janaage
People's Front of Alba
 Offline
Posts: 14825
|
 |
« Reply #135 on: Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 18:10:32 » |
|
Up to around 5 years ago the Governement used to seperate the NI contributions from the tax revenue...but it now gets paid togther by companies...and the Government now treats it the same.
But the cost here is that it is collected differently, the government treats it the same, but they want to merge them together collection wise. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Summerof69
Offline
Posts: 8598
|
|
« Reply #136 on: Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 18:14:18 » |
|
The advantage seems to be that the 6% of my wage that I contribute is bumped up by the 14% which my employer also puts into the pot.
My old company used to match my contributions up to a maximum 7%. I don't know of many private companies that pay in more than double the employees contributions...if any. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Summerof69
Offline
Posts: 8598
|
|
« Reply #137 on: Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 18:25:06 » |
|
Unions and their leaders are the biggest hypocrites of them all.
Around 10 years ago, the unions reps of GPMU (now Amicus) said to all employees at my old place, that they agreed with the company decision to get rid of our old Final Salary pension to replace it with a Stakeholder pension, with no fight at all, despite employees increasing their contributions a few years previously.
Now, the Public sector has been told to pay some more money in...time for a stike despite them being offered a Final Salary pension...but they would have to work a few extra years. If I was offered what they were...I would've ripped the Governments hand off...literally.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Phil_S
Offline
Posts: 1534
Who changed my Avatar ?!
|
|
« Reply #138 on: Wednesday, November 30, 2011, 18:48:40 » |
|
Unions and their leaders are the biggest hypocrites of them all.
Around 10 years ago, the unions reps of GPMU (now Amicus) said to all employees at my old place, that they agreed with the company decision to get rid of our old Final Salary pension to replace it with a Stakeholder pension, with no fight at all, despite employees increasing their contributions a few years previously.
Now, the Public sector has been told to pay some more money in...time for a stike despite them being offered a Final Salary pension...but they would have to work a few extra years. If I was offered what they were...I would've ripped the Governments hand off...literally.
Of course the main difference being the government is not labour now |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
From the Dark Side
|
|
|
jonny72
Offline
Posts: 5554
|
|
« Reply #139 on: Thursday, December 1, 2011, 12:35:00 » |
|
Good to see Jeremy Clarkson weighing in to the debate on the strike with a well reasoned, balanced and thought provoking statement; "I'd have them all shot. I would take them outside and execute them in front of their families". Interesting response from the unions; all the strikers were actually mums who hold our society together by saving lives and caring for the sick, vulnerable and elderly. Plus they're going to grass him up to the Police, not sure what this will achieve though as this doesn't even make the top 20 most offensive remarks by Jeremy Clarkson. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15977813 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Ardiles
Offline
Posts: 11588
Stirlingshire Reds
|
|
« Reply #140 on: Thursday, December 1, 2011, 12:42:16 » |
|
What annoyed me most about Clarkson's comments is that David Cameron felt he needed to weigh in and condemn them. He's the PM, FFS. Clarkson will only have made the comments anyway because he'll have a book out for Christmas (I haven't checked - but he will) and he wants some publicity. Is the top job now so media-driven that Cameron feels he has to take time out to comment on comments made by television presenters?
(I know the answer to this question is 'yes', and this is what depresses me.)
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Batch
Not a Batch
Offline
Posts: 57751
|
|
« Reply #141 on: Thursday, December 1, 2011, 12:47:40 » |
|
What annoyed me most about Clarksons comments were people totally overreacting to them. He is Jeremy Clarkson FFS. Even if he literally meant it, which I really doubt he did, who cares.
Its RossBrandgate all over again. Attack the personality because they don't like him.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
sonicyouth
Offline
Posts: 22352
|
|
« Reply #142 on: Thursday, December 1, 2011, 12:51:30 » |
|
What annoyed me most about Clarkson's comments is that David Cameron felt he needed to weigh in and condemn them. He's the PM, FFS. Clarkson will only have made the comments anyway because he'll have a book out for Christmas (I haven't checked - but he will) and he wants some publicity. Is the top job now so media-driven that Cameron feels he has to take time out to comment on comments made by television presenters?
