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!
£ 1000 employer compensation
Comments
-
Jaco70 said:jimkelly said:gettingtheresometime said:As a side issue if HMRC are waiting bunting February 2020 to accept claims because the January 2020 RTI will then have been submitted, what's to stop an employer giving notice of redundancy at the beginning of January or even in December so the employee is included in that return but made redundant as soon as the qualifying date is hit?
Either there is work available for the employee moving forward, or there isn't.
It would cost them more to keep the employee on, in order to received a £1000 (which is then taxable) bonus, than it would to just make them redundant in the first place.0 -
Jaco70 said:jimkelly said:gettingtheresometime said:As a side issue if HMRC are waiting bunting February 2020 to accept claims because the January 2020 RTI will then have been submitted, what's to stop an employer giving notice of redundancy at the beginning of January or even in December so the employee is included in that return but made redundant as soon as the qualifying date is hit?
Either there is work available for the employee moving forward, or there isn't.
It would cost them more to keep the employee on, in order to received a £1000 (which is then taxable) bonus, than it would to just make them redundant in the first place.0 -
epm-84 said:Jaco70 said:jimkelly said:gettingtheresometime said:As a side issue if HMRC are waiting bunting February 2020 to accept claims because the January 2020 RTI will then have been submitted, what's to stop an employer giving notice of redundancy at the beginning of January or even in December so the employee is included in that return but made redundant as soon as the qualifying date is hit?
Either there is work available for the employee moving forward, or there isn't.
It would cost them more to keep the employee on, in order to received a £1000 (which is then taxable) bonus, than it would to just make them redundant in the first place.Personally I think most companies won’t be looking for a carrot to prevent resignations, the incentive that most employees will use not to resign will be the big stick in the shape of the unemployment statistics and the competitiveness of the job market over the next year or two.It’s a pretty poorly targeted use of resources, £1000 isn’t enough of an incentive to an employer to keep an employee on their books until the beginning of February so we’ll just end up giving cash to companies who’s employees jobs were safe anyway. Think how much we’ll end up giving some businesses, Just as a high profile example weatherspoons furloughed 42,000 people, if they all stay on till feb then as well as the grants, loans, furlough scheme, reduction in VAT, eating out vouchers etc. They’ve benefited from they’ll also get an extra £4.2 million. It’s a shame the money couldn’t have been better directed towards that needed it more.0 -
Jaco70 said:jimkelly said:gettingtheresometime said:As a side issue if HMRC are waiting bunting February 2020 to accept claims because the January 2020 RTI will then have been submitted, what's to stop an employer giving notice of redundancy at the beginning of January or even in December so the employee is included in that return but made redundant as soon as the qualifying date is hit?
Either there is work available for the employee moving forward, or there isn't.
It would cost them more to keep the employee on, in order to received a £1000 (which is then taxable) bonus, than it would to just make them redundant in the first place.
The current gov's approach to anyone questioning their cuckoo plans is to say "it's nice you feel that way but we don't need to explain ourselves to you". Normally they would justify decisions - because they've done their homework and genuinely believe it's the right answer (whether it is or not). So the fact they refuse to justify certain decisions (not just corona btw, this has been going on for several years) calls into question whether they themselves believe it's the right decision or whether they were just high on coke and can't find any sober way to explain it.
I agree with Jim Harra's criticisms of it tbh. It is unlikely to lead to many (if any) jobs being retained beyond that which would be retained without the bonus. So likely to either lead to a situation where employer's are getting money for nothing or where those less financially savvy employers keep staff on due to it and end up worse off - potentially then losing every job in the company rather than just some and leading to their creditors (including customers) losing out.
I could understand their logic for the job retention scheme with how precarious our economy is right now. The only two possible scenarios I can come up with for the bonus is a PR stunt or to try defer any economy collapse until after we've managed to secure a trade deal with the EU (deadline of 31 Dec). Always better negotiating to be perceived in a position of power rather than weakness.You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride1 -
unholyangel said:Jaco70 said:Rishi is cleverer than me0
-
Grumpy_chap said:unholyangel said:Jaco70 said:Rishi is cleverer than me
(meant as a joke, not to offend)
ETA: Let me put it this way. He became chancellor on appointment (not promotion) by Boris. He became Chief Sec on appointment, by Boris. The general consensus is that he was appointed as he's a BJ loyalist, not because he's the best man for the job. He was able to be appointed to those positions because his constituency voted Tory. Whether they voted for him or because he was tory/wasn't labour...who knows, but we can safely say that the UK electorate do not vote based on who is the most intelligent/who has the highest IQ. He was able to be elected by his constituency because the tory party vetted & selected him to stand in that constituency in strategic placement.
That is quite a stark difference from "the best person for the job" or open & fair competition. Less deserved and more lucky charm.You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride0 -
Drink out to help out 🤣1
-
Grumpy_chap said:Drink out to help out 🤣You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride0
-
unholyangel said:Grumpy_chap said:unholyangel said:Jaco70 said:Rishi is cleverer than me
(meant as a joke, not to offend)
ETA: Let me put it this way. He became chancellor on appointment (not promotion) by Boris. He became Chief Sec on appointment, by Boris. The general consensus is that he was appointed as he's a BJ loyalist, not because he's the best man for the job. He was able to be appointed to those positions because his constituency voted Tory. Whether they voted for him or because he was tory/wasn't labour...who knows, but we can safely say that the UK electorate do not vote based on who is the most intelligent/who has the highest IQ. He was able to be elected by his constituency because the tory party vetted & selected him to stand in that constituency in strategic placement.
That is quite a stark difference from "the best person for the job" or open & fair competition. Less deserved and more lucky charm.
Now, get yourself down the pub and fulfill your public duty.😎0 -
Is he? It's not like he was recruited through fair & open competition with a demonstrable experience of being successful in a similar role. You would hope that someone being paid a job knows how to do that job well, but experience has taught me it's foolish to assume that is the case. Negligence is rife in any profession. But unlike other professions, politicians usually escape the accountability for theirs.
Fulbright scholar and self made millionaire via investment banking, married into a billionaire family, Chancellor before 40, don't think he can be dumb.
2
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards