Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
fru-gal

Bleak trend of low, part-time wages in UK is revealed

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, fru-gal said:

This?


' What did Gordon Brown expect when tax cfdits were based on 16 hours of work per week. Many people on low pay used to take overtime or a second job. but why would you today if that means you ll lose a your tax credits or housing benefit. '

No. But Im glad to see its not just me + DurhamBorn who have sussed out tax credits.

Wierdly, there was  an article on the FT about Hague being pro Work visa for EEers

'William Hague backs work visas for EU citizens after Brexit'


https://www.ft.com/content/9114eeb0-d91c-11e6-944b-e7eb37a6aa8e

Articles bblah blah blah, nothing to see.

Its the top rated comments that are interesting. Looks like theyve been copied from my Brexit thread from a year + a bit ago:

' Me101
4 hours ago

I don't see anything wrong with the UK finally growing a backbone and stop pandering to the lowest common denominator. There should be no welfare payments to anyone that hasn't paid into the system for at least 5 years, including British nationals. What a ridiculous idea to pay people not to work as a habit as opposed to a temporary set back (that it's supposed to be).

There are various rules and regulations under FOM, it's not a 'free for all' as portrayed in the UK. After all, others were protected from  'sudden surges', but then they tend to have a more modern and competent style of government/public sector.

I bet these sorts of restrictions would be easier than many believe. If there were ID cards, it would be even easier.
ReportShare
27UnrecommendReply
VanHaarlem
4 hours ago

@Me101 Agreed. UK governments dont want to bother themselves with redesigning the system so that they can apply the EU rules that allow them to better control benefits paid or afforded to EU immigrants. It would mean they actually had to do some work rather than just appearing in the House of Commons and baahing like a bunch of sheep.
ReportShare
15UnrecommendReply
harry parkes
4 hours ago

@Me101 Indeed, absent from the entire referendum debate so far as I can recall was any mention of the precedent of the 1980s, when the Dutch got tired of paying generous benefits to unemployed Britons turning up at Hook of Holland then moving to Amsterdam to while away their days in cafes there. That was resolved by tightening welfare payment arrangements, not by the Dutch exiting the EU in a hissy fit, or bringing in work permits
ReportShare
14RecommendReply
Consternation'

I remember the Ditch removing benefits. My Dutch mate was fed up with the towns being full of scousers coming over and sitting around smoking dope or using the free smack services.

 

The Dutch experience of the mid 90s only involved few hundres Brits. I doubt they had over a 1000.

Compare that to ~2M EEer plus their parents today.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It amazes me there are still some people who dont get it.A friend,worked at a top 10 FTSE company.Packed in his job,his wife works 16 hours in SPAR,Tax credits make them as well off.Three kids and of course one of them ADHD for the DLA and £80 extra tax credits just for him.

Biggest engine manufacturer in the country.Production line.The best paid worker was the woman working 16 hours.Tax credits.Loads of people there trying to get on job share for the same reason.

Just in my close,nobody on benefits 20 years ago.Now 4 families on tax credits so they can work 16 hours.

Local hairdresser.6 staff,all on tax credits,all refuse work over 16 hours.The owner told me she earns the least in the shop,she works 60 hours a week.

School sports day.50+ parents there watching,all part time,or not working.No parents there who worked full time.Couldnt see their kids they were at work paying for the other ones.

In a way im glad they came in.It made me save like crazy and semi retire at 39 years old.At least i know i pay as little as possible towards it now.

The banking crisis didnt bankrupt us.Tax credits did,and immigration.They were the reason Brown unleashed the banks.He said their tax would pay for it all.

Millions of 50 year olds will be left in poverty once the free money stops.As usual the left choose who gets all the free money,and the ones who dont get the bill,and the poverty.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, durhamborn said:

It amazes me there are still some people who dont get it.A friend,worked at a top 10 FTSE company.Packed in his job,his wife works 16 hours in SPAR,Tax credits make them as well off.Three kids and of course one of them ADHD for the DLA and £80 extra tax credits just for him.

