themselves and so must be raised up on a pyre of bankers and capitalists. The contemporary reality is that people in menial jobs are finding ways out for themselves, through effort and ambition, which is why most menial jobs in Malta today are filled by desperate Africans. Please don’t tell me that, come the revolution, the Maltese slackers and bums who can’t be bothered to do anything about their prospects will suddenly turn into bank managers and teachers. I don’t think so.]

      • Joseph ABorg says:

        who said so? are per chance implying that desperate africans and maltese who for various reasons end up doing “menial jobs” aren’t worthy of fair and respectable remuneration?

        If you’re so envious of those people sweating over nasty jobs because they were stupid enough to end up at a dead end-job, you should also be envious of all the spoilt rich brats prattling around at posh restaurants greasing their connections and flaunting the expensive education their parents paid for them…

        I doubt anybody here expects bums who do no valuable work should be paid anything more than survival money. But I’m sure it’s not the case for many couples trying to build a family and others who lacked the foresight and a parent’s parachute…

        [Daphne – I have a couple of Che T-shirts in a cupboard somewhere. I’ll drop them off if you let me know where.]

      • Castro says:

        I love your way of thinking Joseph.

        To enjoy a delicious steak at a posh restaurant (read: decent restaurant as per Maltese standards) you must be spoilt rich due to connections and financial help from wealthy parents.

        It’s never the case that their are people out there who are actually working their ass off.

      • Joseph A Borg says:

        you’re still insisting on the communist bogey man daphne?

        [Daphne – No, you are, leading me to mock you for it.]

      • Joseph A Borg says:

        you’re right: I was tired and started taking things too seriously for my own health…

      • Milone says:

        Bums who do no valuable work should be sacked. I can think of more than a few cluttering up various government departments. That might leave the way clear for people who actually do want to work.

  24. xejnsew.com says:

    Pamela Hansen(32 minutes ago)
    A lot of this is pathetic.
    So what if Consuelo did mention a domestic at the Caruana Galizia household at a dinner party?
    So what if she was a friend of Saviour Balzan, or anyone working on Maltastar?
    Are people now going to be censored on who their friends are and what is discussed at dinner parties?
    And whose business is it if she wants to ‘lick Gianella’s butt’? That is only of interest to gossip mongers.
    The only things I found worth mentioning in a court room were that she engaged her partner Robert Musumeci as a court expert and the question of property deals in Gozo, as they raise conflict of interest issues in her capacity as a magistrate.

    And whose business is it if she wants to ‘lick Gianella’s butt’? That is only of interest to gossip mongers.

    mmm it is interesting to know that the magistrate is a very good friend with the lawyer!… it has to be very close to lick someones butt!

    [Daphne – I’m guessing she missed the bit, because The Times didn’t report it, on how she is not suing about my accusations of sex with policemen, double adultery, and more, and that she gave a declaration in court that she will NOT proceed against me on those scores – so that she can’t be cross examined about them. Which is, of course, an admission.]

    • Grezz says:

      OK, so if it is a tacit admission that yes, she did sleep with policemen, how is Joe Public going to put his mind at rest that she never sat on a case (excuse the pun) in which maybe one (or more) of such policemen was the prosecuting officer?

    • Grezz says:

      So this poor excuse for a woman does not find your “accusations of sex with policemen, double adultery, and more, and that she gave a declaration in court that she will NOT proceed against” you “on those scores”, AND YET, she found that what other people would consider trivialities to be defamatory. U le! What sort or a person is she? Then again, maybe I’d rather not have an answer …

      • LG says:

        I am by no means referring to Pamela Hansen, but most of the commentators who write on timesofmalta.com really need to just zip it!

        I find most of these comments so out of place, written by people who have no other way to show off than to air their idiocy on timesofmalta.com.

        People with no idea of Maltese law write like they’re Malta’s Perry Mason. People who have never entered a hospital, if not maybe as a patient, write as though they’ve just won the Nobel Prize for medicine – oh how it irks me.

        Really, timesofmalta.com should remove this commenting option.

        It may be a pastime for people with nothing better to do, but comments posted can be somewhat misleading because they are written with no research or knowledge of the topic, which in my opinion, often undermines the actual message of the article itself.

        It is enough to read Grech Mintoff’s comments to Andrew Borg Cardona’s articles to understand what I mean.

        I know this has nothing to do with this post. I just had to get it off my chest.

    • La Redoute says:

      So, it appears that Magistrate Herrera has tacitly admitted to having had sex with the young son of a business contact while still living with her husband.

      I thought this was a defamation case. How can someone of such a poor reputation be defamed?

    • Leon Scerri says:

      Veru jew mhux veru li konvenju gie iffirmat sew min Dr. Carmelo Galea kif ukoll mil l-Magistrat Scerri Herrera biex jinxtara il-fond Casa Cordina, Msida ghal Lm175,000 kif juri hawn taht:

      22 ta’ Gunju, 2005 – Del Petra Holdings wieghdet u obbligat ruhha li tassenja u titrasferixxi lill-komparenti Galea (Dr. Carmela Galea u martu) u lil Laurence Scerri u martu d-drittijiet u 1-obbligi kollha naxxenti favur il-kumpanija mill-konvenju datat 15 ta’ Ottubru 2004 hawn fuq citat relattiv ghal-fond Casa Cordina fi Triq Nazju Falzon, l-Imsida … versu l-prezz ta’ Lm175,000 (test mill-kuntratt tal-10 ta’ Novembru 2005 – 124036/2005).

      NENFASIZZA, DAN IL-KONVENJU GIE FFIRMAT MILL-MAGISTRAT CONSUELO SCERRI HERRERA U DR. C. GALEA META HI KIENET QED TIPPRESEDI KAWZI LI DR. C. GALEA KIEN PARTI FIHOM U QABEL MA GHAMLET IT-TERMINAZZJONI TAL-‘COMMUNITY OF ACQUESTS’

  25. Albert Farrugia says:

    “If that (lower salary paid to immigrants) lowers wages for other British workers, so be it.”

    Says Ian, above.

    Well, dear Ian, that is precisely why we have Labour and Social-Democrat parties – to fight against ideas which people like you would implement, given the chance.

    If market forces means simply the exploitation of cheap labour, well…the “red” parties in Europe are there to say “oh no you don’t”.

    • Antoine Vella says:

      Albert, in Malta. the so-called ‘red’ party was itself responsible for exploiting workers – see the various military-style labour battalions Mintoff invented. if you’re old enough you’ll also remember that government employees were on occasion forced to work for free, giving up their wages/salaries fora day to show their gratefulness to the Great Leader.

    • Ian says:

      The word exploitation has been grossly abused. Sending children into the coal mines was exploitation.

      The wages agreed by employers and employees (however low they may be) are not cases of exploitation – it’s simply supply and demand.

      If the employee doesn’t like it, then he may leave and find work elsewhere. His wage is simply dependent on how many employers want what he can offer, and how many others like him can offer employers what he can.

      There is nothing ‘unfair’ about that.

      What is unfair is asking the employer to pay anything above this beautiful phenomenon of market clearing.

    • David Buttigieg says:

      And yet Albert, left wing and socialist parties are the most pro EU and in favour of free movement of labour within the EU.

      Of course you cannot include Joseph Muscat’s lot which are socialist only in name.

      In practice they are right wing and extremely conservative.

  26. liberal says:

    It is in the interest of every entrepreneur to postpone the dreaded pay day to the latest possible date.

    Since most entrepreneurs run their business on an overdraft, they save money on interest this way. Also, at month end, they are usually paid by their credit customers so they have more cash to spare.

    Today the weekly wage is less and less popular. All the big factories have stopped paying their employees weekly. They have also stopped cheques and gone for direct bank transfers.

    It is only the small shops and small businesses who still pay their employees this way and obviously all work which is not registered with the ETC.

  27. Raymond says:

    Awn hariglek Dephnie mil isptar il Perit issa ghoqod atenta ghax il mard li xtaqtlu jiegi fuqek ja Qahba

    • Rover says:

      There you go Mr Sammut, another sub-literate Labour moron.

    • Joseph A Borg says:

      Raymond, either you’re trolling or you need some manners … and you’re not doing yourself many favours. You are the type of person that keeps me away from Labour.

    • H.P. Baxxter says:

      Dan ma nahsibx li seta’ jaqra “Samurai”, Frans Sammut, ahseb u jara jifhmu.

      • Min Weber says:

        I cannot understand how a brilliant author such as Sammut can find himself in such embroilment. Unless there is some deeply personal rift between him and Daphne and/or him and David Buttigieg. I am nonplussed, to say the least.

        Why should Sammut defend people who are LITERALLY (not LITERARY) morons? This is beyond me.

        He is not defending some symbolic representation of the underdog, but defending very real members of the underclass.

        I understand he wrote about the French Revolution. But whereas that Revolution did make use of the underclass to do the dirty work, it was conceived, directed and executed (a word I use also because of the intended pun) by the bourgeois, particularly lawyers.

        Why someone who is all the time eulogizing the French Revolution and its ideals and (bourgeois) Vassalli and his (nation-building) ideals, and condemning the cage-like qualities of Malta (due, inter alia, to the underclass) – why this someone should then roll in the metaphorical mud to defend the most obtuse members of that (under)class, to defend their utter stupidity, I cannot understand.

        There must be something deeper here.

      • La Redoute says:

        Maybe Raymond doesn’t vote Labour.

      • David Buttigieg says:

        “I cannot understand how a brilliant author such as Sammut”

        BRILLIANT? Well, if you say so.

      • La Redoute says:

        @Min Weber

        Deeply personal rift? That might explain why Frans Sammut posted a comment on timesofmalta.com purportedly in defence of the judiciary, having got hold of the wrong end of the stick.

        He appears to think that the magistrate in question has a good reputation to defend. Maybe he hadn’t noticed that she has breached the boundaries of professional behaviour more than once. Or maybe he thinks that a penchant for pussy pelmets excuses gross indecency.

      • Min Weber says:

        @ La Redoute: I couldn’t agree more with you. Not only the magistrate, but her brother too, are over the top thinking they are entitled to God-knows-what.

        In reality, the God-knows-what applies to what goes on behind the scenes.

        I am very concerned by the fact that Jose’ Herrera has been an MP for 14 years now, and nobody has ever had the bright idea of investigating some of his by-the-side dealings.

        Hadn’t it been for Daphne, who drew attention to the controversial behaviour of one of the Herreras, these people would be just ignored. I wonder whether our journalists know the meaning of “sleuthing”.

        @ David Buttigieg

        You have already publicly expressed your view that you have read one book in Maltese and gave up on the literature in that language. So I really do not want to go over all this again with you. You have never read the books written by Sammut, so your opinion about his works is worthless.

        Do you know why -273 degrees Celsius is an important temperature? Because it is Absolute Zero (in Kelvins). That is also the worth of anybody’s opinion on books they haven’t read, or about which they haven’t read anything. Absolute Zero.

        Actually, as a Maltese, it hurts me that someone should publicly flaunt his ignorance of his native land’s literature.

      • David Buttigieg says:

        @Min,

        Well actually you are right, I never managed to get my hands on any of his recent stupendous works of literature, and the chances are I never will.

        Contrary to what you said, I have attempted to read Maltese literature, by several ‘brilliant’ Maltese authors as you would put it, but rarely managed to finish them, finding them amateur at best and very boring.

        If you do happen to know of any you honestly believe worth reading please do let me know, I may give it another try.

        Also, I happen to judge a person’s brilliance on more then writing ‘brilliant books’ by Maltese standards, and just because I find Maltese literature so dreadfully boring does not mean I do not read a variety of real literature, I do and feel quite as competent as you would have me believe you are.

        Unless of course you believe the normal “standards” of literature do not apply to Maltese literature, you know, like comparing a book written by a child to one by an adult.

        Can you honestly even begin to compare “Samuraj” to books like “The Sound and the Fury” or “1984” or even “The little Prince”? Well if so, bully for you! (And those are not even greats)

        http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/2008/12/22/a-la-frans-sammut/ – rather excellent description of old Frans’s literary genius.

        “Actually, as a Maltese, it hurts me that someone should publicly flaunt his ignorance of his native land’s literature.”

        Oh grow up and let’s not get back into a Maltese lit debate again.

      • Min Weber says:

        @ David Buttigieg

        Yes, I would compare “Samuraj” to “1984”.

        Still, you have not argued your position out of this contradiction:

        in prior comments you said you read only O Level syllabus books in Maltese and decided to give up on Maltese literature; still you feel you can generalize about ALL of Maltese literature.

        You might be justified in saying that it is not to your liking (which is subjective) but not that it is amateurish (which is close to an objective statement). To make objective statements, you must have studied, analyzed and have a wide culture on the subject.

        This is one of the most pertinent message given by Daphne on this blog. That opinions are just opinions, unless backed by intelligent cultivation of one’s ability to judge.

        Also, David, you have not told us whether there is a personal rift between you and the Sammuts.

      • David Buttigieg says:

        “Yes, I would compare “Samuraj” to “1984″.”

        Bully for you!

        “To make objective statements, you must have studied, analyzed and have a wide culture on the subject.”

        I couldn’t study them, too amateur and boring for words! However whenever I compare them to real literature …

        “This is one of the most pertinent message given by Daphne on this blog. That opinions are just opinions”

        Fine, it’s my opinion that books like Samuraj are utter crap!

        For someone who stated he doesn’t care about my opinion you really keep on at it!

        “Also, David, you have not told us whether there is a personal rift between you and the Sammuts.”

        Didn’t I?

  28. Joseph Micallef says:

    Is there an emerging “movement” of young socialist charlatans wearing pink ties who want to lead a country before they themselves have learned to crawl in the world of real politics? Ed Miliband was terrified and delivered a lick-all pathetic maiden speech!

  29. Joseph Borg says:

    So I gather that salaries are mostly received by those whom one ever needs are ; at a meeting, on another line, s/he is on sick/leave, it is not me I will put on with somebody. While wages are earned by, technicians, tradesmen, craftsmen etc.

  30. A Zammit says:

    Oh, am dead tired of hearing about classes.

    Frankly, I think that classes don’t exist any more, as it is only money which separates peoples’ expectations. I do not mean that rich people are literate etc, as it all depends upon the way and source of their income.

    I remember a young guy at university in the late 1980s who was raised in a diehard Labour family, and it was always he who was moaning and speaking about working classes, middle class and the rest. I still think that he did it with some inferiority complex in mind, and the way Joseph Muscat moans in the same manner brings back such flashbacks of this young guy with such complex issues.

  31. MS says:

    The distinction between a salary and a wage when described in terms of interval between payments — weekly as opposed to monthly — has become a bit confusing due to the several exceptions which now exist. I like to distinguish between the two by the type of contract an employee has with his/her employer.

    If there is actually a formal contract between the two, then the employee is being paid a salary; else, the employee (often referred to as ‘il-lavrant’) is being paid a wage. Not so accurate I know, but tends to be true most of the time.

    Anyway, since the majority of people can’t tell the difference, and those who can (and are bothered to point it out) will not vote Labour anyway, I guess it’s OK for Joseph Muscat to use the two terms interchangeably.

  32. Anthony Farrugia says:

    Anybody remember TOIL (time off in lieu) from the golden years before May 1987? This was implemented during the wage freeze to avoid paying overtime. It was grossly abused and nearly impossible to work out in practice.

  33. TROY says:

    Why is it that every time I see Joseph Muscat I get this feeling he looks so much like Benito Mussulini.

