Living Wage 2020... is it right?

[Hades]

Surely this will filter upwards it always does for the exact reasons OP is moaning.
More professional people will just ask for more money when applying for jobs. I cant remember the last time I took a job for the advertised salary I always ask for more as every employer always try's to hook the correct employee for a cheapest possible salary they can its just business.

If you don't ask you don't get. But you have to do it with confidence, because your worth it

I think the problem in the public sector is that a given job is on a given pay band. So it's not as easy to get a payrise. In the private sector you can sometimes get a payrise by threatening to quit for a higher paid job. But in the public sector I'm not sure the same flexibility is there.

 

[Hades]

It would be better to let people on minimum wage not have to pay any income tax. That way it won't lead to less jobs.

Which indirectly means that the other tax payers are subsidising private companies.

 

[Freakbro]

Who valued it and against what? How is it being devalued if his wage goes up over time, albeit not as much as someone elses? Why is an IT job any more "valuable" than someone elses?

But we're not talking about just IT are we.

Say for example a Health Care Assistant is currently on £10 / hr and Min Wage is £6.50 for serving burgers, in 2020 the HCA will be on £10.51 and the burger flipper £9

That has 'devalued' the job of the HCA, whereas they were paid significantly above NMW as the job requires a lot more training and has more responsibility than giving out burgers.

I'm not against this rise at all, in fact I push for larger than NMW rises for our lowest paid staff year on year, I'm just pointing out the OP has a valid concern.

 

[Hades]

But we're not talking about just IT are we.

Say for example a Health Care Assistant is currently on £10 / hr and Min Wage is £6.50 for serving burgers, in 2020 the HCA will be on £10.51 and the burger flipper £9

That has 'devalued' the job of the HCA, whereas they were paid significantly above NMW as the job requires a lot more training and has more responsibility than giving out burgers.

I'm not against this rise at all, in fact I push for larger than NMW rises for our lowest paid staff year on year, I'm just pointing out the OP has a valid concern.

IT was an example. My point stands across any job and any role. Who is to say one job is more important than another? For example a premier division footballer earns millions. So that job must be thousands of times more valuable than being a nurse?

 

[dowie]

But we're not talking about just IT are we.

Say for example a Health Care Assistant is currently on £10 / hr and Min Wage is £6.50 for serving burgers, in 2020 the HCA will be on £10.51 and the burger flipper £9

That has 'devalued' the job of the HCA, whereas they were paid significantly above NMW as the job requires a lot more training and has more responsibility than giving out burgers.

I'm not against this rise at all, in fact I push for larger than NMW rises for our lowest paid staff year on year, I'm just pointing out the OP has a valid concern.

but, unless inflation increases significantly, he hasn't got a valid concern other than what essentially boils down to 'envy' that people who were much less well off suddenly aren't as badly off relatively speaking

 

[cyber69]

So... The living wage for people over 25 is to be £9 by 2020.

And Public sector Pay rises are capped at 1%.

I'm not very pleased about this, i feel it will devalue my wage.

For example at the moment I get paid £11.20 Per hour

the Gap between My wage and the current Minimum is £4.70, I believe that the extra pay per hour is based on my skills and the job that I do over a poo job that pays £6.50.

If they raise these to £9 then that gap is £2.20... A MUCH smaller gap.

Imo my wage should then increase to keep this gap, otherwise whats the bloody point in getting skills to get paid a higher amount for that amount to be worth less.

I'm worried that if Many are then on £9 per hour the prices of food, and other required commodities will also rise, its going to happen we all know it.
And when that does happen, My wage will still be the same and things will cost me more.



Is anyone else worried about this?

I work for a large global outsourcing company and the only way it seems to be able to boost income is by doing overtime and lot's of it. They seem to take on staff and then don't do pay rises so the only way to earn more is either leave or work overtime or on-call.

So i've not had a pay rise in the last four years and won't be too far off that £9 an hour rate.

 

[Sheff]

I'm in a similar position, £11 per hour for first and second line support in certain areas plus data analysis for the contact centre and incident management outside of core business hours.

It's a good rate of pay for where I live but it's slowly being eroded by the pay freezes; we've already had this within the nhs as cost of living increases were given to all points below £21000 and so the first four pay bands have been compacted.

By 2020 the top of my pay band will have increased by 10% over ten years and bands 1 and 2 will no longer exist as they'll be swallowed up by the NLW, band 3 will see it's pay range reduced further or potentially merged with band 4.

There won't be any incentive for progression or improvement within the NHS as generally the amount of responsibilities increase greatly with each pay band... until you can find some cushy role where no-one knows what you actually do!

If you add in the removal of the reduced NI rate, the suggestion of removing tax relief for pension payments and the proposal or reducing pay for unsociable hours then it paints a bleak picture.

 

[anything I don't mind]

Which indirectly means that the other tax payers are subsidising private companies.

haha how did you get to that? Bringing minimum wage people off income tax does not give any money to private business. Private business does not pay income tax. The employees do. It will reduce the tax revenue of the government and put more money in to the hands of the minimum wage workers.

One problem that would create though is that people on minimum wage would not want a raise until it is over a certain amount, otherwise they would be better off on minimum wage due to the tax break. This would remove a section of the pay bracket and might create other problems where people don't get a raise.

 

[Freakbro]

IT was an example. My point stands across any job and any role. Who is to say one job is more important than another? For example a premier division footballer earns millions. So that job must be thousands of times more valuable than being a nurse?

