Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32272817
Supermarket workers paid the national minimum wage are forced to claim state benefits totalling £11bn a year, according to a charity.
Citizens UK said the employers of five million workers in the UK were being "subsidised" by the taxpayer.
The minimum wage is £6.50 an hour for people over 21, while the living wage calculated by the Living Wage Foundation is £7.85 (£9.15 in London).
The British Retail Consortium said most supermarkets paid above minimum wage.
According to Citizens UK, which organises community campaigns, most of those earning less than the living wage are employed in the retail sector.
The charity said this meant most supermarket staff needed in-work benefits - which it argued meant taxpayers were "subsidising private companies by almost £11bn per annum".
Supermarket workers paid the national minimum wage are forced to claim state benefits totalling £11bn a year, according to a charity.
Citizens UK said the employers of five million workers in the UK were being "subsidised" by the taxpayer.
The minimum wage is £6.50 an hour for people over 21, while the living wage calculated by the Living Wage Foundation is £7.85 (£9.15 in London).
The British Retail Consortium said most supermarkets paid above minimum wage.
According to Citizens UK, which organises community campaigns, most of those earning less than the living wage are employed in the retail sector.
The charity said this meant most supermarket staff needed in-work benefits - which it argued meant taxpayers were "subsidising private companies by almost £11bn per annum".
Show More
why the heck have people only just started realising this ? no offence to OP, i'm not thinking of him, but wider society as a whole. I have been in low-paid work for the last 15 years mostly and have always needed tax-credits to be able to support my family. It was always clear to me that the public purse was being used to subsidize my wages just so that my billionaire employers didn't have to reach into their velvet pockets so to do.
about a year or two ago this finally broke through into the public consciousness when the Guardian started writing about the evident wrongfulness of this situation.
this situation is the most blatant manifestation of the oft stated point that Corporations pull the strings of the governments which nominally run this country.
When you say benefits do you include tax credits in the total?
minimum wage annual increase 2% above inflation until it hits living wage - Policies are so easy
yes doctor - to me 9 and I think, externally, as a matter of fact) - that tax-gredits are benefits.
i receive them in the same way I have received unemployment benefit i.e. into a Post Office 'accouynt' which exists only for the purpose of receiving benefits (and cannot perform any other function. weirdly)
i presume tax-credits are part of the overall 'benefits budget' of, what is it , 80 billion odd?, something like that. The more i ponder it tho' the more I realise that may not be correct. I would wish to be corrected pronto if I am incorrect in that assumption.
I hardly think its credible to increase wage costs by 11 billion in the retail sector.
Why not look at the real cause of this which is the excessive cost of housing and rents. That is where the problem lies.
Why not look at the real cause of this which is the excessive cost of housing and rents. That is where the problem lies.
Yes, most "benefits" are pensions and so-called in-work benefits (tax credits) and it is the latter that subsidise poor employers, just like housing benefit subsidises landlords.
I know someone in the public sector. Felt unwell during pregnancy. Got the remaining 7 months (up until the birth) On full pay, followed by full paid maternity leave for ages.
Only beggars and mugs work for low wages in the private sector
Only beggars and mugs work for low wages in the private sector
just like housing benefit subsidises landlords.
Borrow 5 billion at 0.5%, built low income houses and rent out at 10% return, jobs, housing and at the end a profit. Politicians dont want solutions to the issues UK faces
Borrow 5 billion at 0.5%, built low income houses and rent out at 10% return, jobs, housing and at the end a profit. Politicians dont want solutions to the issues UK faces
oh fck off you ignorant know-all/know-nothing Zazu. I work for a supermarket, like about half a million other people in this country do, I work nights so that i can get a bit more than the minimum wage (but it's still a low wage) and it's a damn sight better than being on the dole.
they will make a decent profit due to scale of the project, 5, 10% even 1%, pick which ever you like, it will be more than 0.5% it cost UK to borrow. (Its not fully costed its a post on a forum 
)
)
People like me get ripped-off for their labour everytime they cross the threshold of their workplace - we know this. We are not mugs, or beggars, or idiots. Reconsider your opinion or I will impress this point you at every subsequent opportunity (have I just threatened him? .v soz about that but his views are most ill-considered)
During the good old days of the mid 2000s when recessions had been abolished by political command and government overspent 'only to invest' ( although that got disproved later ), people in supermarkets used to turn down extra work. They asked for and got a 16hr a week contract as that maximised their tax credits. They didn't want the extra wages.
i have a 14 hour contract. I accept every bit of overtime i can get my hands on.
