No p45 No payslips

[GypsyGSD]

My grandaughter age 18 has been working in a local hair salon as she thought on a aprenticeship for just over a year starting age 17 she has now been a few weeks ago she has been told she is not on a aprentiship and they feel her attidude is not right for this line of work they gave her a months probation,after 2 weeks they decided she had to go , now dwp want to see proof of earnings her wage has been paid into the bank direct but she has asked for back dated payslips and her p45 plus there reasons for her dismissal she cannot have these as the companys accountant has no record of her working there and her emplyer now wants her to sign a p46 which she is not going to do any advice would be most welcome tks gypsy x

[brenda]

Sorry hadn't noticed that she already has it -- apologies. Tell her not to give it back.

[dotty.]

if she was under 18 she was not liable for NI contributions was she? however, once she turned 18 she would have been and the employer probably realised that they couldn't affford to pay their contribution as they have been working without a legitimate business account,

[ABerrant]

NI contributions (based on earning levels) commence at age 16.

[dotty.]

ahh do they? I don't think any under 18 year old i have worked with has ever been more than weekend staff or part time i guess that's why it seemed unusual. If they were getting her to work 45 hours a week every week they were committing an offence toi weren't they? anything over 41 hours is time and half isn;t it?

[factor-fiction]

"Anything over 41.5 hours is time and half isn't it?"

Well, I'd be very surprised if there any employment legislation on that!

[DC_FC]

Any news on this OP

[boxtops]

If she was on an Apprenticeship she should have had a contract - this all sounds very fishy and unbusinesslike.

[Skyline D]

Just to pick up a couple of points.

So far as I know there are no rules requiring "time and a half" or any other additional payment to work overtime.

Keeping the P46 certainly wouldn't prevent the employer faking a signature Brenda, it's just a blank document of which they will have dozens of them most likely. If they want to fake it they could just write another one.

It would appear the "employer" here has paid the girl "off the books" ie without officially employing her. That's only of any real significance if her earnings were over £110pw though I expect they were with those sort of hours. If they were over that then she's certainly underpaid NIC and probably tax though that depends on other info we don't have.

The Revenue say they haven't heard of the the "company" (I'd guess it isn't a company in terms of being a Limited Company, it will be a sole trader most likely). I would expect that means they haven't heard of them as being an employer rather than that they haven't heard of them at all.