Government thinking freezing or cutting the minimum wage.
Discussion
This should go down well.
The FT said:
Ministers are considering freezing or even cutting the minimum wage, despite embarking on the largest contraction to date in the welfare state with the aim of making “work pay”.
The wage, paid to almost a million low paid workers at companies such as retailers and manufacturers, has never been cut since its introduction in 1999.
But Downing Street said on Tuesday morning the business department was mulling over a report from the Low Pay Commission, which recommends the wage level, and could end up reducing the rate.
“It is something we need to make sure works and continues so that it supports people,” Number 10 said. “Changes are being made to the tax and benefits system that mean a couple with two children on the minimum wage will be £340 better off per year.”
The wage, presently at £6.19 an hour, is usually set each spring and comes into force in September.
Jo Swinson, Liberal Democrat employment minister, told the Low Pay Commission in January that the government believes it should take the UK’s stagnant economy into account when setting the rate.
“The level of employment is now above its pre-recession peak, but the employment rate is below the pre-recession peak,” she said. “This means that we believe that caution is required, particularly as the minimum wage rate is now at its highest ever level relative to average earnings for adults and remains high for young people.”
The hourly rate for workers over 21 increased from £6.08 last year, but the wage for employees aged 18 to 20 was frozen at £4.98.
The minimum wage was established by the Labour government in 1999, at a rate of £3.60 an hour, and is set after negotiations with employers and unions.
Campaigners have long pressured private sector employers and government departments to pay a “living wage”, which they say would be about £7.45 an hour and £8.55 in London, where costs are higher.
Chris Leslie, Labour’s shadow Treasury minister, criticised the chancellor for considering reducing the wage at the same time millionaires got a tax cut in the 50p rate of tax.
“How can George Osborne claim he wants to make work pay when the government is considering cutting or freezing the minimum wage?” Mr Leslie said.
“Working people are already worse off under this government because prices are rising faster than wages. And on top of that figures from the independent IFS show that the average family will be £891 worse off this year because of tax and benefit changes since 2010,” he added.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9a961914-9b8b-11e2-a820-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2PJKKjFHmThe wage, paid to almost a million low paid workers at companies such as retailers and manufacturers, has never been cut since its introduction in 1999.
But Downing Street said on Tuesday morning the business department was mulling over a report from the Low Pay Commission, which recommends the wage level, and could end up reducing the rate.
“It is something we need to make sure works and continues so that it supports people,” Number 10 said. “Changes are being made to the tax and benefits system that mean a couple with two children on the minimum wage will be £340 better off per year.”
The wage, presently at £6.19 an hour, is usually set each spring and comes into force in September.
Jo Swinson, Liberal Democrat employment minister, told the Low Pay Commission in January that the government believes it should take the UK’s stagnant economy into account when setting the rate.
“The level of employment is now above its pre-recession peak, but the employment rate is below the pre-recession peak,” she said. “This means that we believe that caution is required, particularly as the minimum wage rate is now at its highest ever level relative to average earnings for adults and remains high for young people.”
The hourly rate for workers over 21 increased from £6.08 last year, but the wage for employees aged 18 to 20 was frozen at £4.98.
The minimum wage was established by the Labour government in 1999, at a rate of £3.60 an hour, and is set after negotiations with employers and unions.
Campaigners have long pressured private sector employers and government departments to pay a “living wage”, which they say would be about £7.45 an hour and £8.55 in London, where costs are higher.
Chris Leslie, Labour’s shadow Treasury minister, criticised the chancellor for considering reducing the wage at the same time millionaires got a tax cut in the 50p rate of tax.
“How can George Osborne claim he wants to make work pay when the government is considering cutting or freezing the minimum wage?” Mr Leslie said.
“Working people are already worse off under this government because prices are rising faster than wages. And on top of that figures from the independent IFS show that the average family will be £891 worse off this year because of tax and benefit changes since 2010,” he added.
If you work full time and earn the minimum wage you earn around £12875 a year. In the last full year of the labour government a person earning that would pay tax on £6840 of it. Next year a minimum wage earner will pay tax on only £2875 of it. Seems to me minimum wage earners have had a sizeable increase in take home pay since labour left office just by the increasing of personal allowances.
Caulkhead said:
If you work full time and earn the minimum wage you earn around £12875 a year. In the last full year of the labour government a person earning that would pay tax on £6840 of it. Next year a minimum wage earner will pay tax on only £2875 of it. Seems to me minimum wage earners have had a sizeable increase in take home pay since labour left office just by the increasing of personal allowances.
as if that will stop labour succesfully selling it as a cut to their dimmer voters.besides if they cut minimum wage won't minimum wage earners just get higher tax credits? sounds like a half baked plan that will increase the wage subsidy to the likes of profit exporters like starbucks and amazon...
Edited by fbrs on Tuesday 2nd April 15:41
greygoose said:
Sounds like political suicide by the Conservatives as the headlines about out of touch toffs punishing the poorest workers will write themselves.
