Huge shortage of staff to work in hospitality from next week due to brexit and locals not wanting to do the work as better off on benefits?

[zugzwang]

6 hours ago, GregBowman said:

If you read my posts I disagree with zero hours contracts and believe in a minimum wage. Both skew the labour market. Don't worry though the next labour government will sort that.....Oh that might be a while  and anyway they believe in open door immigration which has always been good for supporting wages 

The Labour Party? Suck, Tony, Alistair, Gordo and Mandy?

My preference would be to put 'em all in one room, lock the door and set fire to the building.

[MonsieurCopperCrutch]

3 hours ago, Riedquat said:

Oh dear, need to do something about that, can't have wages increasing! Your burger and fries will be more expensive, demand this is stopped! You like cheap stuff don't you, don't want to go back to when everything was too expensive!

Only applicable to other peoples' wages, not your own.

If you didn't like cheap stuff you wouldn't be eating McyD's anyway. Cant remember when I last ate that garbage.

[GregBowman]

7 hours ago, reddog said:

The thing is, we have had a Tory only government since 2015.  They talk tough, but don't actually do anything with a large majority.

True

[GregBowman]

6 hours ago, Freki said:

I don't know, but as I mentioned 1.3k is extortionate.  I bring up this subject and I see apathy all around. 

Child benefit is now 21.15 quid a week, an extra 14 per extra child. If you earn more than 50k, you quickly get nothing. As I showed earlier at 50k, the cost of nursery makes it hardly interesting to keep on working. But hey, it seems everyone around here find that paying the equivalent of minimum wage is a good deal, I guess I live in a different world.

It is while the min wage is set at that level. Higher and you risk collapsing viable enterprises. They are loads more choices than just your way. Many do rely on family to help accept its not always possible. Or push through your salary level and earn more or relocate somewhere where housing is cheaper ( let’s face it rampant hpi is the reason both parents have to go out to work when the kids are pre school )

 

 

Edited May 14, 2021 by GregBowman

[spyguy]

9 hours ago, Riedquat said:

Oh dear, need to do something about that, can't have wages increasing! Your burger and fries will be more expensive, demand this is stopped! You like cheap stuff don't you, don't want to go back to when everything was too expensive!

Only applicable to other peoples' wages, not your own.

The joke of how capital v labour has turned out.

With the fwittery of the likes of GE/Jack Welch, grossly overprice CEOs, private equity and general gormless behaviour by the bans, the cost of capital and the 'stewardship' is the most expensive and risk to the economic system.

 

 

[iamnumerate]

11 hours ago, Dorkins said:

Nope:

Am I exempt from the Benefit Cap?

You are exempt from the Benefit Cap if:

• You (or your partner or your child) is receiving:
  • Personal Independence Payment (PIP)
  • Disability Living Allowance (DLA)
• You (or your partner) is receiving
  • Attendance Allowance
  • Carer's Allowance
  • Guardian's Allowance
  • Carer's Element of Universal Credit
  • Support component of Employment and Support Allowance
  • Limited Capability for Work Related Activity (LCWRA) element of Universal Credit
  • Armed Forces Compensation Scheme Payments
  • Armed Forces Independence Payment
  • Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit
  • War Disablement Pension
  • War Widow's or Widower's Pension
• You (or your partner) qualify for but do not receive Carer's Allowance

• You are claiming Universal Credit and you (and your partner) earn at least the amount you would get for 16 hours per week on National Living Wage

• You are claiming Housing Benefit and you (and your partner) work enough hours to qualify for Working Tax Credit

• You (or your partner) are over Pension Credit age

Wow that is a long list - why should be over 65 exempt you for the benefit cap?

Also working 16 hours a week and getting more than £23k a year in benefits as is a pretty good hourly rate. 

[spyguy]

1 hour ago, spyguy said:

The joke of how capital v labour has turned out.

With the fwittery of the likes of GE/Jack Welch, grossly overprice CEOs, private equity and general gormless behaviour by the bans, the cost of capital and the 'stewardship' is the most expensive and risk to the economic system.

 

 

R4 6.15 bizzyness section had an interview with some shop ladies from Mansfield Debenhams, one of the last to close.

'They just kept taking money out ....'

They = CEO and finance.

Labours costs are not a problem with most UK business; CXo/finance are.

 

[winkie]

Those that are paid poorly are help keeping those above them collecting more.

