Forum

Replies

• 

  T & S Plants October 27, 2010 at 7:55pm

  It was always going to come, since with the growing population over 65, or 66 as recently decided.
  
  It may well result in lower than inflation pay settlements to account for the potential 4% input from employers.
  
  But we all know what to do, blame the bankers for wrecking our economy!!!!
  
  Heard it said the other day "Why are 16 year olds protesting in France?" Well the answer is simple, if workers in France have to work until 62 rather than 60, the 16 year olds will have to wait another 2 years to get a job.
• 

  Fenlandphil October 27, 2010 at 8:35pm

  When the 1% increase in employers NI contributions was introduced a few years back it caught us out, I had misinterpreted the 1% rise as a 1% rise in what we paid in NI contributions not as it really was 1% of salary it was a hefty wack on our NI bill that I hadn't thought through properly.
  My youngest daughter worked for a national retailer, at the store she worked for the size of shop would warrent probably a workforce of about fifty people. They employed two hundred people, nearly all on short hours contracts to keep them below the NI threshold.
  Most small companies employ people full time.
  These large companies hit the taxpayer two ways, they avoid paying their fair share of NI, by employing people on short hours contracts, it places most of their employees in need of benifits to supplement their wages.
  I think that making larger companies pay a total percentage of their wage costs as NI rather than dodging their responsibilities would make more money available to meet the pensions bill.
• PRO

  Paul @ Ashgate Garden Care October 27, 2010 at 8:42pm

  The part-time contracts also mean that they can pay a reduced holiday pay. I bet the store expected the level of commitment of full time staff covering sick days etc.
  
  Any one know how these changes will affect sole traders / partnerships with no employees ?
  
  Fenlandphil said:

  When the 1% increase in employers NI contributions was introduced a few years back it caught us out, I had misinterpreted the 1% rise as a 1% rise in what we paid in NI contributions not as it really was 1% of salary it was a hefty wack on our NI bill that I hadn't thought through properly.
  My youngest daughter worked for a national retailer, at the store she worked for the size of shop would warrent probably a workforce of about fifty people. They employed two hundred people, nearly all on short hours contracts to keep them below the NI threshold.
  Most small companies employ people full time.
  These large companies hit the taxpayer two ways, they avoid paying their fair share of NI, by employing people on short hours contracts, it places most of their employees in need of benifits to supplement their wages.
  I think that making larger companies pay a total percentage of their wage costs as NI rather than dodging their responsibilities would make more money available to meet the pensions bill.
• 

  Richard Boyd October 28, 2010 at 1:27am

  Looking forward to seeing how this one develops. Are they going to reduce NI contributions, give micros and smaller SME's a kick back for what will turn into yet more red tape and unpaid state slavery...will they ferk.
  
  Politicians really don't get the fact that small businesses in the UK are what keeps the UK ticking over without us they are well and truly stuffed. If we all kicked back and went stuff you we’ll sign on and sit drinking larger all day this country would be on its knees by the end of the week.
  
  How about ditching our EU contributions and reducing the upper and lower house to about 100 (we really need far less than 100) instead of over 1250, that would save billions and the 1150 could use their good names to find "real" employment...surely they can actually do something useful!?
• 

  Lawncare-4u.co.uk October 28, 2010 at 10:58pm

  do 'we' put 1% into a deposit account in our name/security for them?
  
  
  or is it to go into a scheme (used by pension co's etc to invest / or lose!! abroard) .............no thanks to this way.
• 

  Richard Boyd October 29, 2010 at 7:41pm

  Gardens4u.co.uk said:

  do 'we' put 1% into a deposit account in our name/security for them?
  
  
  or is it to go into a scheme (used by pension co's etc to invest / or lose!! abroard) .............no thanks to this way.

  
  No you have to give it to the pros to lose or you can do a Maxwell, either way I'd by very scared if I was looking forward to my pension scheme being managed by others.
• 

  Richard Boyd October 30, 2010 at 1:06am

  The Garden Co said:

  
  richard can you find a house for rent for £100 ! i dout

  
  To answer the accommodation question.
  
  In cheshire you can find 3 to 4 bedroom accommodation IRO £500-600 PCM for London rates see http://cityunslicker.blogspot.com/2010/10/400-pw-in-london-gets-you...
  
  I still think housing allowance should be capped @ £200 per week max and people forced to relocate outside of London. The concentration of facilities in London is yet another farcical political decision.
• PRO

  Gary RK October 30, 2010 at 11:44am

  
  
  s>cite>Richard Boyd said:

  The Garden Co said:

  
  richard can you find a house for rent for £100 ! i dout

  
  To answer the accommodation question.
  
  In cheshire you can find 3 to 4 bedroom accommodation IRO £500-600 PCM for London rates see http://cityunslicker.blogspot.com/2010/10/400-pw-in-london-gets-you...
  >I still think housing allowance should be capped @ £200 per week max and people forced to relocate outside of London. The concentration of facilities in London is yet another farcical political decision.

  
  That reeks of 'social cleansing' ? Wasn't that tried last century by certain counties/dictators ?
  
  How would you feel potentialy forced to move from you upbringing and family ?
  
  Regards pension investments - its my understanding you do not have to select to have your savings invested in 'stock market funds'- cash/on deposit accounts have always been around.
  
  Capital's safe, but obviously not such a great return vs stock market.
  
  Perhaps people have been greedy, wanting the expansion offered in past years without considering the downside, not helped by dodgy advisors.
  
  Perhaps now is the time for people to get more involved in their future finances and make their OWN decisions, rather than leave to financial advisors ? - just a thought...
• PRO

  Gary RK October 30, 2010 at 1:20pm

  Yes - we did and it sucks and make me ashamed to be British, in a different respect - just like our treatment of the Ghurka's until it became the hot political thing to support them ....
  
  I think a lot of countries/government should have hung their heads in shame.
  
  Stuart said:

  Quote: That reeks of 'social cleansing' ? Wasn't that tried last century by certain counties/dictators ?
  
  You are right Gary, we did this as well or our Government did.
  
  http://www.privateislandsblog.com/2007/05/27/colonialism-is-not-dead/
  
  http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2009/01/british-chagos-cabl...
• 

  Richard Boyd October 30, 2010 at 5:51pm

  Gary RK said:
  
  That reeks of 'social cleansing' ? Wasn't that tried last century by certain counties/dictators ?
  
  How would you feel potentialy forced to move from you upbringing and family ?
  
  ------------------------
  
  If I was unemployed and relent upon people who were working i.e. the taxpayer I don't see that I would have a choice.
  
  Would you pay an employee who could not do his/her job? Of course you would not but in effect you are saying that the state should.