"Additional rights for agency workers" after 12 weeks..?

edd1974:
In law yes.
Going back a few years I was working for an agency.
Was working for a pallet line place. Same route postcode area same collections ever day.
After 11 weeks was told works not there anymore I’m not needed.
Then was offered work someware else.
There always find a way around things.

This is what happens to me every year. I get an “ongoing” assignment but at 12 weeks I’m given some transparently untruthful story that work has “gone quiet” at that firm, when I know full well it hasn’t, and I’m pulled out and offered an assignment elsewhere usually on a poorer rate.

So my response is always “No, it’s all right, I’ve saved enough now to go off boating, see you in six months” so essentially the agency shoot themselves in the foot a bit by doing this as they lose around £200 a week in placement fees by avoiding having to pay me £20 or £30 a week more.

This rule is the main reason agencies will do everything in their power not to offer PAYE. It only applies to PAYE drivers.

Be aware also that every single company worth their salt will make an agency sign an agreement putting the responsibility for checking the 12 weeks in their hands, and failure to comply i.e. they put a driver in for longer and trigger the parity pay rights, the agency will indemnify the company for all the additional cost this entails.

Don’t for a moment think the nice company want to give you parity but the nasty agency won’t let them, it’s the other way round.

Conor:

ETS:
Regarding pensions, let’s not forget taht private pension funds tend to go belly up unexpectedly, wiping out ppl’s “savings”, recent example Carillion and their pension scheme. If I was near retirement I’d probably go for it but I have 0 faith that 30-35 years from now “my money” will still be there for me. If anything, the gov’t will be so broke by then they will be taxing pensions heavily.

Pension funds are ring fenced and you have full protection under FSCS. Company pension schemes like Carillion are a different matter but ones like Nest, People’s Pension etc involve the pension fund holding stocks, shares and bonds from all over the world and those are ringfenced from the rest of the company so if the pension company goes belly up the core assets are still there and the Financial Services Ombudsman will appoint another company to take over the pensions, those stocks, shares and bonds being transferred over. Pensions are already taxed when you draw them down. The income from a pension is classed as taxable income taxed the same as income from wages.

It is also completely impossible for the UK government to be broke as we have a sovereign currency meaning we can simply print money if it came to it unlike countries like Greece who don’t have their own currency but use someone else’s, in their case the Euro.

The government will NEVER print money to pay all a private company’s generous final salary pension obligations. They didn’t do it with BHS, British Steel, etc. - and they’ll not start now I suggest. They might offer to pay part if gits like “Sir” Phillip Green - can be squeezed for the rest.

The Governmnent, in cahoots with the Financial “Industry” - routinely act in a manner “against Pension member’s interests”. I worked in the City in the 1980’s, and it was my experience of working in the square mile that made me as Left Wing on matters of “Finance” as I am today.

I’m only Right Wing on Law & Order. I’m Socially Liberal (and voted Libdem more than for any other party in my life) and Left Wing on matters of Finance, “Tony Benn” Style. I reckon all the banks should be nationalized, and company loans only made to those firms that are in the public interest. I would pull the rug on any foreign owned outfits “short of cash” that way, whilst a UK with a nationalized Banking sector - could cherry pick all the decent firms worth taking on for a quid… Hehe… None of the Tory Privatizations would have happened of course, but there again I never voted for Thatcher during the 80’s, whilst Labour under Footy - were unelectable. (I voted SDP in the 1987 election - my first ever general election vote)

Conor:

Winseer:
Today’s crappy pensions though - involve the first 2-3 years of contributions paying front-loaded commissions, and you really need to be paying in for around 10-12 years just to have a good chance of breaking even on what you’ve paid in by that point.

You really have no idea what you’re talking about. There is no front loading of commissions. You can see what the charges are yourself. You’re charged an annual management fee which is a percentage of the amount in your pot - 1% being ridiculously expensive. I have no idea what mental gymnastics you’re using to come to the conclusion that you need to be paying in for 10-12 years just to break even. I’ll post the figures from my People’s Pension account later on today when the website is back up from overnight maintenance.

Carryfast:
Here’s a clue.There’s a big difference between your pension ‘FUND’.As opposed to the rate at which the ‘Annuity’,which that ‘fund’ buys you,pays out.The whole scam being based on a figure at which they know the holder will probably die before they’ve paid out everything in the ‘fund’.

