1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    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.

    Dismiss Notice

Should Greggs workers be allowed to enjoy their bonus?

Discussion in 'Personal' started by Duke of York, Jan 22, 2020.

?

Should Greggs staff have their bonus clawed back by the state?

  1. No

    88.9%
  2. Yes, the nation can't afford to let them reap the benefits of hard work

    11.1%
  1. Duke of York

    Duke of York Star commenter

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51208542

    I know rules are rules, but it seems dreadfully unfair that those in receipt of universal credit who are trying to do the right thing by being employed, will lose three quarters of the £300 bonus they worked hard for, so the company could pay them this bonus.

    I mean it's not like they're getting it every week or that it will make a dent in the benefits cost to the nation. You'd have thought the government would want hard work to be rewarded throughout all levels of society, wouldn't you?

    Is it any wonder there are some who can't see the point of working and prefer to live off benefits? Or am I missing some fundamental point here?Should
     
    Laphroig, Jamvic and smoothnewt like this.
  2. Jamvic

    Jamvic Star commenter

    In work poverty I think it’s called.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society...taff-prompts-call-for-benefit-and-tax-rethink

    Torsten Bell, the chief executive of the Resolution Foundation thinktank, said: “While workers on universal credit could lose up to £225 of their £300 cash bonus, that is an argument for the government to lower the taper rate in universal credit, rather than for employers to stop paying their staff more.”

    He said Greggs should not be blamed for choosing to reward staff in this way: “Greggs should be congratulated for offering organisation-wide flat-rate bonuses that disproportionately benefit lower-paid staff. More firms should follow suit.”

    Helen Barnard, the deputy director of policy and partnerships at the anti-poverty charity the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF), said it was “morally right” for employers such as Greggs to boost the living standards of their employees and the bonus was welcome, although many of those on universal credit might gain very little from it.

    The rise of in-work poverty has become a salient feature of the UK economy in recent years. JRF estimates that stagnant wages and welfare cuts mean about 4 million people are living below the breadline despite being in a job, meaning about one in eight people in the economy were now classified as working poor.
     
    Duke of York likes this.
  3. irs1054

    irs1054 Star commenter

    They should be grateful that could keep £75, it was £5 when I was on Jobseekers.

    But seriously, is this really what the Government means by "making work pay"?
     
  4. bajan

    bajan Occasional commenter

    What about giving employees on UC vouchers instead of cash?
     
    Jamvic likes this.
  5. sbkrobson

    sbkrobson Star commenter

    I always feel sorry for workers in Greggs when I walk past, especially in Summer.
    They must be baking in there.
     
  6. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    Then just a taxable benefit reducng following years taxable allowance by £96.
     
  7. jubilee

    jubilee Star commenter

    strictly speaking, what happened was that you kept all your part-time/temporary earnings and your JSA amount was adjusted. They disregarded the first £5 of earnings so that travel costs were covered and you didn't end up worse off for having worked. After the £5 disregard, they reduced your JSA £ for £.
     
  8. jubilee

    jubilee Star commenter

    The solution for those in Universal Credit, and other means testing, is for the employer to pay the bonus over several benefit payment periods
     
    border_walker and Jamvic like this.
  9. ajrowing

    ajrowing Established commenter

    Perhaps the employer should pay their employees sufficiently well that the government doesn't also need to pay them?
     
  10. Jamvic

    Jamvic Star commenter

    Excellent idea.

    I think Greggs are considered one of the better employers but I agree with you. Not likely to happen under the current government though imo.
     
  11. Skeoch

    Skeoch Lead commenter

    This is a reflection of poor design of the system, just as with the doctors' pension issues. In both cases the marginal tax rate is far too high and is a disincentive to work. In the Greggs case at least the workers get some take-home; the doctors are effectively taxed more than they earn.
    UK taxation system is widely reported as the most complex in the world, but reform isn't likely to win votes and would be opposed by many groups with special pleading.
    "Politics is the art of the possible."
     
  12. peakster

    peakster Star commenter

    It's disgraceful - some execs get millions in bonuses and these people can't have a few extra quid.
     
    Laphroig likes this.
  13. peakster

    peakster Star commenter

    Johnson was asked a question about this in PMQs yesterday - he clearly hadn't a clue about it and undoubtedly didn't give a toss either.
     
  14. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    £20k a year minimum wage regardless of hours may be unachievable. Greggs sandwiches would become very expensive.
     
  15. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    Prevailing opinion is usually in favour of high tax for high earners.
     
  16. jubilee

    jubilee Star commenter

    That is not necessarily the problem. Many people are only able to work part-time and their rate of pay may be reasonable or good. They then get top-up Benefits payments related to their family size and their outgoings (such as rent).
     
  17. Mangleworzle

    Mangleworzle Star commenter

    It's a massive hidden perk for big companies, the government, i.e. tax payers help them get workers on the cheap so they can make bigger profits by dumping the wage costs elsewhere.
     
    cissy3 and ajrowing like this.
  18. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    If they paid a minimum of £20k per year, there wouldn't be a Greggs. Not an easy one to resolve.
     
  19. Mangleworzle

    Mangleworzle Star commenter

    Perhaps they should have to forego profits until such time as they become a viable business without being propped up by the tax payer.
     
    ajrowing likes this.
  20. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    Are there any large businesses where everyone Inc unskilled people are paid at least £20k a year (£23k in London)?
     

Share This Page