Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Supply teaching' started by teacha, Aug 27, 2015.
It was all looking so good until that last paragraph!!!!!!
Lol, trying to please all of the people all of the time. It'll never work
On a more serious note. Sounds like they have had a team meeting about how they can change new legislation which has mucked up their 'nice little earner' to their advantage whilst still hoping some suckers will fall for the 'nice little earner' scam.
Which new legislation is that...?
Chancellor George Osborne signalled another crackdown on umbrella companies in his budget speech.
The news will be welcomed by unions who are campaigning against the use of umbrella companies.
The Budget said: ?Autumn Statement 2014 announced that the government would review the growing use of overarching contracts of employment that allow some temporary workers and their employers to benefit from tax relief for home-to-work travel expenses, relief not generally available to other workers.
?This is unfair. As a result of the review, the government will change the rules to restrict travel and subsistence relief for workers engaged through an employment intermediary, such as an umbrella company or a personal service company, and under the supervision, direction and control of the end-user.
?This will take effect from April 2016 following a consultation on the detail of the changes. It will level the playing field between employment businesses that seek to lower their costs by using these arrangements and those that do not.?
Yeah. I've no idea who you're talking about unfortunately!
I'm sure it will be.
It's definitely unfair on other workers.
Uh oh. I hope once the consultation takes place they won't be a get out clause. Why wait until 2016? Can't they consult now?
A far more obvious way to deal with this is to get agencies out of education altogether. The net result of their presence has been a drastic cut in supply teacher's wages, a big increase in costs to schools, tax avoidance via umbrella companies, restrictive clauses that prevent schools from hiring good supply teachers full time, no access to the Teachers Pension Scheme for supply teachers. Only the agencies win.
Can you see those invisible parentheses? The ones that say "apart from everyone in Government and/or plenty of people in the public sector".
What about all those people in the private sector benefiting from expenses such as meals and hotels, company cars, free insurance and mileage that is fiddled so that many of their personal miles can be reclaimed?
When self-employed, you are entitled to deduct any expenses before paying tax on your earnings. I know this because I pay tax on two self-employed ventures of mine. I can subtract everything from printer ink, to mileage (at 40p per mile!), advertising etc etc before the tax is calculated on my profits. This is standard practice across the private sector; my accountant is surprised I don't claim for more.
In the public sector, similar expenses are incurred but are not accounted for before tax. Things like paying for our own professional dress (when I worked in retail, I was given a clothing allowance so I could buy clothes from the shop to wear at work...stands to reason I should wear their clothes and shouldn't have to spend my own money to do so); we spend a fortune printing things at home, buying our own resources, paying for internet - which is more and more essential to complete standard parts of our job such a report writing now that schools are using Cloud storage and other multi-media methods of completing paperwork. Why shouldn't these costs be taken into consideration when tax is calculated?
When you move into the private sector (which is what we've done by joining a supply agency) those things are taken into account.
I think Cameron's dis-satisfaction is only evident of how much he hates the public sector. These privileges are afforded into many private sector businesses.
I bet HE subtracts his petrol costs before paying his tax.
Surely it would make more sense just to pay supply teachers a higher rate than all this rigmarole?
I agree it would be much better to take agencies out of education altogether. They don't have much of a clue anyway.