Am I the only one with a clue about how pensions work? Christ you’ve just posted a whole load of typical RDC waiting room ■■■■■■■■. You do know you don’t have to have an annuity and can do draw down? Unlike an annuity where you basically purchase a policy promising to pay out £x until the day you die, when you do draw down you can choose to take 25% of it tax free as a lump sum and from then on just decide how much you’re going to take out of your pot that year and leave the rest in there. When you die what is left gets passed on to your estate.

Before anyone else posts that its all a rip off may I suggest going and doing some actual [zb] research about pensions before making yourself look a pillock?

READ EVERY SINGLE BIT OF THIS ENTIRE ARTICLE, ALL THE LINKS, ALL THE SECTIONS and then you won’t look like these two.

moneysavingexpert.com/savin … -pensions/

Pension funds have been under-performing the market for nearly two decades, because they habitually hold far too much of the fund in “cash” and “bonds” whilst interest rates have been falling, and then stayed at rock bottom. Top yielding shares return much better dividend yields, but the pension funds continue this folly, nonetheless.
The 1% annual management fee - is the bit that people can calculate easily. The tax rebate one gets on “pension contributions” makes people believe that there will be a guaranteed profit on the pension pot at maturity. NOT factored into all this are the Gordon Brown AND George Osbourne “Pension Grabs” which no matter how small - are going to take a LARGE chunk of any “annual profit” on the fund - IF so much of the fund is held in Cash (0.75% base rate) and Bonds (upto 50% premium to buy pristine paper for some time since, and no benefit at such lofty bond prices unless the fund is selling) - and far too little invested in even FTSE stocks during the slow but sure climb, since the Credit Crunch in particular. So even if the “pension trading” breaks even (plenty of them have black holes from "trading losses) - you’re talking about 1% management charges plus government pension grabs (ongoing, and not one-off contrary to popular belief…) having to limbo under the annual profit - which for all too many pension funds - is 0.75% base rate of interest, and <2% on long-held government bonds. These funds - need to learn how to make money again, rather than “playing it safe” and then end up treading water, profits-wise, whilst “churn and burn” aspects of selling during a company scandal (for example) and buying only after outside interest is announced (paying through the nose) - crush a lot of any would-be trading profits out of the entire fund, before “poltiical risks” are factored in, such as sharp changes to interest rates. The situation is SO bad - that the Bank of England CANNOT routinely raise interest rates now - because of systemic weakness in the PENSION funds “industry” - that was quietly swept under the carpet along with the Insurance sector in 2008… The truth is, there wasn’t any money left to “bail out anything else”. As I said, the government does NOT print money to bail out private pension funds “unable to meet their obligations”, hence why BHS pensioners for example - are now taking a haircut, even with some cash raised from Now FORMER Billionaire Sir Phillip Green.

There are going to be a LOT of upset people in 15-20 years time, who thought they had rather a lot more to come - than what they’ll end up with, simply from “too little profitable trading” minus "too much government dipping to funds, and not heavily regulating the entire industry to STOP such high 1% charges when CASH only returns 0.75% at prevailing rates.

So, I don’t agree with you on “I don’t know what I’m talking about” - but DO agree with you on “1% being far too high a charge to manage funds”. Let’s leave it at that, then. :unamused: :neutral_face:

Conor:
ones like Nest, People’s Pension etc involve the pension fund holding stocks, shares and bonds from all over the world and those are ringfenced from the rest of the company so if the pension company goes belly up the core assets are still there and the Financial Services Ombudsman will appoint another company to take over the pensions, those stocks, shares and bonds being transferred over. Pensions are already taxed when you draw them down. The income from a pension is classed as taxable income taxed the same as income from wages.

It is also completely impossible for the UK government to be broke as we have a sovereign currency meaning we can simply print money if it came to it unlike countries like Greece who don’t have their own currency but use someone else’s, in their case the Euro.

Ehh…what happens if the value of stocks/shares held by the fund go down and/or the bonds aren’t repaid? Who’s to guarantee a 5% yearly increase+fees? What if there’s a bad year with only 1% or -2% growth? You still pay the fee. Real inflation numbers are higher than official stats (look at your groceries receipts from 12 months ago and your fuel bills). Printing money is fine as long as you’re among the first people/companies to get it, after this it’s worth much less. I also doubt they’d print hundreds of billions or more if things get really bad in a hurry. The FSCS is a nice idea, let’s remember 2008 how that went…

Conor:

Carryfast:
Here’s a clue.There’s a big difference between your pension ‘FUND’.As opposed to the rate at which the ‘Annuity’,which that ‘fund’ buys you,pays out.The whole scam being based on a figure at which they know the holder will probably die before they’ve paid out everything in the ‘fund’.

Am I the only one with a clue about how pensions work? Christ you’ve just posted a whole load of typical RDC waiting room ■■■■■■■■. You do know you don’t have to have an annuity and can do draw down? Unlike an annuity where you basically purchase a policy promising to pay out £x until the day you die, when you do draw down you can choose to take 25% of it tax free as a lump sum and from then on just decide how much you’re going to take out of your pot that year and leave the rest in there. When you die what is left gets passed on to your estate.

Before anyone else posts that its all a rip off may I suggest going and doing some actual [zb] research about pensions before making yourself look a pillock?

READ EVERY SINGLE BIT OF THIS ENTIRE ARTICLE, ALL THE LINKS, ALL THE SECTIONS and then you won’t look like these two.

moneysavingexpert.com/savin … -pensions/

So you believe that instead of an annuity,based on having to live until you’re 90 just to get what’s been paid in back and if not they’ll pocket the difference.The bankers will also give you the choice of taking all the fund out as you please and some interest on top and if you die before you’ve taken it all they’ll pay it out anyway.Good luck with that what could possibly go wrong.Starting with the questions what’s in it for them and how do you explain the massive difference and how can they possibly go on selling the annuity option ?.Suggest you do some calculations as to the implications of drawing down more than £4000 pa,from a £100,000 fund.On that note if it was better to put your money into a pension rather than paying off the mortgage maybe you can explain why everyone isn’t remortgaging the equity in their house and then putting the cash into a pension draw down scheme. :unamused:

ETS:

Conor:
ones like Nest, People’s Pension etc involve the pension fund holding stocks, shares and bonds from all over the world and those are ringfenced from the rest of the company so if the pension company goes belly up the core assets are still there and the Financial Services Ombudsman will appoint another company to take over the pensions, those stocks, shares and bonds being transferred over. Pensions are already taxed when you draw them down. The income from a pension is classed as taxable income taxed the same as income from wages.

It is also completely impossible for the UK government to be broke as we have a sovereign currency meaning we can simply print money if it came to it unlike countries like Greece who don’t have their own currency but use someone else’s, in their case the Euro.

Ehh…what happens if the value of stocks/shares held by the fund go down and/or the bonds aren’t repaid? Who’s to guarantee a 5% yearly increase+fees? What if there’s a bad year with only 1% or -2% growth? You still pay the fee. Real inflation numbers are higher than official stats (look at your groceries receipts from 12 months ago and your fuel bills). Printing money is fine as long as you’re among the first people/companies to get it, after this it’s worth much less. I also doubt they’d print hundreds of billions or more if things get really bad in a hurry. The FSCS is a nice idea, let’s remember 2008 how that went…

The 1% management fees - are charged on the entire consideration (all the money invested with all assets marked-to-market) It isn’t just 1% on othe “Profits” meaning they don’t get paid on years the fund loses value - more’s the pity…

Printing Money only works when you’d have DEflation where if you don’t do it - like in the 1930’s, when there was a banking moratorium which did more to aggrevate the 1930’s slump than the stock market crash of 1929.

We had QE in 2008 to allow “good” banks to take over the “about to go bust” banks, such as Merril Lynch being swallowed by Bank of America for example… The most solid bank in America was Wells Fargo, as their assets were diversified over actual assets with positive intrinsic values, such as factories, mines, and premium (as opposed to ‘sub-prime’) properties.

The Far Eastern Banks - lost a lot of money when the commodity bubble burst some time later.

The EU banks got sharply marked down to market after the referendum result, and the ECB has been effectively bailing out Deutsche Bank in partiular - for some time since the referendum.

