Tax Credits

antrobus

kinger101 wrote: »

The public sector alone employs around 20% of the workforce, so I'm not sure where your 90% figure comes from.

It was around 20% in 2010. It is now about 17%.

But yes, "Total employment in SMEs was 15.6 million; 60% of all private sector employment in the UK", so 90% would a little OTT.

http://www.fsb.org.uk/media-centre/small-business-statistics

dktreesea

antrobus wrote: »

There is no way that you could know that Lidl UK has "soaring profits". Lidl UK does not publish a profit; it operates in the UK as a branch of the German operation.

However, that other German discounter named Aldi, does publish separate UK numbers. They show a big increase in sales, but a small fall in profits. I'd expect Lidl was no different.

Fighting a price war ain't cheap, ya know.:)

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-3251846/Aldi-takes-rivals-online-launch-year-price-war-takes-toll-profits.html



Oddly enough, if you look around this interweb of ours, you will find that it is Aldi and Lidl who attract criticism for their "workfare/slave labour workforce" rather than Tesco.:)



And yet Waitrose pay the lowest hourly rate.



Maybe not.:)

The darling of the middle classes posts a 26% slide in half-year profits

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3229007/Pension-charges-hurt-John-Lewis-profits-Waitrose-records-sales-slide-seven-years.html



Waitrose doesn't pay the living wage. Lidl and Aldi claim that they do. Why is it you are shopping at Waitrose again?:)



In Ireland they have something called 'Rent Supplement', which is being replaced by something called 'Housing Assistance Payment'. I don't know about you, but it looks just like HB to me.:)

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/supplementary_welfare_schemes/rent_supplement.html

Lidl doesn't have to publish it's profits to know how they are going. They paid over £25mill corporate tax in 2013. In 2014 their sales were £3.3 billion. This year they are expecting to top £4 billion.


Lidl doesn't use workfare to staff its shops. Neither does Aldi. They probably couldn't stand the heat in Germany if they did, let alone here. Unlike Tesco, who use thousands of free "volunteer" workers as part of the workfare programme. They probably make quite efficient use of their staff though. But then, so do companies like Amazon in their fulfilment centres. The shop manager was on the tills last time I was in Lidl, it was so busy.


Waitrose pay at least £7 base rate to its employees, so above NMW. But on top of that they get to participate in the company's bonus /share of profits scheme at the end of the year. That's what takes them ahead of the big four in pay.


As to people shopping there, if you use their My Waitrose card and nominate the ten items you want 20% off the shelf price for the whole year, then some products can work out at cheaper than at the Big Four supermarkets. And I rather like meandering through their shops with a free coffee in hand....


The rent supplement in Ireland, now getting replaced by the housing assistance payment, was never as generous or as broad reaching as over here. For those renting in the private sector, it only kicks in if you have had a substantial change in circumstances. If you're in full time employment, or are self employed working over 30 hours a week in Ireland, you don't qualify for housing assistance. Even then everyone has to make a contribution towards their rent. This idea of 100% actual rent being paid is madness imho. If people don't have to pay anything towards their rent, where is the incentive to try to rent in a cheaper area?

dktreesea

antrobus wrote: »

It was around 20% in 2010. It is now about 17%.

But yes, "Total employment in SMEs was 15.6 million; 60% of all private sector employment in the UK", so 90% would a little OTT.

http://www.fsb.org.uk/media-centre/small-business-statistics

So how does this tally with the claim that 76% of SMEs in the UK don't employ anyone?


Since 2000, according to the fsb:


"The majority of population growth since 2000 has been due to non-employing businesses, which accounted for 90% of the 1.9m increase..."

antrobus

dktreesea wrote: »

Lidl doesn't have to publish it's profits to know how they are going. They paid over £25mill corporate tax in 2013. In 2014 their sales were £3.3 billion. This year they are expecting to top £4 billion.....

It doesn't matter "how they are going". The point would be is that since they don't publish a profit, you have no idea what they profits are. So when you wrote of Lidl's "soaring profits" you were just making it up.

dktreesea wrote: »

...Lidl doesn't use workfare to staff its shops. Neither does Aldi. They probably couldn't stand the heat in Germany if they did, let alone here. Unlike Tesco, who use thousands of free "volunteer" workers as part of the workfare programme. They probably make quite efficient use of their staff though. But then, so do companies like Amazon in their fulfilment centres. The shop manager was on the tills last time I was in Lidl, it was so busy....

The point I was making was that there is far more criticism of Aldi and Lidl' working practices than any other supermarket.

dktreesea wrote: »

...Waitrose pay at least £7 base rate to its employees, so above NMW. But on top of that they get to participate in the company's bonus /share of profits scheme at the end of the year. That's what takes them ahead of the big four in pay.

Of course it's above NMW, that's why it's the national minimum wage! You don't get a gold badge for complying with the law.:)

In any event, the Guardian says that the Waitrose rate is £6.92 per hour, which is (I suppose) 3p more than ASDA pay, but is indeed he second lowest. And whilst Waitrose staff might qualify for an 11% bonus, an 11% bonus only brings the rate up to £7.68 which is still less than what, for example Lidl and Morrisons pay. And that's before you take into account any bonuses those companies pay.


http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/sep/29/morrisons-supermarket-shop-floor-staff-national-living-wage-george-osborne

dktreesea wrote: »

...As to people shopping there, if you use their My Waitrose card and nominate the ten items you want 20% off the shelf price for the whole year, then some products can work out at cheaper than at the Big Four supermarkets....

You don't have a free choice of the 'ten items you want' with MyWaitrose, your choice is restriced to certain products. And it doesn't last for a whole year, you can change it every month or so. And of course Waitrose has some products can work out at cheaper than at the Big Four supermarkets. Why would anyone buy them at Waitrose of they worked out more expensive?

dktreesea wrote: »

...And I rather like meandering through their shops with a free coffee in hand...

.

Thankfully my Waitrose has taken steps to discourage that sort of thing.:)

dktreesea wrote: »

..The rent supplement in Ireland, now getting replaced by the housing assistance payment, was never as generous or as broad reaching as over here.

That's not what you said before. You said that in the "Irish system". people had to "pay for everything, including housing" out of their dole.

dktreesea wrote: »

....For those renting in the private sector, it only kicks in if you have had a substantial change in circumstances. If you're in full time employment, or are self employed working over 30 hours a week in Ireland, you don't qualify for housing assistance. Even then everyone has to make a contribution towards their rent. This idea of 100% actual rent being paid is madness imho. If people don't have to pay anything towards their rent, where is the incentive to try to rent in a cheaper area?

So now you are trying to pretend that you have some knowedge of the Irish benefit system, having taken the time to read through the link I provided, in the hope that no one will notice that you were originally making things up.

antrobus

dktreesea wrote: »

So how does this tally with the claim that 76% of SMEs in the UK don't employ anyone? ...

Presumably because the 24% of SMEs that do employ someone, are those that actually do employ the 60%?

Although I would point out that there are very few businesses that "don't employ anyone". Someone has to run the business.

It's actually "76% of businesses did not employ anyone aside from the owner", and since there are 4.1m of them, that is still a lot of people.

dktreesea wrote: »

...Since 2000, according to the fsb:

"The majority of population growth since 2000 has been due to non-employing businesses, which accounted for 90% of the 1.9m increase..."

And?

All that means is that 1.9m people have created their own employement.

kinger101

antrobus wrote: »

Presumably because the 24% of SMEs that do employ someone, are those that actually do employ the 60%?

Although I would point out that there are very few businesses that "don't employ anyone". Someone has to run the business.

It's actually "76% of businesses did not employ anyone aside from the owner", and since there are 4.1m of them, that is still a lot of people.




And?

All that means is that 1.9m people have created their own employement.

Partners also would not be classed as employees.

antrobus

kinger101 wrote: »

Partners also would not be classed as employees.

They would not be classed as employees for tax purposes. But they count as being employed for the purposes of Labour Market statistics.

princeofpounds

And I rather like meandering through their shops with a free coffee in hand....

I find that promotion so funny; people are so desperate for their free coffee, they fight like rats over it at the customer service desk.

Mistermeaner

I think you'll find its queenbury rules only in waitrose

westernpromise

The free coffee in Waitrose is revolting. It's like the free coffee that comes out of a machine at work.