[skinnylattej]

8 hours ago, zugzwang said:

The Labour Party? Suck, Tony, Alistair, Gordo and Mandy?

My preference would be to put 'em all in one room, lock the door and set fire to the building.

Can the building be a bit larger, and include BoJo, Gove, Frost, Eustice, Patel, Rabb, Duncan Smith as well?

Perhaps the solution is to blow up the asylum on Thames, calling Guy Fawkes.

Is it possible to retrofit flammable cladding?

 

[Dorkins]

40 minutes ago, iamnumerate said:

Also working 16 hours a week and getting more than £23k a year in benefits as is a pretty good hourly rate. 

Especially when you consider that benefits are not taxed whereas the basic rate of income tax and NI is 32%, so somebody working 16 hours a week and claiming benefits could very easily find themselves on the same take-home as a full time worker.

There's also the creative option of a full time worker chucking as much as they can over the personal allowance into their SIPP and claiming benefits, this would be a very tax efficient way to build up a pension. Would probably need to buy a house though and put all the savings over £6k into it to avoid it counting against the benefits claim.

Edited May 14, 2021 by Dorkins

[spyguy]

9 hours ago, reddog said:

The thing is, we have had a Tory only government since 2015.  They talk tough, but don't actually do anything with a large majority.

 

2 hours ago, GregBowman said:

True

True.

And from 2015 youve had a government mainly dealing with Brexit.

 

 

[spyguy]

9 hours ago, Dorkins said:

Guardian journos (especially the older ones who decide the editorial line) are affluent London homeowners and always hated Momentum and Corbyn. No doubt a lot of them are BTLers. The Guardian wants New Labour back.

More for the Ad revenue if not for the BTL tenants....

The Guardian job section ~2000-2010 was a thing of wonder.

 

 

[Jason]

10 hours ago, btl_hater said:

The big problem with child care (which also makes no sense) is that it becomes affordable via 30 free hours only once the child has turned 3. I’m not sure what logic is being applied there, I must be thick and am missing it? So from 1 year to 3 years the costs are insane.

 

Well at least it is something to try and encourage you to work. I think the issue most mothers have is if they left, and later tried to get a part time job they are few and far between that are much more than min wage. So if you can keep your median waged job, but work less days it does work out.

My Mrs had a full 12 months mat leave for the first, returned with a huge amount of accrued holiday so worked three days but paid for four. The second child came 20 months later, so she only worked seven months before the second round of mat leave. As we won't have any more children, her accrued holiday is being added to the end, so nearly 14 months off this time.

The problem we face is when both are in nursery until we get the free hours, and that will swallow all of her wage - however that will only be for an eight month period. Also, we think it's unfair to move our first child out of nursery (two days per week) during my Mrs second round of mat leave, so that's costing us more but our choice.

When both kids are in school, that's when it really pays back - but my Mrs will only be working three days per week then, so we think it's a good balance. And this is based on her earning less than the median average (£27k ish full time pro-rata).

For nursery costs, it's £5.50 per hour plus food (£5.00 per day). However you get the tax back, so it costs us £39.2 which is £4.90 per hour.

As for the £50k taper/limit on child benefit, you can just put extra into your pension to bring it down to £50k so you get full CB. 

 

 

 

[Jason]

Duplicate post.

Edited May 14, 2021 by Jason

[markyh]

13 hours ago, Freki said:

At 1.3k the cost of nursery per month coming out of your net salary, you are trading fairly even.

45k means 2.85k a month net, deduct nursery costs, you have 1.5k left to pay rent, food, bills, transport. Childcare is a massive issue in this country, and nobody talks about it. 

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/04/these-countries-have-the-most-expensive-childcare/

UK, more than twice as expensive as other OECD when used as %age of net income. 

Yep, been through this twice, we deliberately had our 2 kids over 4 years apart so that the 1st was at free state childcare (School) before the second was entering full time (7.30am-6pm) Nursery @ 1 year old. 

£1.3k pcm Gross is not to far off us, we always paid £700-£800 pcm Net AFTER we had used the full allowance of 2 lots of childcare vouchers.  This is in the S/E. 

[MancTom]

14 hours ago, gp_ said:

Few non-western countries too. I knew a few British people who got into trouble in Sri Lanka.

