Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 2 votes

53-a-week Iain Duncan Smith


  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

#31    ciriuslea

ciriuslea

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Joined:08 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • CHAMP20NS

Posted 05 April 2013 - 09:55 PM

View Poststevewinn, on 05 April 2013 - 06:50 PM, said:


Firstly some context and a breakdown of your 5.2 million figure
5.3 million working-age people were in receipt of an out-of-work benefit as of February 2011.  Of these, 2.6 million (49%) were sick or disabled, 1.4 million (27%) were unemployed and 0.6 million (12%) were lone parents.


Now to claim the vast majority of people living on council estates are benefit scroungers is offensive, that might be the case in Liverpool but not where I live, although I do concede they do exist. I lived on a council estate in Manchester for most of my teens and most people were buying their homes from the council, even now where I live three out of the four people renting apartments in this council owned block are employed.

As for the rest of your post no one is denying benefit scroungers exist, what I think people are angry about is stereotype when any and everyone is classed as a scrounger who is claiming benefits, and that like you try to assume the vast majority of benefit claimers are living a life of luxury, which just isn't true...if anything its a small minority.

Did you know over a £billion is actually under claimed by people who are entitled to claim more ?


#32    smurf0852

smurf0852

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 484 posts
  • Joined:21 Jan 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 April 2013 - 11:57 PM

View Poststevewinn, on 05 April 2013 - 06:50 PM, said:

what i witness in life is not being expressed so far in this post, people are going on about how people cannot survive on £53 a week. well it seems over 5.2 million of working age can. this number of people have been living on benefits for over five years. you take the council estates all over the land, estates were the vast majority dont work. yet every house more or less have the sky dish up, most have a car outside - their kids seem to get all the presents at Christmas. they seem to be able to wear the latest fashionable clothing. mobile phones, smoking etc.. can afford to have 'house parties' most Friday / Saturday nights. can afford private hire taxis coming and going all hours. and yet defy all logic being spouted on here, not living, or existing on benefits, but flourishing not for weeks but for YEARS. you know the same benefits no-one can live on - yes those same benefits. so something is up somewhere.

when you have 1.2 million migrant workers doing low skilled jobs, and just under two million of your own citizens who could be doing these jobs but instead are claiming benefits then something is wrong, - for me the Tory Government have caught up with a lot of people and they simply dont like it. the Government are asking them the tough question. why are you not working? for some, those who have been made redundant or lost a job through no fault of their own, those who have a history of many years working the answer to the question is easy. -- BUT if you've been on benefits for three years and counting then something is wrong and the question becomes harder to answer. i refuse to believe anyone who is actively seeking work, who wants to work, will be claiming benefits for more than 12 months, okay in these times of economic recession maybe longer three years (max). (even though the unemployment figure is dropping)  - people seem to have forgotten what the welfare state is for. a system described as a safety net, not a comfort blanket.

for far to long people have done nothing for earn their benefit, here am talking about the work shy the long term useless. the ones who have no excuse in being unemployed for such a considerable time. - the stipulation for receiving benefits should have always been some sort of work. not just - 'sign on' once a fortnight and wait for the giro. playing the system, going in showing the advisor the fake job log. six months down the line huffing and puffing because they've been moved onto 'New Deal' and have to attend the job centre weekly instead of fortnightly (what a pain) then huff and puff again when sent on 'back to work' programs, maybe where they attend some sort of centre where services such as help with C'V's / Job search is offered. but after the two weeks is up their back to fortnightly signings, and the merry - go - around continues. deep down these people tell themselves they'd love a job, any job, up until one is offered and then find reasons why its not suitable.

The work shy, and the one million who have been claiming benefits for over 10 years should not be exempt from cuts in these times of austerity, when the working man/woman faces cuts.
how can a person from liverpool be so ignorent of the truth.you really need to stop reading the daily mail the vast majority of people on benefits are living a miserable life of poverty for themselves and there children, to say any diffrent is ignorent at the least and bloody minded at the worst .this turn the poor against the poorest is starting to wear thin .we have even had the goverment blaming the death of 6 kids on benefits and it is disgusting .
steve if you think a group of people who got to be where they are by being in the bullingdon club at oxford means they are qualified to rule a nation you are deluded. boris ,call me dave and gideon used to get ferried around in a limo to find homeless people so they could burn money in front of them for a laugh.
are these the people you want running your country if so you are as unfeeling pathetic and out dated as they are.