Biggest engine manufacturer in the country.Production line.The best paid worker was the woman working 16 hours.Tax credits.Loads of people there trying to get on job share for the same reason.

Just in my close,nobody on benefits 20 years ago.Now 4 families on tax credits so they can work 16 hours.

Local hairdresser.6 staff,all on tax credits,all refuse work over 16 hours.The owner told me she earns the least in the shop,she works 60 hours a week.

School sports day.50+ parents there watching,all part time,or not working.No parents there who worked full time.Couldnt see their kids they were at work paying for the other ones.

In a way im glad they came in.It made me save like crazy and semi retire at 39 years old.At least i know i pay as little as possible towards it now.

The banking crisis didnt bankrupt us.Tax credits did,and immigration.They were the reason Brown unleashed the banks.He said their tax would pay for it all.

Millions of 50 year olds will be left in poverty once the free money stops.As usual the left choose who gets all the free money,and the ones who dont get the bill,and the poverty.

 

 

 

... huh?

Surely people are on tax credits  BECAUSE there is only low paid part time work. Not the other way round. Why is there low paid and part time work? Probably many reasons, one we don't mention is that the introduction of a minimum wage means that the only option for companies who need to keep costs down is to have a more flexible workforce that they only pay when they need them. 

Not quite sure why you would blame tax credits for low pay. Low pay is a consequence of employers not wanting to pay a reasonable wage, not because employees don't want one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Pieman Pieface said:

... huh?

Surely people are on tax credits  BECAUSE there is only low paid part time work. Not the other way round. Why is there low paid and part time work? Probably many reasons, one we don't mention is that the introduction of a minimum wage means that the only option for companies who need to keep costs down is to have a more flexible workforce that they only pay when they need them. 

Not quite sure why you would blame tax credits for low pay. Low pay is a consequence of employers not wanting to pay a reasonable wage, not because employees don't want one. 

If there weren't so many people who were completely willing to do low paid part-time work, the chances are that employers would have to offer more pay/hours.  ie. 'Proper' jobs.  Tax Credits just subsidise employers by incentivising the workforce to take low paid, part time jobs.  Same thing goes for the likes of sky high housing benefit in places like London supporting rents.

 

I can't really criticise people for playing the tax credits games though, if it's there you'd be silly not to take advantage whilst it lasts.  'Tragedy of the Commons' and all that ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Pieman Pieface said:

... huh?

Surely people are on tax credits  BECAUSE there is only low paid part time work. Not the other way round. Why is there low paid and part time work? Probably many reasons, one we don't mention is that the introduction of a minimum wage means that the only option for companies who need to keep costs down is to have a more flexible workforce that they only pay when they need them. 

Not quite sure why you would blame tax credits for low pay. Low pay is a consequence of employers not wanting to pay a reasonable wage, not because employees don't want one. 

No.

Popel are on TC because Brown fcked up.

See:

 

In short, i nthe UK there was a persistent lump of ~20% on benefits.

The US has a similar problem. Clinton fixed it with tax credits - in the proper sense of the word.

You have low paid couple both working then they get a ~$2-4k for holding down a job.

If you dont get a job then you go on wofrkfare or lose benefits.

Simple eh. How could someone fck that up?

Enter Brown ....

First he made is so complex with TC#1 that noone understood, including DWP minister.

Rather than millions voting for Brown for being a genius, singles mums owned 10K/year from overpayments.

Furious rewrite when he shoved up the money massively, dropped down the hours.

Slowly people sussed it, so people started leaving low and medium paid jobs to go n 16h.

Then the EErs noticed it and foudn they could claim too - sending almost the average wage back to Poland

(Theyd do their 16h, claim TCs, then work cash in hand for the rest).

Its a total fcking disaster for the people claiming it - theyll be paupers when it stops and for the tax payer - 20bln and rising.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sour Mash said:

If there weren't so many people who were completely willing to do low paid part-time work, the chances are that employers would have to offer more pay/hours.  ie. 'Proper' jobs.  Tax Credits just subsidise employers by incentivising the workforce to take low paid, part time jobs.  Same thing goes for the likes of sky high housing benefit in places like London supporting rents.

 

I can't really criticise people for playing the tax credits games though, if it's there you'd be silly not to take advantage whilst it lasts.  'Tragedy of the Commons' and all that ....

 Seems a rather unlikely proposition, and an attempt to just throw the blame at tax credits . I think its far more likely that the real culprit is a globalised society , captialism and the basic removal of all trade unions who would drive wages up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Pieman Pieface said:

 Seems a rather unlikely proposition, and an attempt to just throw the blame at tax credits . I think its far more likely that the real culprit is a globalised society , captialism and the basic removal of all trade unions who would drive wages up. 

OK - say I have a member of staff on £8 per hour doing 4 days a week, 8 hours a day. 

Her gross pay is £256 per week. She gets a tax credit top up of £100 per week. So £356 per week.

The firm is getting busier so I ask her to do a full 5 days a week. Her pay is now £320 per week but her tax credits are cut to £50 per week. She is now £14 better off but has lost 1/3 of her free time. Would you work the extra day?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Pieman Pieface said:

 Seems a rather unlikely proposition, and an attempt to just throw the blame at tax credits . I think its far more likely that the real culprit is a globalised society , captialism and the basic removal of all trade unions who would drive wages up. 

It's not unlikely at all - if you create a welfare scheme that allows people doing low paid, part time work to pull in the equivalent of £35.5k pre tax, of course you are incentivising people to take such jobs.  You are creating a workforce of people who desire such conditions and effectively giving the green light to employers to offer lower compensation and non-full time jobs.  It's a massive giveaway, paid for by the state and ultimately taxpaying citizens.

 

And yes, it's all part of a neoliberal type agenda whereby bigger companies get the right to move their production anywhere they like, pay people anything they like, sell the finished product anywhere they like and dodge paying taxes - letting the general taxpaying plebs shoulder the burden.  Unfortunately, they are very close to the point where the pooch has been well and truly screwed - maybe past it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sour Mash said:

It's not unlikely at all - if you create a welfare scheme that allows people doing low paid, part time work to pull in the equivalent of £35.5k pre tax, of course you are incentivising people to take such jobs.  You are creating a workforce of people who desire such conditions and effectively giving the green light to employers to offer lower compensation and non-full time jobs.  It's a massive giveaway, paid for by the state and ultimately taxpaying citizens.

 

And yes, it's all part of a neoliberal type agenda whereby bigger companies get the right to move their production anywhere they like, pay people anything they like, sell the finished product anywhere they like and dodge paying taxes - letting the general taxpaying plebs shoulder the burden.  Unfortunately, they are very close to the point where the pooch has been well and truly screwed - maybe past it.

 

No.

Solely down to Brown being a fkcing idiot.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, spyguy said:

No.

Solely down to Brown being a fkcing idiot.

 

I doubt he came up with the idea solely on his own.

 

He'll have wanted to create a client, government dependent voter base.  He'll have had 'business advisors' telling him it was a great idea.

 

Note that the Tories haven't really done anything about fixing it.  Suits them too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sour Mash said:

I doubt he came up with the idea solely on his own.

 

He'll have wanted to create a client, government dependent voter base.  He'll have had 'business advisors' telling him it was a great idea.

 

Note that the Tories haven't really done anything about fixing it.  Suits them too.

Maybe some support from Balls. But mainly Brown.

 

4 minutes ago, hotairmail said:

He brought it in from America.

You will note their remarkably similar problems.

Clinton has two successes:

- US tax credits, which really did work.

- Getting Monica's pants off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another scandal in the benefits system is service charges for property. There is no limit to it.

For example if you put you are seeking work and qualify for £73.10 jobseeker's allowance but have a service charge of £1,000,000 a week to pay, this calculator says you are entitled to £1,000,073.10 a week.

http://benefits-calculator.turn2us.org.uk/AboutYou

Obviously people might not get away with £1m a week but let's hope all service charges are honest and above board. We wouldn't want any unscrupulous people taking advantage. Ground rents are also paid.

I was going to look to see if once people qualified for Pension Credit, they also qualified for unlimited service charge and ground rent payments. If it is possible I was thinking that would be good for such as McCarthy and Stone etc. to gather a few taxpayer pounds. They could charge sky high amounts knowing the taxpayer not the pensioner, has to pay it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, CunningPlan said:

OK - say I have a member of staff on £8 per hour doing 4 days a week, 8 hours a day. 

Her gross pay is £256 per week. She gets a tax credit top up of £100 per week. So £356 per week.

The firm is getting busier so I ask her to do a full 5 days a week. Her pay is now £320 per week but her tax credits are cut to £50 per week. She is now £14 better off but has lost 1/3 of her free time. Would you work the extra day?

 

how does she get TC of £100 per week...what does she apply for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Democorruptcy said:

Another scandal in the benefits system is service charges for property. There is no limit to it.

For example if you put you are seeking work and qualify for £73.10 jobseeker's allowance but have a service charge of £1,000,000 a week to pay, this calculator says you are entitled to £1,000,073.10 a week.

http://benefits-calculator.turn2us.org.uk/AboutYou

Obviously people might not get away with £1m a week but let's hope all service charges are honest and above board. We wouldn't want any unscrupulous people taking advantage. Ground rents are also paid.

I was going to look to see if once people qualified for Pension Credit, they also qualified for unlimited service charge and ground rent payments. If it is possible I was thinking that would be good for such as McCarthy and Stone etc. to gather a few taxpayer pounds. They could charge sky high amounts knowing the taxpayer not the pensioner, has to pay it.

 

What are you talking about. Benefits are capped and there is no property service charge one. You get housing benefit at LHA rates and possibly council tax reduction and that's it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems some people in the Guardian comments are only just waking up to what we've been saying on here since forever. I wouldn't be surprised if that top-rated poster is a poster on here! I really like to avoid these sort of articles now, after another crap, arduous week at work it doesn't put you in a good mood. No problem in working hard but when the premium is being eroded it can turn you very bitter about the situation. Pay is otherwise known as compensation for a reason.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, EnglishinWales said:

What are you talking about. Benefits are capped and there is no property service charge one. You get housing benefit at LHA rates and possibly council tax reduction and that's it.

I'm talking about what that benefit calculator says people are entitled to. I don't really think anyone will get £1m but JSA is about £4k a year, so leaves a gap that could be topped up. The gov website states:

"Eligible rent

Eligible rent means the reasonable rent for a suitable property in your area. It includes service charges (eg for lift maintenance or a communal laundry) but not things like heating."

https://www.gov.uk/housing-benefit/what-youll-get

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I work part time too, by choice. No tax credits or state benefits - but did work out I'm going to be netting the same (eventually) as if I worked full time by bunging a shed load of it in the pension via salary sacrifice. My effective hourly rate now matches those earning six figures +. Good enough for me. 

The instigators for this were

1) ridiculous house prices that make earning sub 100k pointless in the South east. So thanks BOE and gov for letting that happen.

2) most importantly that if I don't do this, retirement is going to be horrible.

3) the tax breakdown helpfully advising me that most of my tax goes on welfare payments - i.e. corporate and landlord subsidies, interest of the national debt etc none of which I have the slightest interest in encouraging.

You can't be taxed on what you don't earn, and they aren't getting 50-60% of my marginal earnings for any extra effort i put in. I'm giving them 3k in income tax and NI pa now, on top of the 150k i paid earlier in life. That is more than enough to cover what I take out of this system imho, seeing as I'm also paying council tax, vat etc out of my net. The rest, I'll manage thanks. 

I encourage others who are sick to the back teeth of the way things are run actively to spite middle earners doing similar. Take back control of your life.

Edited by Frugal Git

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, CunningPlan said:

Single mum with four kids should easily cover it.

so not just any old working childless 60 year olds then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   56 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.