The banks were forced to liquidate their bond holdings in 2008 to raise capital, with the Bank of England acting as market maker for all those bonds being sold back at once. QE money was used BY the Bank of England to purchase these bonds. Those banks who were then able to re-float - did so, and those banks like Lehman Brothers - left holding all the defaulted mortgage security paper (NOT purchased by the Bank of England, and other national banks around the world) - FAILED. It is somewhat misleading to tell the public that the QE money was loaned to the Banks being bailed out. As such, they sold assets to bail out THEMSELVES, which WITHOUT the QE - Interest rates would have risen sharply, which would have precipitated another round of bank crashes - but THIS time of High Street Mortgage Banks, some of whom were rather over-exposed to the FIXED rate mortgage market - where rates rising sharply - causes them huge losses via the derivatives market upon which these “collaterized debt obligation swaps” were traded. Think of it like being a bookmaker who heavily lays a 1000-1 horse - that then romps home… That bookie probably never bothered to hedge, because “hedging” costs money off your top line for the year. WITHOUT the hedge - ALL payouts come the “Black Swan Event” of the No Hoper coming in - and all the money has to be paid out of that bookmaker’s pocket - to an unlimited extent, in the case of the Banks such as Lehmans.
“Derivatives” are indeed “Investments of Mass Destruction” as portrayed by Warren Buffet.
Other banks to have now gone include Kleinwort Benson, where I was working in 1986-7 for a while, Bear Sterns, Babcock & Brown, Wachovia Securities, and of course Halifax Bank of Scotland - which was the only “High Street” outfit listed there. Whilst Lehmans failed outright, the other fallen angels from 2008-9 - were fire-sold to other stronger banks such as Wells Fargo and Bank of America, already mentioned.

Our banks - are a powerful instrument IF controlled by our country, rather than our world rivals, especially in peace time.

Tony Benn - was Correct, and so was Thomas Jefferson of course…

I can’t say weather anyone should start a pension but I can tell about mine, I’m 59 and started pension aged 20 only paying £200 a year or 8000 over 40 years. Each year I’ve had a statement saying I’m getting a few hundred back when retired this year all changed and it’s looking like I’ll get 5000 per year for life which could be 30 years so well worth it as I have 2 others that pay when I’m 65

Winseer:
Tony Benn - was Correct, and so was Thomas Jefferson of course…
0

:wink:

let.rug.nl/usa/outlines/hist … ferson.php

mac12:
I can’t say weather anyone should start a pension but I can tell about mine, I’m 59 and started pension aged 20 only paying £200 a year or 8000 over 40 years. Each year I’ve had a statement saying I’m getting a few hundred back when retired this year all changed and it’s looking like I’ll get 5000 per year for life which could be 30 years so well worth it as I have 2 others that pay when I’m 65

Suggest you re check the amount that it takes to buy a £5,000 pa annuity.Are you really suggesting and do you really believe that type of pension fund will pay out £5,000 pa for life from age 60.More like there’s been a typo in the statement.

Carryfast:

mac12:
I can’t say weather anyone should start a pension but I can tell about mine, I’m 59 and started pension aged 20 only paying £200 a year or 8000 over 40 years. Each year I’ve had a statement saying I’m getting a few hundred back when retired this year all changed and it’s looking like I’ll get 5000 per year for life which could be 30 years so well worth it as I have 2 others that pay when I’m 65

Suggest you re check the amount that it takes to buy a £5,000 pa annuity.Are you really suggesting and do you really believe that type of pension fund will pay out £5,000 pa for life from age 60.More like there’s been a typo in the statement.

One with another company I pay £420 pa and there statement says £5813 pa from age 65 but it’s still got 6 years to grow so should make 7000. That’s without any lump sum. Statement before last year have never shown this amount

mac12:

Carryfast:
Suggest you re check the amount that it takes to buy a £5,000 pa annuity.Are you really suggesting and do you really believe that type of pension fund will pay out £5,000 pa for life from age 60.More like there’s been a typo in the statement.

One with another company I pay £420 pa and there statement says £5813 pa from age 65 but it’s still got 6 years to grow so should make 7000. That’s without any lump sum. Statement before last year have never shown this amount

Let us know exactly where a £25,000 or even £30,000 ? fund will buy a £5,800 pa pension meaning an £87,000 payout assuming an 80 year life term.If it was that easy retirees would be cashing in half the equity of a £450,000 house for example obviously meaning a £48,000 pa annuity or drawdown whichever by those figures.In which case that’s more than the total value of the house back in around 10 years let alone 15. :open_mouth: :laughing:

Meanwhile in the real world.IE ''a male aged 65 could currently receive an annual annuity of around £5,800 from a £100,000 purchase.Which means you have to live to at least 82 to get your money back,which was a much better forecast than I was given when I stopped my private pension.While the annuity provider takes all the interest on the cash being held back by the drip fed pittance and if you don’t reach 82 that’s a bonus to them.

Bearing in mind that in the case of draw down the fund can go down or even be wiped out over the payment period.No surprise what will ‘happen’ to it in that case.

moneytothemasses.com/saving-for … ension-pot