#33    stevewinn

stevewinn

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 8,552 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, England

  • Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival

Posted 07 April 2013 - 11:52 AM

View Postciriuslea, on 05 April 2013 - 09:55 PM, said:

Firstly some context and a breakdown of your 5.2 million figure
5.3 million working-age people were in receipt of an out-of-work benefit as of February 2011.  Of these, 2.6 million (49%) were sick or disabled, 1.4 million (27%) were unemployed and 0.6 million (12%) were lone parents.


Now to claim the vast majority of people living on council estates are benefit scroungers is offensive, that might be the case in Liverpool but not where I live, although I do concede they do exist. I lived on a council estate in Manchester for most of my teens and most people were buying their homes from the council, even now where I live three out of the four people renting apartments in this council owned block are employed.

As for the rest of your post no one is denying benefit scroungers exist, what I think people are angry about is stereotype when any and everyone is classed as a scrounger who is claiming benefits, and that like you try to assume the vast majority of benefit claimers are living a life of luxury, which just isn't true...if anything its a small minority.

Did you know over a £billion is actually under claimed by people who are entitled to claim more ?




View Postsmurf0852, on 06 April 2013 - 11:57 PM, said:

how can a person from liverpool be so ignorent of the truth.you really need to stop reading the daily mail the vast majority of people on benefits are living a miserable life of poverty for themselves and there children, to say any diffrent is ignorent at the least and bloody minded at the worst .this turn the poor against the poorest is starting to wear thin .we have even had the goverment blaming the death of 6 kids on benefits and it is disgusting .
steve if you think a group of people who got to be where they are by being in the bullingdon club at oxford means they are qualified to rule a nation you are deluded. boris ,call me dave and gideon used to get ferried around in a limo to find homeless people so they could burn money in front of them for a laugh.
are these the people you want running your country if so you are as unfeeling pathetic and out dated as they are.

To all, we could have a long debate about benefits, but at the end of the day if people cannot live on £53 a week then the answer is to get a job. it really is that simple. dont languish on benefits complaining when the tax payer is funding you. - benefits are there for people to survive - not to give people a comfortable lifestyle, people simply need to cut their cloth accordingly. get rid of the car, get rid of the mobile phone, get rid of the Internet, cancel the Sky TV.

Personally i'd go further by reforming the benefits system - to a system where you get out - what you put in, that'll throw a spanner in the works, when the long term useless turn up and the computer screen reads contributed nothing, your getting nothing. make a good few sit up and pay attention. i dont care what anyone says when you have over a million households were three generations - and not one person in those households has ever worked, never had a job then something needs changing. before 1970 we never had a problem with British citizens going out fruit and veg picking. cleaning the streets or other menial work. No, whats happened over the years as the benefits have become more a lifestyle choice - people have started turning their noses up at certain jobs. we have now got to a situation where you have low or no skilled people refusing low skilled jobs. so we have to import millions of migrants from across the European continent to do the work our own people refuse to do. - So if our benefit system is so bad why are British citizens turning down work when migrants are traveling hundred or thousands of miles for that same work. c'mon. its time we had a system that looks after those who need it. hands up how many on here claiming benefits have see a job and thought am not doing that. choosing to stay on benefits waiting for something better to come along? and this how the weeks tick by and before you know it you've been on benefits for months. or years and then the vicious circle is hard to break. you start being able to live on the low paid benefit money. and then you find yourself in a rut. then before you know it. your stuck in the mundane existence of looking forward to signing on followed by receiving payment. and worse of all -  is if your lucky enough to get a job interview trying to explain in that interview the gap in your employment especially if you've been out of work for months / Years - doesnt look good or feel good if you have to turn and say nothing been on benefits. or on Safari.

In order to receive benefits you should be made to work for them. which gives people some sort of structure, if someone on Job seeking allowance as to report to 'work' at 8am every morning and leaves at 4:30pm five days a week they are at least kept busy and in the working frame of mind and body. im sure most people operating under such a system would find work pretty sharpish.

Edited by stevewinn, 07 April 2013 - 11:58 AM.

Posted Image

British by Birth - English by the Grace of God

#34    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,142 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:02 PM

Steve, I suspect you would change your tune if you lost your job due to downsizing, or if you lost function due to disease or disability.
Its easy to take the moral high ground and say they are all spongers until you have walked a mile in their shoes.

England is a miserable place to live if you are on benefit. It really can't be made much worse for most of the people who are on benefit - but the conservatives will try to do a damn hard job of punishing the unemployed and disabled.

I think its the measure of a person how he treats his fellow citizen. Its more of the same the right wing blaming the victims of a failed economy rather than actually admitting that their actions are the primary reason why most of the people are on benefit in the first place.

Your premise is based on the lie that we could all get a job if we wanted, when in fact there's only so much demand for burger flippers and shelf stackers.


Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 07 April 2013 - 12:07 PM.

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#35    The Sky Scanner

The Sky Scanner

    Observer

  • Member
  • 5,540 posts
  • Joined:30 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • The loud ones never last!

Posted 07 April 2013 - 12:16 PM

There is a problem with the system, but I really don't know what the answer is tbh. I think what winds a lot of people up is if you know how to play the system then you can live better then the average manual worker. But when I started my working life in 1990 it wasn't like that, I was a manual worker and I earnt good money, then minimum wage came in (which I understand was brought about with good intent) but it had a knock on effect for those already earning a decent wage, as their wages dropped to the minimum, many people I worked with that were older and had families actually became priced out of being able to work and live (which is an odd way to run things).....

You know the system is a mess and out of kilter when those same people were still unemployed during the boom we had..

As I say, I don't know what the solutiuon is, only that I haven't heard anyone come up with a decent one yet..

Edited by Sky Scanner, 07 April 2013 - 12:18 PM.

"Equipped with his five senses, man explores the universe around him and calls the adventure Science". ~ Edwin Powell Hubble

#36    ciriuslea

ciriuslea

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Joined:08 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • CHAMP20NS

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:06 PM

View Poststevewinn, on 07 April 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

To all, we could have a long debate about benefits, but at the end of the day if people cannot live on £53 a week then the answer is to get a job. it really is that simple. dont languish on benefits complaining when the tax payer is funding you. - benefits are there for people to survive - not to give people a comfortable lifestyle, people simply need to cut their cloth accordingly. get rid of the car, get rid of the mobile phone, get rid of the Internet, cancel the Sky TV.

Personally i'd go further by reforming the benefits system - to a system where you get out - what you put in, that'll throw a spanner in the works, when the long term useless turn up and the computer screen reads contributed nothing, your getting nothing. make a good few sit up and pay attention. i dont care what anyone says when you have over a million households were three generations - and not one person in those households has ever worked, never had a job then something needs changing. before 1970 we never had a problem with British citizens going out fruit and veg picking. cleaning the streets or other menial work. No, whats happened over the years as the benefits have become more a lifestyle choice - people have started turning their noses up at certain jobs. we have now got to a situation where you have low or no skilled people refusing low skilled jobs. so we have to import millions of migrants from across the European continent to do the work our own people refuse to do. - So if our benefit system is so bad why are British citizens turning down work when migrants are traveling hundred or thousands of miles for that same work. c'mon. its time we had a system that looks after those who need it. hands up how many on here claiming benefits have see a job and thought am not doing that. choosing to stay on benefits waiting for something better to come along? and this how the weeks tick by and before you know it you've been on benefits for months. or years and then the vicious circle is hard to break. you start being able to live on the low paid benefit money. and then you find yourself in a rut. then before you know it. your stuck in the mundane existence of looking forward to signing on followed by receiving payment. and worse of all -  is if your lucky enough to get a job interview trying to explain in that interview the gap in your employment especially if you've been out of work for months / Years - doesnt look good or feel good if you have to turn and say nothing been on benefits. or on Safari.

In order to receive benefits you should be made to work for them. which gives people some sort of structure, if someone on Job seeking allowance as to report to 'work' at 8am every morning and leaves at 4:30pm five days a week they are at least kept busy and in the working frame of mind and body. im sure most people operating under such a system would find work pretty sharpish.

No long debate needed, stereotyping everyone who is on benefits as a scrounger is the condem effect, from your own figures only 27% as of a year ago were unemployed so its already a minority, then when you weigh up, school leavers, people left out of work from the bank crisis, people left redundant etc etc...so in reality the % gets smaller and smaller for claimers who are scrounging from the state, but I don't personally mind tougher measures introducing to help people get back into work who are long term unemployed,

One of the most quoted reasons why people 'refused' to work was that they were better off on benefits, not that they didn't want to work.


#37    ciriuslea

ciriuslea

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Joined:08 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • CHAMP20NS

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:13 PM

View PostSky Scanner, on 07 April 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

There is a problem with the system, but I really don't know what the answer is tbh. I think what winds a lot of people up is if you know how to play the system then you can live better then the average manual worker. But when I started my working life in 1990 it wasn't like that, I was a manual worker and I earnt good money, then minimum wage came in (which I understand was brought about with good intent) but it had a knock on effect for those already earning a decent wage, as their wages dropped to the minimum, many people I worked with that were older and had families actually became priced out of being able to work and live (which is an odd way to run things).....