(I know the answer to this question is 'yes', and this is what depresses me.)
I believe he has a DVD out rather than a book. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
horlock07
Offline
Posts: 19145
Lives in Northern Bastard Outpost
|
|
« Reply #143 on: Thursday, December 1, 2011, 13:05:17 » |
|
It will be interesting to see how the strikes are reported in the main news bulletins this evening, and on Newsnight etc. Based on what little I have heard, it does feel to me as if this has not gone well for the unions...and that their position will have been weakened by today's action. The Coalition (or the more Tory elements of it) will be loving this.
Newsnight had Maude on for the government and Mark Sorwotka for the union (I think its PCS), the worring thing for the Union is that Sorwotka comes across as being as smug and out of touch as Osbourne does. Ultimately now we have the career politicians on one side and the career union reps (who dream of being politicians) on the other and everyone else is just stuck in the middle. I just wish that the media would stop interviewing them, its just plain pointless. When I worked in LA I was a Unison rep for a while (as no one else wanted to do it), and I can honestly say they had no interest unless you were a female member of staff or on minimum wage. We had a dispute regarding some of the planning staff being screwed over regarding allowances and the Union didin't even bother sending anyone up from manchester to assist with negotiations with management - they essentially admitted that it is not good PR for them to get involved in such disputes and thus they didint bother! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ghanimah
Offline
Posts: 3639
|
|
« Reply #144 on: Thursday, December 1, 2011, 13:07:17 » |
|
What annoyed me most about Clarkson's comments is that David Cameron felt he needed to weigh in and condemn them. He's the PM, FFS. Clarkson will only have made the comments anyway because he'll have a book out for Christmas (I haven't checked - but he will) and he wants some publicity. Is the top job now so media-driven that Cameron feels he has to take time out to comment on comments made by television presenters?
(I know the answer to this question is 'yes', and this is what depresses me.)
In fairness to Cameron (the clueless tosser that he is) he was asked the question on This Morning, he can hardly say no comment in those circumstances - his response was as bland as it could get in my view. As for Clarkson it was clearly a joke...some people should get over it. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"We perform the duties of freemen; we must have the privileges of freemen ..."
|
|
|
Baggins
Offline
Posts: 600
|
|
« Reply #145 on: Thursday, December 1, 2011, 13:09:28 » |
|
I believe he has a DVD out rather than a book.
I'm assuming he probably has one of each out - he usually does. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
jonny72
Offline
Posts: 5554
|
|
« Reply #147 on: Thursday, December 1, 2011, 13:14:42 » |
|
In fairness to Cameron (the clueless tosser that he is) he was asked the question on This Morning, he can hardly say no comment in those circumstances - his response was as bland as it could get in my view.
To be doubly fair to Cameron, prior to the interview a Labour shadow minister had specifically requested that he distance himself from Clarkson's comments. Bit of a stupid request, as if any politician is going to say they agree with anything Clarkson says, let alone when it's calling for strikers being shot. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Sippo
Living in the 80s
Offline
Posts: 15614
I ain't gettin on no plane fool
|
|
« Reply #148 on: Thursday, December 1, 2011, 13:14:42 » |
|
It makes me laugh, cos people want the BBC to sack him.
As if they would, with out him top gear would be shite. Top Gear has to be one of the best TV programmes viewing wise.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If my calculations are correct, when this baby hits 88 miles per hour, you're gonna see some serious shit...
|
|
|
Batch
Not a Batch
Offline
Posts: 57751
|
|
« Reply #149 on: Thursday, December 1, 2011, 13:25:27 » |
|
It makes me laugh, cos people want the BBC to sack him.
As if they would, with out him top gear would be shite. Top Gear has to be one of the best TV programmes viewing wise.
And it makes the BBC as shit load of money. Still if unions want to waste their members union fees consulting lawyers about whether his comments are chargeable so be it. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
