Greggs Bonus Fiasco

[Theland]

Greggs workers awarded a £300 bonus but those on universal credit only allowed to keep £75 of it.

Is this fair?

[david small]

My nephew just got his yearly accumulated tips money at the hotel he works hard at on zero contract and minimum wage. Was it taxed? Heck yes. Death and Taxes.

[nailit]

Yes ok ff,
I know numerous people that have to jump through hoops to claim a few pound in order to survive.
Why not just shoot them?
Burden on society etc!

[fiction-factory]

Someone already getting paid a wage equal to X +300 may get UC but they will get less top up than someone earning X, all other things being equal..

[Ellipsis]

Sorry, I don't know how UC works. Would they get to keep more of it if it was paid as £25 per month over 12 months rather than a £300 lump sum?

[fiction-factory]

This is getting silly, Nailit. Who mentioned shooting them or anything even close to it.
It would be nice if everyone including pensioners, and all unemployed, as well as those in work, could get a top up but someone has to pay for it, so there have to be points at which the top up is stopped/scaled back/ not made available

[Mozz71]

Seems to me that Greggs have an easy way around it if they want to. Instead of a one-off £300 which the employee only gets 75%, give them £75 a month over 4 months so it doesn't effect their UC.

[nailit]

//This is getting silly, Nailit. Who mentioned shooting them or anything even close to it//

Yeah, my bad. Sorry!
Just ignore the scores of reports of the homeless dying on the streets ect. No bullets, my mistake.
Just cold!

[Mozz71]

Sorry, that should read 25%.

[nailit]

Some people just dont live in inner-cities and the REAL world.
Stay put. It will come to you soon enough!

[Mozz71]

Sorry Ellipsis, I didn't see your post and ended up making much the same point.

[THECORBYLOON]

UC claimants are allowed to earn a certain amount before the earnings above that affect their entitlement.

That means if they already exceed the allowed amount, any bonus paid in a lump sum OR in stages, would affect their entitlement.

In fact, if the bonus is a large large enough, it may be better to receive the lump sum since a portion of it may be enough to reduce the entitlement to zero. If paid in stages, the whole amount would have an effect over the months to come.

[THECORBYLOON]

If paid as a lump sum, it would affect only that month's entitlement.

[Gromit]

Universal Credit is a big political con paid for by the taxpayer.
The Government win by claiming record employment.
Supermarket chains such as Greggs win by having a huge flexible workforce.

The losers are the employees who only get low hour contracts usually 12-15 hours a week. They cannot live on that few hours so they get their wage topped up by the tax payer by claiming taxpayer funded benefits.
Last year subsidising supermarket workers cost us taxpayers £11 billion in benefits.

Rather than benefits going down, more people than ever are claiming them.
Because people working are earning less than £12,500 they are paying no income tax so tax yields are reduced.

(I know someone who worked 15 hours extra over Christmas and New Year and came out with less money. That clearly is wrong).

[ladybirder]

An employer relation of mine has one employee who refuses to do any overtime because that would reduce his UC.

[alavahalf]

This is exactly what we need .. a tax avoidance plan for those who cant do a weeks work because it interferes with their benefits.
So it seems those who pesevere and put a full week in on the minimum wage will receive the same bonus as those whose benefits restrict their working hours ?

[Gromit]

// An employer relation of mine has one employee who refuses to do any overtime because that would reduce his UC. //

That is not the exception, it is the norm.
UC has a built in disincentive. The more hours you work the less you make.

[Gromit]

alavahalf

Having to claim benefits is a time consuming and dispiriting experience.
Having a job and still having to go through that experience is doubly disheartening.
No one wants a 14 hour/week contract, they would sooner work 28-32hours and not have to waste such much of their time claiming additional money in benefits.

[Theland]

Gromit - I agree.

[THECORBYLOON]

UC takes into account only 63% of earnings above a certain amount. That means more than a third of their earnings above that limit is disregarded.

[cassa333]

If your income is below a curtain amount the government tops that up. Personally I think they spend too much of my taxes on it but that’s life.

If, for whatever reason, you get paid more then the top up is reduced. What is so difficult to understand?

Life is neither equal or fare and if you want to give your family a bit extra then do it yourself.