Tories know that they are dead in the water already, its only the Lib-Dems that will stop some of the idealistic loony policies seeing the light of day, thankfully. Nasty Tories, always have been and always will be, call me Dave and look at my Oak Tree isn't kidding anyone.
It's why they'll be voted out asap. Their diet isn't working, nonsense like this has nothing to do with revitalising the economy or repaying the national debt it's just plain old nasty tories wanting to concentrate the wealth into the hands of the few.
It's why they'll be voted out asap. Their diet isn't working, nonsense like this has nothing to do with revitalising the economy or repaying the national debt it's just plain old nasty tories wanting to concentrate the wealth into the hands of the few.
fbrs said:
as if that will stop labour succesfully selling it as a cut to their dimmer voters.
mattnunn said:
Nasty Tories, always have been and always will be, call me Dave and look at my Oak Tree isn't kidding anyone.
It's why they'll be voted out asap. Their diet isn't working, nonsense like this has nothing to do with revitalising the economy or repaying the national debt it's just plain old nasty tories wanting to concentrate the wealth into the hands of the few.
not entirely sure if you're serious. have a It's why they'll be voted out asap. Their diet isn't working, nonsense like this has nothing to do with revitalising the economy or repaying the national debt it's just plain old nasty tories wanting to concentrate the wealth into the hands of the few.
if you arefbrs said:
fbrs said:
as if that will stop labour succesfully selling it as a cut to their dimmer voters.
mattnunn said:
Nasty Tories, always have been and always will be, call me Dave and look at my Oak Tree isn't kidding anyone.
It's why they'll be voted out asap. Their diet isn't working, nonsense like this has nothing to do with revitalising the economy or repaying the national debt it's just plain old nasty tories wanting to concentrate the wealth into the hands of the few.
not entirely sure if you're serious. have a It's why they'll be voted out asap. Their diet isn't working, nonsense like this has nothing to do with revitalising the economy or repaying the national debt it's just plain old nasty tories wanting to concentrate the wealth into the hands of the few.
if you aremattnunn said:
You'd be dim to think that the Tory party isn't doing anything other than desperately trying to appease the (rather hunched and arthritic) back bone of the party so they've actually got someone to knock doors and deliver leaflets at the next election.
oh so you were serious! dear god. you'd be dim to read my post above and think i didnt see through such a silly headline. fact is the working poor pay considerably less tax and take home more money under the nasty/nice coalition than they did under feckless labour. the torys are going to be destoyed at the next election despite winning the benefits debate. like it or not the majority of people in the uk work or worked for a living and object to people being paid more than the national average to sit on their arses in houses nicer than the ones they pay for.timely peice by hodges in the torygraph
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100209...
Edited by fbrs on Tuesday 2nd April 18:14
fbrs said:
mattnunn said:
You'd be dim to think that the Tory party isn't doing anything other than desperately trying to appease the (rather hunched and arthritic) back bone of the party so they've actually got someone to knock doors and deliver leaflets at the next election.
oh so you were serious! dear god. you'd be dim to read my post above and think i didnt see through such a silly headline. fact is the working poor pay considerably less tax and take home more money under the nasty/nice coalition than they did under feckless labour. the torys are going to be destoyed at the next election despite winning the benefits debate. like it or not the majority of people in the uk work or worked for a living and object to people being paid more than the national average to sit on their arses in houses nicer than the ones they pay for.timely peice by hodges in the torygraph
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100209...
Edited by fbrs on Tuesday 2nd April 18:14
The working poor pay less tax because of the Liberal Democrats chucking all there eggs into the £10k personal allowance basket, both before the election and as part of the coalition agreement. The Tories always saw the minimum wage as an ideological hurdle, don't be suprised that Tory party members can't get over an argument they lost in 1998 when the vast majority of the members at my local cons club (good snooker table) are still smarting about the election of Harold Wilson.
I hate to say it but this is just more UKIP triggered internal Tory party flapping.
Ozzie Osmond said:
Age 21+ rate is £6.19 an hour
18 to 20 rate is £4.98
Under 18 rate is £3.68
Rate for an apprentiuce in first year or aged under 19 is £2.65
When I left school in 1998, at 16, my first job paid £3 per hour. That was a crappy admin job at Dutton Forshaw. 18 to 20 rate is £4.98
Under 18 rate is £3.68
Rate for an apprentiuce in first year or aged under 19 is £2.65
So in 15 years, someone under 18 is only worth 68 pence more than what I was paid in 1998?
Yet a loaf of bread has tripled in price over the same period.
there are virtually no full time jobs for under 18s any more so the govt doesn't really care. jobs for people that age are just seen as extra pocket money.
I am generally in favour of the minimum wage - the main bad thing about it imho is that many companies now use it simply as a maximum wage.
I am generally in favour of the minimum wage - the main bad thing about it imho is that many companies now use it simply as a maximum wage.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff