Skeddan Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Both IoM and UK have new minimum hourly rates effective from today In IoM these are: * £6.00 an hour to adult workers aged 18 and above * £5.25 an hour to workers aged 17-18 * £4.67 an hour to workers aged below 17 who are no longer of compulsory school age In the UK these are: * £5.73 an hour to adult workers aged 22 and above * £4.77 an hour to workers aged 18-21 - the development rate * £3.53 an hour to workers aged below 18 who are no longer of compulsory school age Raising minimum wages seems to increase GDP (more disposable income for low paid), and this seems to make sound economic sense and benefits businesses even if wage costs go up a bit. I think IoMG should be given credit for having higher and better minimum wage rates than in the UK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triskelion Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 What, no conspiracy theory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted October 1, 2008 Author Share Posted October 1, 2008 What, no conspiracy theory? ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 (part 1) Does the wage frame apply to foreign workers, Polish etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 (part 2) What steps are being taken to stop employers using slave labour? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snaefell050 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 (part 1) Does the wage frame apply to foreign workers, Polish etc? I would imagine so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxy Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 (part 3) What happens to the employers if they continue to shrug off warnings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojomonkey Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 As I understand it, the minimum wage applies any job irrespective of whether the employee is Manx, English, Scottish, Polish, Swedish or Martian. As the minimum wage is written into legislation any failure to comply would be contrary to that legislation, which I expect would be a criminal offence. What the penalties are for failing to comply I do not know, but there was that South African bloke who was done for employing "slave" labour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 In the UK these are: * £5.73 an hour to adult workers aged 22 and above * £4.77 an hour to workers aged 18-21 - the development rate * £3.53 an hour to workers aged below 18 who are no longer of compulsory school age Is this just an increase on the Isle of Man or also in the UK? (part 2) What steps are being taken to stop employers using slave labour? Most people in the workforce are slave labour anyway Manxy! (Look up wage slavery). You are just talking about those whose employment security is even more unsure than the precariousness faced by nearly all wages workers and the fact that these these people are even more at whims of their employer, but there isn't that much of a distinction between their situation and most peoples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted October 2, 2008 Author Share Posted October 2, 2008 Is this just an increase on the Isle of Man or also in the UK? Both - these are the new rates effective from 1st October. (part 1) Does the wage frame apply to foreign workers, Polish etc? Yes it does – but I’m not sure how it works in the case of someone working illegally – illegal immigrants or someone on visa which does not give right to work. In Sweden illegal immigrants won the right to unpaid wages they should have received from an employer who was paying below minimum wage. I don’t think this is the case in either UK or IoM. (part 2) What steps are being taken to stop employers using slave labour? Good question, but I don’t know the answer. The legislation to deal with breaches seems to be adequate, but it is an issue of enforcement. My impression is relatively few cases are actually prosecuted, and when this happens, they are treated more leniently than they might be. (part 3) What happens to the employers if they continue to shrug off warnings? IMO employers who break the law shouldn’t just be given warnings. If you are in business it is your responsibility to know applicable laws and regulations, and there are plenty of ways of finding out what these are. However there seems to be a kind of presumption that employers are good and mean well, and the issue is only one of lack of knowledge of the law (which is no excuse). Nonsense – businesses are motivated by profit, and many will do this if they can get away with it. there was that South African bloke who was done for employing "slave" labour. I believe he was done for falsifying immigration documents. There were two South Africans who were prosecuted: Van Rooyen who worked at Barclays, and Visser who made arrangements and was himself an illegal immigrant. Visser got 6 months imprisonment, suspended for two years, and had to pay £1,500 costs, he was excluded from the Island for five years. So, he had to leave the island, couldn’t come back for 5 years and had to pay £1,500 costs. Van Rooyen was jailed for 3 months and had to pay £1,500 costs. The cost to the taxpayer was probably many times more than the court costs they had to pay. They did not have to pay the workers what they should have received under minimum wage, or pay any fines or the like. As I understand it, the workers themselves spent 2 months in jail while awaiting deportation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted October 2, 2008 Author Share Posted October 2, 2008 Erm - isn't having a difference in minimum wage based on age discrimination on grounds of age? Why should a 16 or 17 year old worker not have the same entitlement to a £6 phr minimum wage as someone over 18? Maybe IoM should set an example by abolishing these age-based differentials? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 Why should a 16 or 17 year old worker not have the same entitlement to a £6 phr minimum wage as someone over 18? Ermm... yeah....like... 's not fair, like... is it? Like...y'know.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeddan Posted October 2, 2008 Author Share Posted October 2, 2008 Why should a 16 or 17 year old worker not have the same entitlement to a £6 phr minimum wage as someone over 18? Ermm... yeah....like... 's not fair, like... is it? Like...y'know.... Yeah... like it's not fair - like Human Rights Act like... Yeah but, no but, yeah but, no but.... Has the Minister explained how this can be justified? Exceptions to HRA shouldn't be made without good clear sound reason - that's how it works - otherwise it doesn't. Ermm... yeah....like... 's fair, like... innit? Like...y'know.... fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 Erm - isn't having a difference in minimum wage based on age discrimination on grounds of age? Why should a 16 or 17 year old worker not have the same entitlement to a £6 phr minimum wage as someone over 18? Maybe IoM should set an example by abolishing these age-based differentials? The differential reflects experience at that age. Otherwise the same argument could be applied to apprentices getting the same pay as their qualified trainers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted October 2, 2008 Share Posted October 2, 2008 (part 3) What happens to the employers if they continue to shrug off warnings? Setting the business on fire, or better the Manager's (whomever makes the decisions) home. Only seems fair, although a little far fetched and illegal. But it would be the best response. Nonsense – businesses are motivated by profit, and many will do this if they can get away with it. I agree. It id only the law that protects the employee from the employee. If there was no minimum wage then wages would be no doubt lower than what they are now. The employer will try to keep wages as low as possible, it is in their interests to do so. there was that South African bloke who was done for employing "slave" labour. I believe he was done for falsifying immigration documents. There were two South Africans who were prosecuted: Van Rooyen who worked at Barclays, and Visser who made arrangements and was himself an illegal immigrant. Visser got 6 months imprisonment, suspended for two years, and had to pay £1,500 costs, he was excluded from the Island for five years. So, he had to leave the island, couldn’t come back for 5 years and had to pay £1,500 costs. Van Rooyen was jailed for 3 months and had to pay £1,500 costs. The cost to the taxpayer was probably many times more than the court costs they had to pay. They did not have to pay the workers what they should have received under minimum wage, or pay any fines or the like. As I understand it, the workers themselves spent 2 months in jail while awaiting deportation. £1500, that's nothing! Just sad that these people found it necessary to take-up illegal work and be exploited. I think the concept of ''slave'' labour and the minimum wage does give the impression that wages are acceptable, it is simply a matter of how much you are getting paid. If you get under the minimum wage you are somehow then a slave, as if you are not when you are receiving £6.50 an hour. Unfortunately, this does seem to reinforce the acceptability of the wage system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.