Moderators Casino Posted April 9, 2020 Moderators Share Posted April 9, 2020 3 minutes ago, Escobarp said: Apart from the critics fact this has nothing to do with a company being profitable or not of course we made several billion profit in the last financial year but are still using the scheme. JSL Mounts point is that you shouldn't be able to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QFPants Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 12 minutes ago, DazBob said: Quite a few like that at our place too. Some had also started in the first week of March so they got paid up to the end of the month and then let go. Poor fuckers. Have they asked their old place to take them back on then furlough them? Believe it’s possible, though not sure what the incentive is for the old company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DazBob Posted April 9, 2020 Author Share Posted April 9, 2020 Just now, QFPants said: Have they asked their old place to take them back on then furlough them? Believe it’s possible, though not sure what the incentive is for the old company. No idea. Hope something got sorted for them though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErnestTurnip Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 (edited) We had one lad who was working his notice and was due to leave on the Friday that it turned out was the day pubs and that were told to close. At the start of that week he got told his new job no longer existed and it was decided we would keep him on (wasn't a universally popular decision). He ended up getting furloughed which was good for him but could look like we are taking advantage of the 80% which wasn't the case. Edited April 9, 2020 by ErnestTurnip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escobarp Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 15 minutes ago, Casino said: Mounts point is that you shouldn't be able to Why not though? just because a company is profitable doesn’t mean it won’t have a varying need for head count and all this scheme is designed to do is to even that out and stop firms reacting to that and laying folk off. Companies are taking advantage of this rather than have some very difficult decisions. To make. And some are just taking advantage of course but that’s human nature Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Casino Posted April 9, 2020 Moderators Share Posted April 9, 2020 I'd say a company making billions and furloughing staff is taking the piss But it's a universal system (imo intended to protect emoyees not employers) and there'll always be businesses that take the piss Just have to hope we hear who they are and can decide if we want to use them on the other side Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escobarp Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 (edited) 29 minutes ago, Casino said: I'd say a company making billions and furloughing staff is taking the piss But it's a universal system (imo intended to protect emoyees not employers) and there'll always be businesses that take the piss Just have to hope we hear who they are and can decide if we want to use them on the other side What they made last year is irrelevant that’s my entire point and is highlighting your own lack of understanding in what than scheme is and in the financials of a business and taking the piss? tell you what you explain to the hundreds of my colleagues who have been furloughed that they are instead being made redundant And can claim universal credit instead and are welcome to apply for jobs again when business picks up? How does that sound? there is no work for them if the scheme wasn’t there they would have been made redundant Oh and I’m terms of the name and shame same Company that’s donated now 500 vehicles to the nhs foc that’s about 300k a month we are giving up as well as plenty of other stuff which is well publicized in the media. So aye crack on. No sure we are your sort of company anyway maybe a tad stylish ☺️ Edited April 9, 2020 by Escobarp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DazBob Posted April 9, 2020 Author Share Posted April 9, 2020 Just because a company "makes billions" doesn't mean it has billions in the bank. But I'm pretty sure Casino knew that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Casino Posted April 9, 2020 Moderators Share Posted April 9, 2020 Just now, DazBob said: Just because a company "makes billions" doesn't mean it has billions in the bank. But I'm pretty sure Casino knew that. I do I'm actually not overly sure where mounts was going cos I know he doesn't work for some global powerhouse I do still feel uncomfortable with companies taking the money if they don't need it Bit need is a hard thing to define Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escobarp Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, Casino said: I do I'm actually not overly sure where mounts was going cos I know he doesn't work for some global powerhouse I do still feel uncomfortable with companies taking the money if they don't need it Bit need is a hard thing to define It’s not about money in the bank. It’s about the here and Now and the business being fit for purpose now and suitably staffed. Simple as that. A business is ran for it shareholders and to continue to have double the amount of staff on the payroll than you need for example is no way to run a Business this simply allows them to keep folk on by the sounds of it mounts employer is wanting to take the piss and send folk home on 80% and get them to still do some work as there is work there. And if he could get away with it he would take the 80% and keep them working full time. But I might have read the situation wrong my employer is keeping me and my team on because we have enough work for us all. If we didn’t then we would have been furloughed too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Supporter Tonge moor green jacket Posted April 9, 2020 Site Supporter Share Posted April 9, 2020 We'll also want companies to invest when this is all over. They were holding back pending brexit being sorted and just as investment was expected to start growing a bit more, this all hit. I suppose if they've being paying for folk not to work, this would eat into subsequent investment. Anyway, I'm sure Rishi knows what he's doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Casino Posted April 9, 2020 Moderators Share Posted April 9, 2020 If you need it, take it Just don't take the piss, whether large or small The bill for this is going to be horrendous Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomski Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 21 minutes ago, Casino said: If you need it, take it Just don't take the piss, whether large or small The bill for this is going to be horrendous Agreed. It’s not free money. I’m already tightening up for what I think this will cost my family after all this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traf Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 2 hours ago, tomski said: Agreed. It’s not free money. I’m already tightening up for what I think this will cost my family after all this. Very prudent. This money will have to be clawed back somehow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escobarp Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 1 minute ago, Traf said: Very prudent. This money will have to be clawed back somehow. To my mind it makes sense that if a business has claimed under this scheme or any scheme it should be subject to an additional levy of corporation tax or some other taxation that way the business only repays it if it’s profitable and meets a certain threshold Bit like the student loan scheme and mechanism for repayment of that Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traf Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 I think income tax will have to be raised across the board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escobarp Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 (edited) But should it in reality? Genuine question that ive personally Not, and my household won’t be drawing a single penny from any scheme that’s available and I’m very fortunate to be in that position. But should I have my income tax raised to pay? I fail to see why that should be the case. Should I pay something extra towards the additional nhs costs and the like? Of course. But that should be a separate line i just don’t see why My household should be held liable for funding other people’s furlough payments retrospectively. in reality I know it won’t work out like that Edited April 9, 2020 by Escobarp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traf Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 I didn't say it was right, but that's what will happen. The whole nation will have to contribute to the burden incurred. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escobarp Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 Agreed but should that be equal across the board? Absolutely not I’ve no benefit from these payments but I agree they had to be made. and I applied the government for coming up with the scheme to support people and business. It was critical. But I don’t see why I should have to make any contribution Above and beyond my already sizeable tax and ni payments each year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Site Supporter Tonge moor green jacket Posted April 9, 2020 Site Supporter Share Posted April 9, 2020 8 minutes ago, Escobarp said: Agreed but should that be equal across the board? Absolutely not I’ve no benefit from these payments but I agree they had to be made. and I applied the government for coming up with the scheme to support people and business. It was critical. But I don’t see why I should have to make any contribution Above and beyond my already sizeable tax and ni payments each year. If folk weren't furloughed and went on universal credit after losing their jobs, the state would pay for that and taxes contribute to that. I see what you're saying, but whatever way they approach it, tax payers money will be involved somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escobarp Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 4 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said: If folk weren't furloughed and went on universal credit after losing their jobs, the state would pay for that and taxes contribute to that. I see what you're saying, but whatever way they approach it, tax payers money will be involved somewhere. Aye agreed and it’s why we pay into the lot I get that but UC would be a lot less than furlough income. I just think the government have to look at it fairly should a nurse have their income tax increased after this to pay the deficit created by furlough? What’s your view on that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traf Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 19 minutes ago, Escobarp said: should a nurse have their income tax increased after this to pay the deficit created by furlough? What’s your view on that? Sadly, yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DazBob Posted April 9, 2020 Author Share Posted April 9, 2020 1 hour ago, Escobarp said: Agreed but should that be equal across the board? Absolutely not I’ve no benefit from these payments but I agree they had to be made. and I applied the government for coming up with the scheme to support people and business. It was critical. But I don’t see why I should have to make any contribution Above and beyond my already sizeable tax and ni payments each year. Fucking hell. Is this a serious post? There's plenty of stuff my tax and NI pays for that doesn't benefit me or any other person who gets up and goes to work all their adult lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Escobarp Posted April 9, 2020 Share Posted April 9, 2020 Just now, DazBob said: Fucking hell. Is this a serious post? There's plenty of stuff my tax and NI pays for that doesn't benefit me or any other person who gets up and goes to work all their adult lives. Absolutely it’s a serious post its my opinion and I begrudge paying additional tax when I’ve not claimed under the scheme in this case obviously there are lots of things we pay for that We don’t use. But in this instance I think a different approach is needed. Deal with it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DazBob Posted April 9, 2020 Author Share Posted April 9, 2020 "Deal with it" roflbrothel. You do realise that us who have been furloughed aren't "claiming" anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.