You know the system is a mess and out of kilter when those same people were still unemployed during the boom we had..

As I say, I don't know what the solutiuon is, only that I haven't heard anyone come up with a decent one yet..

The problem isn't benefits for the poor as this demonisation of claimers is a recent phenomena, and has only come about as a diversion to the demonisation of the rich,


#38    The Sky Scanner

The Sky Scanner

    Observer

  • Member
  • 5,540 posts
  • Joined:30 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • The loud ones never last!

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:17 PM

View Postciriuslea, on 07 April 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

The problem isn't benefits for the poor as this demonisation of claimers is a recent phenomena, and has only come about as a diversion to the demonisation of the rich,

If you think there isn't any problems with the benefits system, and that any discussion about it is merely diversion tactics from demonising the rich, then fair enough......however, problems within the benefits system (and lower end wage structures in general) still remain regardless of whether you chose to acknowledge them or not.

Edited by Sky Scanner, 07 April 2013 - 01:17 PM.

"Equipped with his five senses, man explores the universe around him and calls the adventure Science". ~ Edwin Powell Hubble

#39    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,142 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:18 PM

The countries are been subjected to the IMF package of structural adjustment measures - which always has at its core the Neo-Liberal core ideas of
-do away with the wealth fare state
-privatize every single state asset

This whole body of rhetoric is a means to convince the people of a country that it is in their best interests to take away their entitlements to healthcare and benefits.
There are plenty of people who are gullible enough to buy the idea that they will never need these essential social services and that they shouldn't have to pay for others to have them.

The real beneficiary though are the mega-rich and the Corporations who have seen their contributions to society shrink year on year since the 1970's.

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#40    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,142 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:26 PM

View PostSky Scanner, on 07 April 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

If you think there isn't any problems with the benefits system, and that any discussion about it is merely diversion tactics from demonising the rich, then fair enough......however, problems within the benefits system (and lower end wage structures in general) still remain regardless of whether you chose to acknowledge them or not.
The real problem of low end wages is that transnational companies have been far more mercenary in their lobbying to lower employment standards such that for many "employed" people they can only survive with top up additional state benefits. Since those same companies are paying less taxes to the state - the only place where those benefits can come from is by increasing the tax take on the middle earners - which further depresses the economy.
This is all in a situation where corporations have been hoovering up more of the national wealth pot - which further supports the mega-rich through dividend payments on capitol investment.

Would you really take up a job where, when all costs have been accounted for, you are worse off than if you did absolutely nothing ? This is in a situation where benefits are only just enough to cover basic living expenses.

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#41    The Sky Scanner

The Sky Scanner

    Observer

  • Member
  • 5,540 posts
  • Joined:30 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

  • The loud ones never last!

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:38 PM

View PostBr Cornelius, on 07 April 2013 - 01:26 PM, said:

The real problem of low end wages is that transnational companies have been far more mercenary in their lobbying to lower employment standards such that for many "employed" people they can only survive with top up additional state benefits. Since those same companies are paying less taxes to the state - the only place where those benefits can come from is by increasing the tax take on the middle earners - which further depresses the economy.
This is all in a situation where corporations have been hoovering up more of the national wealth pot - which further supports the mega-rich through dividend payments on capitol investment.

Would you really take up a job where, when all costs have been accounted for, you are worse off than if you did absolutely nothing ? This is in a situation where benefits are only just enough to cover basic living expenses.

Br Cornelius

Exactly. I actually would take the job, but my circumstances are not the same as many others, and my reasoning wouldn't be because I need that job long term. If I was in any other situation (family etc) then no I wouldn't take the job, I couldn't.

This isn't a recent problem though, it's been creeping up for well over 2 decades, it was ignored before simply because the numbers it affected was relatively low, however, the amount needing assistance because manual work has been downgraded so far has meant the strain on the national purse is very noticeable now, and those who chose not to work because they would be worse off has increased significantly.

When I was 16, I was working 4 shift (12 hr days/ 12 hr nights)...my basic hourly rate was 8:70p/h, then you received an 'unsociable hours' allowance which equated to about 40quid a week, night shift allowance of an extra 1:80p/h, 25 paid days holiday a year (which on 4 shift equated to about 6 weeks off), 2 week paid shut down at xmas, 2 week paid maintenance shut down in April...I could bring home 1500 a month (after stoppages), at 16yrs of age (1990). Family men wanted to work at this company, it paid well, and gave you time off for a decent home life too. Then the minimum wage reduced everything to about 6p/h, shift premiums and bonuses went, 6 month temporary contracts were brought in and bus loads of migrant workers....(who I don't blame at all - they worked hard)....the family man was then on the dole, and unable to get off it...........what a self created mess that system is/was.