I meant beggars as in 'beggars cant be choosers'
(im on a phone with horrific autocorrect so most points are shorterned)
I work in the private sector, my point was at the public workers grand train. Stealing firefighters, teachers
(im on a phone with horrific autocorrect so most points are shorterned)
I work in the private sector, my point was at the public workers grand train. Stealing firefighters, teachers
I hope that your tax credit claims shows you on 16+ hrs/week average dm, and congrats on taking the extra money when you can. It's a better proposition now to take the extra hours and money compared to 9 years ago because of the tax free allowance being much higher.
Btw HMRC are about to get mean on people with say annual incomes coming in on the 14/15 real time return of say 5,300 or less, which would mean they have not been getting the minimum 16 paid hours on average.
Btw HMRC are about to get mean on people with say annual incomes coming in on the 14/15 real time return of say 5,300 or less, which would mean they have not been getting the minimum 16 paid hours on average.
There are only so many jobs in the public sector, but they are in a different world compared with the private sector regarding pay, time off, conditions and pensions.
I thought the last Labour government might address the situation but instead they made the gap between the two even wider.
I thought the last Labour government might address the situation but instead they made the gap between the two even wider.
thats interesting what you say Mr Bongo - my contract is 14.5 hrs per week - am i going to have a problem/ i don't fully understand.
wife has a job for 10 hrs per week in addition ...
I should have found a better word than 'contract' dm, as it's not a helpful term here.
The tax credits system is interested in the number of paid hours you do on average, not what's on the contract. As a couple ( assuming no dla or carer's allowance in your household ) you need to be averaging at least 24 a week with one of you averaging at least 16. Whether you get there from contracted hours or non-contracted extra hours makes no difference. In other words you're fine. There are people on zero hours contracts for example who are quite rightly on tax credits as they are over the long term doing the average paid hours needed.
My original point was really that when the personal tax allowance was down at 5,225 in 07/08 for example, and benefits advisers consulted their calculators and considered other extras like travel child-care and jobs that needed doing at home, it was common to turn the extra hours down.
The tax credits system is interested in the number of paid hours you do on average, not what's on the contract. As a couple ( assuming no dla or carer's allowance in your household ) you need to be averaging at least 24 a week with one of you averaging at least 16. Whether you get there from contracted hours or non-contracted extra hours makes no difference. In other words you're fine. There are people on zero hours contracts for example who are quite rightly on tax credits as they are over the long term doing the average paid hours needed.
My original point was really that when the personal tax allowance was down at 5,225 in 07/08 for example, and benefits advisers consulted their calculators and considered other extras like travel child-care and jobs that needed doing at home, it was common to turn the extra hours down.
when i left school you could walk into a large variety of jobs
minimal unemployment
millions of families have both adults in a family working to keep their heads above water
and we are the highest, or nearly so, overtime workers in europe
what changed!!?? it never used to be this way.
minimal unemployment
millions of families have both adults in a family working to keep their heads above water
and we are the highest, or nearly so, overtime workers in europe
what changed!!?? it never used to be this way.
Dotch is right to highlight housing.
The inflation of the last 40 years in the housing market has brought this crisis about.
Labour brought in tax credits to address it and understandably so. BUT, it's a farcical situation for a Govt to top up private sector pay.
Employers will keep wages low because their staff get tax credits. Can you blame them??
I think it's called Catch 22....
The inflation of the last 40 years in the housing market has brought this crisis about.
Labour brought in tax credits to address it and understandably so. BUT, it's a farcical situation for a Govt to top up private sector pay.
Employers will keep wages low because their staff get tax credits. Can you blame them??
I think it's called Catch 22....
I can understand the Gov allowing tax credits etc for jobs that would otherwise be off-shored but really companies need to be paying the living wage. Also there has to be a mechanism brought in that stops the employers NI dodge by employing multiple people on low hour/low wage contracts - Perhaps levy employers NI based on their total wage bill rather than on an individual employee basis. Employee contributions can stay as they are IMO.
its not just wages though.....they wont curb house prices so have to pay people housing benfits.
scandalous considering many work fulltime!!!!
that shoudl tell you the country is not in good shape.
the eu is in a far better position when it comes out properly from the subprime mess.
any exodus of eu migrants will then hit house prices and rents.
too hard a hit and the economy will be in trouble....
scandalous considering many work fulltime!!!!
that shoudl tell you the country is not in good shape.
the eu is in a far better position when it comes out properly from the subprime mess.
any exodus of eu migrants will then hit house prices and rents.
too hard a hit and the economy will be in trouble....
@DM
When you go on holiday do you get paid 14.5 hours or the average you worked?
When you go on holiday do you get paid 14.5 hours or the average you worked?
if I use one of my holiday days to take a day off i get paid the same amount as I would if I attended. i think.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539