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

1235

Comments

  • Jeremy535897
    Jeremy535897 Posts: 10,752 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Fifth Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper
    Jaco70 said:
    jimkelly 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?
    Nothing, but the question is why would they bother?

    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.
    Yes I totally agree. I don’t think it’s an incentive to keep people on who you haven’t really got employment for. It’s just a taxpayer funded bonus for some people, like me, who’ve legitimately furloughed workers during the full lockdown but have now taken them back because work has returned to near normality. I’m not convinced it’s taxpayer money well spent, but Rishi is cleverer than me, so I’ll take it.
    There are so many comments about "paying taxpayer money" to fund government expenditure. It doesn't work like that. Well established and wealthy nations like the UK, that have their own sovereign currency, don't borrow and tax to pay for public services. They can't run out of money. They can only run out of resources, like labour, and there isn't much danger of that at the moment, which is why we don't see inflation despite the huge amounts of public money being spent. We have heard that the Chancellor is spending far more than any government before in living memory, at a time when tax revenues are in the doldrums and nobody else is in a position to lend us anything. Money is never a constraint in a wealthy country that controls its own currency. When you hand over that control to someone else (like in the eurozone), that's when disaster strikes. The confusion is between a currency user and a currency issuer. We are all currency users, and therefore make the mistake that the state is like us and has to balance the books and borrow or tax before it can spend. The state is a currency issuer, and can never run out of money. A couple of keyboard strokes is all it takes. (Modern Monetary Theory, MMT).
  • epm-84
    epm-84 Posts: 2,786 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Jaco70 said:
    jimkelly 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?
    Nothing, but the question is why would they bother?

    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.
    Yes I totally agree. I don’t think it’s an incentive to keep people on who you haven’t really got employment for. It’s just a taxpayer funded bonus for some people, like me, who’ve legitimately furloughed workers during the full lockdown but have now taken them back because work has returned to near normality. I’m not convinced it’s taxpayer money well spent, but Rishi is cleverer than me, so I’ll take it.
    I think one thing worth remembering (which hasn't been mentioned yet) is lots of employers will have difficulty finding money for pay rises (even if it's just c.2%) or funding staff socials like a Christmas party over the coming year.  For the companies who have furloughed staff but are now able to stand on their own two feet I would hope they don't take the government money and then claim they can't afford £50 per head for a work Christmas party or can't afford to give everyone a small pay rise.  Likewise if there's a overstretched workforce and the company furloughed 20 people for 3 weeks but don't need the bonus then they can't really use the excuse that they can't afford any extra person (even an admin person on minimum wage) to help make the workload more manageable for employees. Companies who don't need the bonus to survive can still use it to keep staff morale high, which will likely prevent resignations and recruitment costs for finding replacement employees.  
  • gary83
    gary83 Posts: 906 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 500 Posts Name Dropper
    epm-84 said:
    Jaco70 said:
    jimkelly 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?
    Nothing, but the question is why would they bother?

    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.
    Yes I totally agree. I don’t think it’s an incentive to keep people on who you haven’t really got employment for. It’s just a taxpayer funded bonus for some people, like me, who’ve legitimately furloughed workers during the full lockdown but have now taken them back because work has returned to near normality. I’m not convinced it’s taxpayer money well spent, but Rishi is cleverer than me, so I’ll take it.
    I think one thing worth remembering (which hasn't been mentioned yet) is lots of employers will have difficulty finding money for pay rises (even if it's just c.2%) or funding staff socials like a Christmas party over the coming year.  For the companies who have furloughed staff but are now able to stand on their own two feet I would hope they don't take the government money and then claim they can't afford £50 per head for a work Christmas party or can't afford to give everyone a small pay rise.  Likewise if there's a overstretched workforce and the company furloughed 20 people for 3 weeks but don't need the bonus then they can't really use the excuse that they can't afford any extra person (even an admin person on minimum wage) to help make the workload more manageable for employees. Companies who don't need the bonus to survive can still use it to keep staff morale high, which will likely prevent resignations and recruitment costs for finding replacement employees.  
    I think that pay rises won’t be happening for a lot of people. It’s worth remembering that a lot of people, especially in the public sector (including those NHS staff we all clapped for for a couple of months) have had several years of pay freezes and not seen an annual increase, they’d have been pretty grateful for anything “even 2%” over those years. 

    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.
  • unholyangel
    unholyangel Posts: 16,866 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Jaco70 said:
    jimkelly 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?
    Nothing, but the question is why would they bother?

    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.
    Yes I totally agree. I don’t think it’s an incentive to keep people on who you haven’t really got employment for. It’s just a taxpayer funded bonus for some people, like me, who’ve legitimately furloughed workers during the full lockdown but have now taken them back because work has returned to near normality. I’m not convinced it’s taxpayer money well spent, but Rishi is cleverer than me, so I’ll take it.
    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. 

    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 Bride
  • Grumpy_chap
    Grumpy_chap Posts: 18,734 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    edited 11 July 2020 at 2:46PM
    Jaco70 said:
    Rishi is cleverer than me
    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. 

    I think we got lucky this time.  The way Government usually works is that the Minister (Chancellor) is the figure head and they have a really clever No. 2 who does all the stuff and working out behind the scenes.  In this occasion Sajid walked just before covid and we got the super-brains No. 2 jumped into top spot, probably just as an interim measure as there was a budget to present.  Then covid happened and Rishi is cemented into our hearts o:)
  • unholyangel
    unholyangel Posts: 16,866 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    edited 11 July 2020 at 3:00PM
    Jaco70 said:
    Rishi is cleverer than me
    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. 

    I think we got lucky this time.  The way Government usually works is that the Minister (Chancellor) is the figure head and they have a really clever No. 2 who does all the stuff and working out behind the scenes.  In this occasion Sajid walked just before covid and we got the super-brains No. 2 jumped into top spot, probably just as an interim measure as there was a budget to present.  Then covid happened and Rishi is cemented into our hearts o:)
    You've been drinking the kool-aid, haven't you?  :'( (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 Bride
  • Grumpy_chap
    Grumpy_chap Posts: 18,734 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Drink out to help out 🤣
  • unholyangel
    unholyangel Posts: 16,866 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Drink out to help out 🤣
    Sorry, tried to edit to explain a bit more and ended up getting distracted long enough for you to see & reply before I could edit. 
    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means - Inigo Montoya, The Princess Bride
  • Grumpy_chap
    Grumpy_chap Posts: 18,734 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    Jaco70 said:
    Rishi is cleverer than me
    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. 

    I think we got lucky this time.  The way Government usually works is that the Minister (Chancellor) is the figure head and they have a really clever No. 2 who does all the stuff and working out behind the scenes.  In this occasion Sajid walked just before covid and we got the super-brains No. 2 jumped into top spot, probably just as an interim measure as there was a budget to present.  Then covid happened and Rishi is cemented into our hearts o:)
    You've been drinking the kool-aid, haven't you?  :'( (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. 
    Yeah, I know all this boring stuff and was only joking with the Rishi comments.

    Now, get yourself down the pub and fulfill your public duty.😎
  • Jeremy535897
    Jeremy535897 Posts: 10,752 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Fifth Anniversary Photogenic Name Dropper
    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.

Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

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

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.