  34. Milone says:

    Almost one hundred comments later, Joseph Muscat could do himself a favour and weigh in with an explanation of what *he* means by ‘a living wage’ and how he expects to finance the policy.

    That would make a refreshing change.

  35. Levi says:

    I think you’re expecting too much now.

    You are seriously expecting them to make a difference between ‘wage’ and ‘salary’?

    They’re already making enough effort: ‘living’ for instance, is quite a difficult word to pronounce.

  36. ciccio2010 says:

    Daphne, it is not the Dear Leader any more.
    It is the era of the Brilliant Comrade now.

  37. Little Britain says:

    To the people who assume that being a free-marketeer means being only pro-business, and that this requires deregulation, there’s a good article in that socialist rag known as the FT. Here’s the juiciest quote, link below.

    “The speech by Vince Cable to the annual conference of the Liberal Democrats, the junior party in Britain’s coalition government, has attracted both attention and criticism. Isn’t it the job of the UK business secretary to promote business?

    Up to a point. Mr Cable has a more subtle intelligence than his critics: some of them did not recognise that some of his negative remarks about business people were not expressions of his own view but quotations from Adam Smith.

    The sage of Kirkcaldy understood that trade was the source of the wealth of nations, but had little admiration for merchants. There is a difference between being pro-market and being pro-business. There is also a difference between being pro-business – in the sense of wanting industry to be healthy, profitable and innovative – and being supportive of the interests of particular companies.’

    This is the link to the article:
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/aaceca04-cb2e-11df-95c0-00144feab49a.html

  38. Milone says:

    Twenty-four hours and counting, and Maltastar still doesn’t think that the cross-examination of a magistrate is worth reporting on.

    If only she were Australia’s next top model. She’d have made the front page. Me? I blame that denim mini-skirt.

    • ciccio2010 says:

      How can Maltastar report that the Magistrate Consuelo Scerri Herrera “appreciated that Ms Caruana Galizia is a journalist with a very good pen” (as reported by timesofmalta.com 28 Sep 2010)?

      • Gahan says:

        Trying to be objective… “good pen”.

        It is convenient to pick and choose ‘facts’ and use the law where it suits us and leave the option for other matters to be tackled later.
        Is there some sort of cross examination of the injured party in this?

        [Daphne – Yes, of course. I speak on the 21st. The magistrate didn’t feel defamed by accusations of double adultery, lying, cheating and sleeping with a man who had just started a family (so that she would avoid being cross-examined on these ‘delicate’ subjects). Which leaves her open to the accusation that she wasted police time to have me prosecuted and interrogated for saying that she looks like the back of a bus and has parties where the guests (but not her) snort cocaine. Pathetic. And despite the outgoing chief justice’s categorical pronouncement on the matter, she actually thinks that for a magistrate, all that is legal is permissible and acceptable.]

      • H.P. Baxxter says:

        Brilliant! A replay of Jerry Falwell vs. Larry Flynt. Classic reductio ad absurdum.

      • Leon Scerri says:

        Isn’t it vilely unethical of Magistrate Scerri Herrera to sign a promise of sale (konvenju) with Dr. C. Galea to purchase a property in Msida for Lm175,000 (Kuntratt tal-10 ta’ Novembru 2005 – 124036/2005).when she was presiding court cases in which Dr. Galea himself was a party and issuing controversial court decrees in his favour. This verifiable information is diametrically opposite to what she stated in Court as reported in The Times.

      • Milone says:

        How can Maltastar report on Magistrate Scerri Herrera’s cross-examination? Why, the way it reports on everything else? with plenty of exclaimation!!makrs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!and esplling mastikes? and question?markx ir the wnong placse?

        Seriously, though, they missed out on a really good story.

        Apparently, it’s far more relevant to the well-being of the popolin that the daughter-in-law of a kapitalist screwed up aTV announcement in Australia.

        Compromising the judiciary by unethical and unseemly behaviour is chickenfeed in comparison, wouldn’t you say?

Leave a Comment