End of the minimum wage?

gravitytolls

i'm outraged that anyone could suggest paying a sector of the working (or non working) community less than NMW. There is already legislation to prevent the disabled being discriminated against in employment, there is already legislation that enables the disabled to take potential employers to tribunals if they feel they were passed over because of their disability. To suggest they only stand a chance of employment if they're cheaper than everyone else is atrocious!

Were thjis to become a reality, would the rate of disabled employees rocket, with able bodied folk being forced onto JSA? Perhaps other minority groups could be considered for the scheme as well? Perhaps based on skin colour, creed, hair colour (ginger folk are a minority lol)?

I thought we had lived under the guise of equality for many years, what's equal about this suggestion?

scheming_gypsy

it's not just for the disabled but that's all that people seem to want to mention. What about the bloke wanting to provide for his family but lives in a poor area if he can get £5 an hour and work a 40 hour week he's contributing more than sitting at home doing nothing.

Pupnik

badgerhead wrote: »

you could get all the applicants in your office and have an auction for the job. "i'll work for 4 pound an hour," "i'll do it for 3.50 " etc

This is probably how it would go, with a section added to the application form along the lines of 'what would you expect your hourly rate to be'.

As it is, there are already plenty of people not on NMW. When I did fruit picking we were paid by the weight of what we picked not the time- fair enough I suppose but I was so slow I didn't bother sticking with it This is definitely an area which relies on foreign workers- they typically come over for the Summer and camp on site, saving up as much as they can. A lot of people work on commision, such as the charity door knockers. In fact when my sister and I both worked for a charity she was on less than minimum wage as she was employed directly by the charity (zookeeper) while I was earning more than her as I was employed by the retail side in the gift shop. It took the !!!! a bit since the directors of this hard done by charity drove sports cars and owned multiple houses.

Amara

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

well you may have stolen out jobs but fortunately you left out sense of humour alone. You're Polish, have you ever worked for 10 bob and a bag of sprouts or did the context of my comment go well over your head?

Some comments I just don't find funny.

ceridwen

Well - I must admit I'm shocked that anyone would even try and abolish NMW by the back door.

I do hope peeps are right and this will never get through.

Even with those who are receiving more than NMW it is the case that many of those have their wages/salaries fixed according to a "Lets pay JUST over the NMW rate" basis. So it wouldnt just be those currently on NMW that would be affected - so would quite a sizeable group of other workers (who would promptly find their salaries cut if there was no "differential" to maintain any more).

Googlewhacker

AdamB wrote: »

Employers would just sign everyone on temporary contracts, then re-issue them every 3 months.

Then make the option for paying less than NMW only allowed on non temporary contracts.

yes some will still abuse it but the vast majority wouldn't

WPN

wantsajob wrote: »

Of course the next logical step would be for the Job Centre to cut JSA to those refusing to accept a job under the condition of waiving rights to NMW. Will save a nice tidy sum for the Govt.

It is indeed a sanctionable offence. Refusing a job offer results in a sanction.

You would be able to appeal saying it was under the NMW, however, by then they would likely tweak the rules... and such defence of "good cause" probably only works for newly unemployed people. Anyone over 6 months would be expected to accept anything (for example)!

There is another... its called the Training Wage Bill which exempts people from the NMW. Second reading in September I think.

A person "would lose that entitlement if they had entered into a written contract of employment offering them a training wage and training from the employer in skills relevant to the employment". Current bill doesn't specify what "training" could mean so open to be exploited. Also has a potential loophole in its current format that is a second job etc. might also be exempt from NMW even if you didn't sign an agreement with that employer saying so.

The biggest issue with these proposed legislation isn't so much that people can choose to get paid less to have a job. Most unemployed people would in theory accept £5/hour although it would lower their self-worth doing the same job as others for less money... for a sustainable fulltime job. The issue is lack of security. Its a criminal offence to pay someone less than NMW. An opt out of NMW is a civil dispute... so sign an contract saying £3.50 an hour.... employer could choose not to bother paying you at all or something like 50p an hour. You would have to sue for your money, you couldnt report them for not paying NMW.

WPN

AdamB wrote: »

Employers would just sign everyone on temporary contracts, then re-issue them every 3 months.

Are you crazy?! It would be 5 year contracts!! hehe, at least a year anyway!

You would want to trap people into working for you for such a small amount as long as possible. Not everyone would consider it.

Most employers under this probably wouldnt bother dismissing the employee, you would just reduce hours and stop paying them or considerably reduce the wage. Employee walks away voluntary or sues you... most employees wont bother going through the legal route.

dark_lady

WPN wrote: »

Are you crazy?! It would be 5 year contracts!! hehe, at least a year anyway!

You would want to trap people into working for you for such a small amount as long as possible. Not everyone would consider it.

Most employers under this probably wouldnt bother dismissing the employee, you would just reduce hours and stop paying them or considerably reduce the wage. Employee walks away voluntary or sues you... most employees wont bother going through the legal route.

EXACTLY They wouldnt be able to afford to go through the legal route so would probably try another tack instead!!!!!!!!!!!