We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
What would other people do?
Comments
-
Person_one wrote: »People aren't made redundant, as such, positions are. There's a process to be followed too, it's not just 'the sack'.
I said he can't just sack people. That's why I mentioned redundancy. Naturally there's a process to follow but I was just answering the point the poster made that he couldn't get rid of people. Of course he can, via redundancy and while there is a procedure to be followed it doesn't prevent staff going.
Your right that technically it's positions that are made redundant rather than people but it's still people who will be out of a job at the end of the day.
I guess it depends on how serious people think he is but I took it from the wording of the first post that if he paid more he'd have to make people redundant to balance the books. No one in this topic knows how true this is or how much profit he is making, the business could run at a loss if the salary is increased for all we know.
The only real fact of this topic is that clearly he should be paying NMW even if it does mean a post will be scrapped.0 -
He needs a certain number of care workers to cover however many residents he has. If he makes any redundant he won't be able to replace them with other people doing the same thing. So it would be extremely foolish to attempt a redundancy exercise. Only way it could work is if he's overstaffed (unlikely) or if the number of residents reduces (also unlikely as he'll need as many as possible to pay!).I don't really understand your point. Are you trying to suggest a company can't make people redundant?
Of course, no one ever has been made redundant!
More likely anyone with <2 years' service will face the chop (theoretically, as the replacements would need paying NMW!)Trying to be a man is a waste of a woman0 -
Is someone who is happy to pay under NMW (which presumably means he's not going to be declaring proper pay to HMRC which will surely have tax and/or NI implications for people?) likely to be overly worried about legal ratios?
I'd be reporting it because being open about something as big as that would make me wonder just how many corners were being cut and rules broken elsewhere.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards