If you happened to turn on the TV news over the weekend, you could not have missed all the senseless pageantry in London celebrating the Queen. What you did miss is that some of those who made up the workforce that made the pageantry possible weren't getting paid and were living under a bridge.
So while celebrating Royalty, it seems the brits were also celebrating capitalism, that great economic system which gives everyone, rich and poor, the absolute right to sleep under a bridge.
Truthfully, this is not a funny story. This is a story of what the British call Workfare. Workfare demands that people who receive welfare work unpaid jobs. As Boycott Workfare points out, "Workfare profits the rich by providing free labour, whilst threatening the poor by taking away welfare rights if people refuse to work without a living wage."
Workfare, of course, does not only impact those workers without jobs, it impacts those with them. Also, as reported by Boycott Workfare:
In February of this year, the following account emerged from one MP on the Public Audit Committee:
“… the situation that I am observing in retail where people are being placed for free in retail operations for work experience….
…squeezing out permanent employment in relatively low-paid retail. I have noticed companies such as Tesco making their standard contracts four-hour contracts. WH Smith has a zero-hour contract policy, as do places such as Primark in my constituency. I have constituents who have worked in those places and who are not getting the hours of work that they used to have, which is obviously having very substantial follow-on impacts on tax credits and so on….
…In my constituency, one of the things that is happening is that many people are being given work experience-unpaid-in retail,…when they [retailers] are offering jobs, a company such as A4e, which operates in Slough, can say to Primark, “If you want more of our free workers, I hope you are going to give our people 20-hour jobs…
…I want to know how – it is not even in the Report – we protect against the risk of job substitution as a result of this programme, because it is not factored into how people are paid.”