Err, every employer defines one job as more important than another, hence the difference in pay rates

but, unless inflation increases significantly, he hasn't got a valid concern other than what essentially boils down to 'envy' that people who were much less well off suddenly aren't as badly off relatively speaking

Ahh, the old stupid 'envy' quote. No-one is arguing that people are not worth getting a living wage, I have advocated it for years, but then there should be the commensurate rise in wages for the jobs above them, which will happen in the private sector but not in the public.

 

[413x]

Wages and lease cost are the greatest running cost in these sort of places. The cost of transporting and paying for the food is next to nothing for very large companies. You can count on the customer paying the cost in wages.

I wonder if it has the potential to drive up costs passed to the customer to a point where jobs/businesses don't get sales
If my Domino's pizza goes up to 15 from 10 I'm more likely to get a supermarket jobby

Possible that net income stays same but less people employed nationally?
Less jobs paying more?

 

[dowie]

Ahh, the old stupid 'envy' quote. No-one is arguing that people are not worth getting a living wage, I have advocated it for years, but then there should be the commensurate rise in wages for the jobs above them, which will happen in the private sector but not in the public.

why should there be? Just because others earn more doesn't mean you necessarily need more - wages don't always work like that. if there is trouble hiring people to fulfill certain roles then you may see wages rise but otherwise you are still just talking about envy

 

[Electroshadow]

I think the problem in the public sector is that a given job is on a given pay band. So it's not as easy to get a payrise. In the private sector you can sometimes get a payrise by threatening to quit for a higher paid job. But in the public sector I'm not sure the same flexibility is there.

years ago I use to work in the public sector I left due to getting only being paid £5p/h 6 months later they employed me via contracting for an extra £16p/h.....

now for the last 13 years I have been contracting for private and public sectors.

im not sure where the stereo type that full time employees of the public sector are well paid im pretty sure most of them are on the bread line. yes there are a few that earn good salary's but I reckon that's only about 30 per council.

and there is plenty to go around as when I was only being paid £5p/h the council were charging (themselves?) £58p/h for my time.....

 

[Hagar]

Ahh, the old stupid 'envy' quote. No-one is arguing that people are not worth getting a living wage, I have advocated it for years, but then there should be the commensurate rise in wages for the jobs above them, which will happen in the private sector but not in the public.

That is how unions used to work, the unskilled man gets a rise, therefore the skilled man got that plus a bit. Didn't matter if it was the same general trade or whatever. Maintaining the differentials.

'Tis a slippery slope. If the MINIMUM wage is mandated, it does not mean that everyone should get an uplift.

 

[413x]

why should there be? Just because others earn more doesn't mean you necessarily need more - wages don't always work like that. if there is trouble hiring people to fulfill certain roles then you may see wages rise but otherwise you are still just talking about envy

With this I'd be even better off getting out of the country.
Cost of living is simply going to increase for those above the new rate
Those on current minimum are going to get a pay rise that is simply quite impossible for no change in job

 

[Electroshadow]

yes I would say so.
Im going to ask for £5p/h increase like I do every year and meet somewhere in the middle. "If you don't ask you don't get" and as we are talking skilled workers you should always end up with something whether it be pay or benefits...if you are good at your job and valued & if your not there's always a company that will value you.

 

[Spook187]

OMG cry me a river, your just an run of the mill IT bod nothing special.

 

[AtticusFinch]

Op all I can say is that more money per hour is still more money. The fact that the gap between the minimum wage and you wage is irrelevant other than as a matter of perception. The reality is that £11.20 an hour is significantly more than £9 per hour.

 

[Hades]

haha how did you get to that? Bringing minimum wage people off income tax does not give any money to private business. Private business does not pay income tax. The employees do. It will reduce the tax revenue of the government and put more money in to the hands of the minimum wage workers.

Because private companies would simply pay less money (e.g. if it was minimum/living wage + £1k they would simply drop the salary for new employees to be minimum/living wage). The employee would take home the same or more money because of the tax incentive and the tax payer has therefore subsidised a reduced cost to the company.

Err, every employer defines one job as more important than another, hence the difference in pay rates

So by that definition in 2020 the OP's job is "correctly" valued at about the same as someone on minimum/living wage because their employers have set the wage at the same amount... and the OP should be happy that he's being paid the right amount for the value of the job.

When in actual fact it simply shows that the wage is just a monetary amount that the employer can get away with charging. It doesn't define the value of the job at all. It simply defines the salary paid.

 

[scorza]

So... The living wage for people over 25 is to be £9 by 2020.

And Public sector Pay rises are capped at 1%.

I'm not very pleased about this, i feel it will devalue my wage.

For example at the moment I get paid £11.20 Per hour

the Gap between My wage and the current Minimum is £4.70, I believe that the extra pay per hour is based on my skills and the job that I do over a poo job that pays £6.50.

If they raise these to £9 then that gap is £2.20... A MUCH smaller gap.

Imo my wage should then increase to keep this gap, otherwise whats the bloody point in getting skills to get paid a higher amount for that amount to be worth less.

I'm worried that if Many are then on £9 per hour the prices of food, and other required commodities will also rise, its going to happen we all know it.
And when that does happen, My wage will still be the same and things will cost me more.



Is anyone else worried about this?

I understand where you're coming from, but would advise you to just worry about what you earn and not others around you - that way lies unhappiness. In an ideal world, it'd be incredibly hard to be very rich and incredibly hard to be very poor in this country - I know lots won't like that notion because they incorrectly think they're rich, or pretend to be rich, but at least we're doing something about the bottom end of the market. It'll take a lot of paradigm shift before we do something at the top as well.

 

[Deleted member 66701]

Yes.

It's not right that the government continues to subsidise shady/bad/incompetent employers with tax credits.

If a business owner can't afford to pay a living wage to thier employees then they shouldn't be in business. Sell the business to someone competent that can run it properly.