"Equipped with his five senses, man explores the universe around him and calls the adventure Science". ~ Edwin Powell Hubble

#42    ciriuslea

ciriuslea

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Joined:08 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • CHAMP20NS

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:44 PM

View PostSky Scanner, on 07 April 2013 - 01:17 PM, said:

If you think there isn't any problems with the benefits system,

that's not quite what I said, demonising benefit claimers is the diversion, not all claimers are job shy, lazy scroungers.


#43    Br Cornelius

Br Cornelius

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,142 posts
  • Joined:13 Aug 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eire

  • Stupid Monkeys.

    Life Sucks.
    Get over it.

Posted 07 April 2013 - 01:59 PM

View PostSky Scanner, on 07 April 2013 - 01:38 PM, said:

Exactly. I actually would take the job, but my circumstances are not the same as many others, and my reasoning wouldn't be because I need that job long term. If I was in any other situation (family etc) then no I wouldn't take the job, I couldn't.

This isn't a recent problem though, it's been creeping up for well over 2 decades, it was ignored before simply because the numbers it affected was relatively low, however, the amount needing assistance because manual work has been downgraded so far has meant the strain on the national purse is very noticeable now, and those who chose not to work because they would be worse off has increased significantly.

When I was 16, I was working 4 shift (12 hr days/ 12 hr nights)...my basic hourly rate was 8:70p/h, then you received an 'unsociable hours' allowance which equated to about 40quid a week, night shift allowance of an extra 1:80p/h, 25 paid days holiday a year (which on 4 shift equated to about 6 weeks off), 2 week paid shut down at xmas, 2 week paid maintenance shut down in April...I could bring home 1500 a month (after stoppages), at 16yrs of age (1990). Family men wanted to work at this company, it paid well, and gave you time off for a decent home life too. Then the minimum wage reduced everything to about 6p/h, shift premiums and bonuses went, 6 month temporary contracts were brought in and bus loads of migrant workers....(who I don't blame at all - they worked hard)....the family man was then on the dole, and unable to get off it...........what a self created mess that system is/was.
This problem cannot be solved without wage controls which oblige companies to pay a fair wage for fair work. In a system dominated by corportate lobbyists this cannot happen. What will happen is that many many people will be forced to live on less money than the poverty line - starve, become homeless. This will in turn inevitably lead to massive civil unrest (of which the riots last year will be a tiny taster) and an increasing para militarization of the country in response.

If it is allowed to degenerate to that point, we may see the UK get that revolution it avoided for 400years.

Br Cornelius

I believe nothing, but I have my suspicions.

Robert Anton Wilson

#44    stevewinn

stevewinn

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 8,552 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, England

  • Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival

Posted 07 April 2013 - 05:38 PM

View Postciriuslea, on 07 April 2013 - 01:06 PM, said:

No long debate needed, stereotyping everyone who is on benefits as a scrounger is the condem effect, from your own figures only 27% as of a year ago were unemployed so its already a minority, then when you weigh up, school leavers, people left out of work from the bank crisis, people left redundant etc etc...so in reality the % gets smaller and smaller for claimers who are scrounging from the state, but I don't personally mind tougher measures introducing to help people get back into work who are long term unemployed,

One of the most quoted reasons why people 'refused' to work was that they were better off on benefits, not that they didn't want to work.

just to make it clear i am not classing everyone claiming benefits as scroungers, only the ones who are long term useless, the work shy. the ones playing the system. there should be a cut off point for claiming benefits of Five years. even the cap today is too high the governments cap on benefits for a single person is £350 a week.

Posted Image

British by Birth - English by the Grace of God

#45    ciriuslea

ciriuslea

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Joined:08 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male

  • CHAMP20NS

Posted 07 April 2013 - 07:10 PM

View Poststevewinn, on 07 April 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

just to make it clear i am not classing everyone claiming benefits as scroungers, only the ones who are long term useless, the work shy. the ones playing the system. there should be a cut off point for claiming benefits of Five years. even the cap today is too high the governments cap on benefits for a single person is £350 a week.

Point taken Steve, and I actually agree with you on many points, cutting benefits after a certain length of time is a bit too drastic for me, I would prefer to 'offer' community jobs forcefully, or come up with community based initiatives where it serves as paid employment as up to £350 in benefits could quite easily be classed as a salary, plus serve to get people back into the working mentality, I would actually do this after 6 months to everyone, not as a punitive measure but to keep them employable.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users