Staff Accommodation

ZanyZoo

Hello, I work in Hospitality (live out, I have my own house with mortgage). All staff at the hotel are paid the same depending on job role obviously. With the previous owners 'live in' staff paid a small amount from their wages for accommodation, bills etc. We have since been taken over by another company who don't charge for accommodation but the wages are still the same. Surely this isn't fair? The live in staff are getting a huge benefit the live out staff are not. I'm wanting to speak to someone higher up in the company about it but want to know where I stand. Any advice? Many thanks. 

Savvy_Sue

Is the other company UK based, or overseas? 

Because if no charge is made for the accommodation, I think problems are going to arise with tax, but it's way outside my area of expertise. 

And they may not realise this. 

Sandtree

ZanyZoo said:

Hello, I work in Hospitality (live out, I have my own house with mortgage). All staff at the hotel are paid the same depending on job role obviously. With the previous owners 'live in' staff paid a small amount from their wages for accommodation, bills etc. We have since been taken over by another company who don't charge for accommodation but the wages are still the same. Surely this isn't fair? The live in staff are getting a huge benefit the live out staff are not. I'm wanting to speak to someone higher up in the company about it but want to know where I stand. Any advice? Many thanks. 

There is no need for employees to be paid equally as long as the reason for the different rates of pay arent for protected characteristics (race, sexual orientation etc).

Savvy_Sue said:

Is the other company UK based, or overseas? 

Because if no charge is made for the accommodation, I think problems are going to arise with tax, but it's way outside my area of expertise. 

And they may not realise this. 

It doesnt cause a "problem" with tax but it is probably a benefit in kind and so will appear on the P11D, even if they are paying for it if the amount is below the P11D calculations the extra tax would still apply for the delta

There are exemptions where its deemed necessary or usual for the staff to live on site (Expenses and benefits: accommodation: What's exempt - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk))

Jillanddy

There may be taxable benefits, yes. But the live in staff have no security of residence and if they lose their job they lose their home. Having that hanging over your head isn't a  benefit.

Thrugelmir

Presumably it's your choice to live out. Is the current policy to provide accomodation for free as an inducement to attract new staff to the organisation ?  

ZanyZoo

Thrugelmir said:

Presumably it's your choice to live out. Is the current policy to provide accomodation for free as an inducement to attract new staff to the organisation ?  

I'm not sure of the reason why it is free for them. Yes it is my choice. I have 2 children I need to live out. 

Own_Worst_Enermy

Live in, in my day.

Early 00's in hotels and chargeable to live in was wardrobes turned other way down to make bed bases. Snowy days, fire alarms, horrid shift times and when no one else could get in - you as the live in were there. I always remember paying to live in from 2001 because that that was the law.  Jarvis Hotels plc was my first hospitality employer and I would never have lived in free of charge as I remember them referencing about the law change for live in charges prior to the early 00's. 

I endured and paid for many dives for the privilege of 'live in.' Half the time my family would refuse to leave me. But I know for many poor families and their loved ones in industry that had to suck this kind of thing up.

I only thought to myself earlier, perhaps they should make pension contributions no matter who you are or what role you hold - simply only eligible after you've done 1 or 2 years employment somewhere since taking up a new role. Everyone would least be on some kind of a level playing field then. 

People who 'lived in' knew they had a discounted hourly rate whether I worked at Jarvis, Corus & Regal Hotels to Swallow, compared to these who didn't need it and 'lived out' on a slight higher wage. 

superbigal

Take the live in accomodation and rent it out on the side.    Job done

Undervalued

ZanyZoo said:

Hello, I work in Hospitality (live out, I have my own house with mortgage). All staff at the hotel are paid the same depending on job role obviously. With the previous owners 'live in' staff paid a small amount from their wages for accommodation, bills etc. We have since been taken over by another company who don't charge for accommodation but the wages are still the same. Surely this isn't fair? The live in staff are getting a huge benefit the live out staff are not. I'm wanting to speak to someone higher up in the company about it but want to know where I stand. Any advice? Many thanks. 

It may not be fair (although that is in the eye of the beholder). It is not unlawful unless, as has been said, you could show that the only reason for the "discrimination" is one of the handful prohibited by law. Otherwise entirely a matter for negotiation but with no "rights" to fall back on.

Ditzy_Mitzy

One of the exemption criteria, in relation to staff accommodation being a taxable benefit, is: the provision of the accommodation is necessary for the proper performance of the duties of the employment.
That's sufficiently vague to apply to almost anyone living on work premises, providing that the employer gives the employees duties to perform whilst within the building.  I assume those could be as vague as holding keys, monitoring fire alarms, being on call and so on.  The live in staff would, no doubt, be expected to step in if bad weather prevented everyone else getting to work or if there was an emergency in the hotel.  They may well have conditions imposed, such as a requirement to be in by a certain hour or not to drink alcohol at particular times.  Do you know for a fact that they don't?  

ZanyZoo

Ditzy_Mitzy said:

One of the exemption criteria, in relation to staff accommodation being a taxable benefit, is: the provision of the accommodation is necessary for the proper performance of the duties of the employment.
That's sufficiently vague to apply to almost anyone living on work premises, providing that the employer gives the employees duties to perform whilst within the building.  I assume those could be as vague as holding keys, monitoring fire alarms, being on call and so on.  The live in staff would, no doubt, be expected to step in if bad weather prevented everyone else getting to work or if there was an emergency in the hotel.  They may well have conditions imposed, such as a requirement to be in by a certain hour or not to drink alcohol at particular times.  Do you know for a fact that they don't?  

I know for a fact there are absolutely no conditions like that!! Only one person holds keys and is fire marshal but he is in the actual hotel.