The article sounds like the Guardian getting upset because its happening to people from the EU. A lot worse has happened to people from other parts of the world, and to far more than a dozen of them.

I am not sure "interviews" in that context ("meetings, conferences, seminars, interviews") means "job interviews". Its not very clear and people coming for a job interview are a pretty clear overstay risk.


Immigration law is complex. So is nationality. I used to know someone who did not know she was a British citizen.

I would have thought you can come to a job interview. Otherwise do people really hire based on a zoom call? I was once asked to go to the US for one (I declined because I accepted another job already), so I assume it must have been a routine thing they did. Of course in those days video conferencing was not a thing.

[markyh]

14 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

For nursery costs, it's £5.50 per hour plus food (£5.00 per day). However you get the tax back, so it costs us £39.2 which is £4.90 per hour.

How cheap!!! where do you live? Syria? 

[MancTom]

10 hours ago, bartelbe said:

I keep being told that mass migration has zero effect on pay and conditions. If that is the case, why are businesses and the Guardian making a fuss?

Employers will be able to offer exactly the same pay and conditions to locals and have no problem filling vacancies.

If employers are forced to offer higher pay and better terms to attract staff, those who claim freedom of movement and mass migration has no impact on the labour market will be proved wrong.

It doesn't - at least if you average over the entire population. Even pro FOM people always said it pushed down wages for the people at the bottom of the pile.

[crescent]

16 hours ago, GregBowman said:

Benefits skew the playing field though, it isn't a true market. Benefits should be a safety net not an alternative to work

Exactly - but do not expect the Guardian to mention that 

[wighty]

28 minutes ago, Dorkins said:

Especially when you consider that benefits are not taxed whereas the basic rate of income tax and NI is 32%, so somebody working 16 hours a week and claiming benefits could very easily find themselves on the same take-home as a full time worker.

There's also the creative option of a full time worker chucking as much as they can over the personal allowance into their SIPP and claiming benefits, this would be a very tax efficient way to build up a pension. Would probably need to buy a house though and put all the savings over £6k into it to avoid it counting against the benefits claim.

Some years ago I was a benefits advisor for citizens advice bureau.

Everyone that came in was offered a free benefits check. I'd wager at least half were entitled to more or could make minor changes to lifestyle and maximize benefits. If everyone claimed their full entitlement it would not be affordable without massive gov funding.

[hotblack42]

It'll blow over, the initial Primani sugar rush has already fizzled out. Oxford St back to bumping along at 60% of 2019 footfall (BBC)

The upward pressure on wages due to absenting immigrants is real, but so is the impending drop in demand.

[msi]

2 minutes ago, hotblack42 said:

It'll blow over, the initial Primani sugar rush has already fizzled out. Oxford St back to bumping along at 60% of 2019 footfall (BBC)

The upward pressure on wages due to absenting immigrants is real, but so is the impending drop in demand.

Agree with the Primani sugar rush.

 

The whole upward pressure is less to do with absenting immigrants, and more the imbalance of available workers due to Furlough and built up savings.  Once they burn out, you will find 'jobs' vaporise.

[Gribble]

17 hours ago, mattyboy1973 said:

If people are better off on benefits than working for you, then you are not paying enough.

Every time you hear an employer bleat that they "cannot recruit anybody", there is a part missing from the end of the sentence: "..for the wages we are offering.". There isn't a job in the land that can't be filled tomorrow if the price is right. 

 

Wrong -  its the other way round. Benefits way too high - if these were reduced taxes could come down on both employee and employer, both having an effect in  increasing wages 

[msi]

4 minutes ago, Gribble said:

 

Wrong -  its the other way round. Benefits way too high - if these were reduced taxes could come down on both employee and employer, both having an effect in  increasing wages 

Remind me all the time Thatcher reduced taxes, how much wages went up?

Remind me when Osborne dropped Corporation Tax, how much wages went up ?

 

[winkie]

6 minutes ago, hotblack42 said:

It'll blow over, the initial Primani sugar rush has already fizzled out. Oxford St back to bumping along at 60% of 2019 footfall (BBC)

The upward pressure on wages due to absenting immigrants is real, but so is the impending drop in demand.

Agree.....less throw away stuff, better but a lot less of stuff that lasts, nobody really cares about what is fashionable or what is not, everyone is an individual, we are not sheep.....less of paying for cheap labour, more of learning and sharing labour, skills and experience.😉