We’re using an agency lad.to.cover holidays at our place.
This is what enterprise charge
Just putting it out there if anyone’s curious
edd1974:
We’re using an agency lad.to.cover holidays at our place.
This is what enterprise charge
Just putting it out there if anyone’s curious
Don’t think it’s fair to publish what they charge, as long as all parties accept the rates all good… all your doing is belong other agencies undercut drivers…
I agree it make other undercut, what do you think the agency give driver ph though 14ph?
i wonder if the driver sees time and a half etc after 8 hours or does he get told a flat rate
while we accept that prople need to make a living there is also the feeling that agencies rake in alot more than they let on
Notimetoulouse:
i wonder if the driver sees time and a half etc after 8 hours or does he get told a flat rate
while we accept that prople need to make a living there is also the feeling that agencies rake in alot more than they let on
The sheer number of agencies with more opening up every day should be a hint. Easy money for no risk (nearly 0 investment) essentially as long as you have the connections to get those shifts. You literally make money off other peoples’ work once you get a few regular clients
TruckDriverBen:
I agree it make other undercut, what do you think the agency give driver ph though 14ph?
If they paid a driver £14 they’d be making a loss, hol pay is 12.07% and NI about 13.8%
Even at £13 they’d only be making about 50p an hour margin and I’m sure they’d want to make more than that.
This is why agencies hate IR35 just as much as the drivers, you could pay a Ltd Co £15, make a nice couple of quid margin and everyone’s a winner. Apart from the taxman…
ATJT:
TruckDriverBen:
I agree it make other undercut, what do you think the agency give driver ph though 14ph?If they paid a driver £14 they’d be making a loss, hol pay is 12.07% and NI about 13.8%
Even at £13 they’d only be making about 50p an hour margin and I’m sure they’d want to make more than that.
This is why agencies hate IR35 just as much as the drivers, you could pay a Ltd Co £15, make a nice couple of quid margin and everyone’s a winner. Apart from the taxman…
The taxman loses out?
And, maybe, just maybe, the Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, etc that “his” money goes to pay?
Have a nice weekend. 
Franglais:
ATJT:
TruckDriverBen:
I agree it make other undercut, what do you think the agency give driver ph though 14ph?If they paid a driver £14 they’d be making a loss, hol pay is 12.07% and NI about 13.8%
Even at £13 they’d only be making about 50p an hour margin and I’m sure they’d want to make more than that.
This is why agencies hate IR35 just as much as the drivers, you could pay a Ltd Co £15, make a nice couple of quid margin and everyone’s a winner. Apart from the taxman…
The taxman loses out?
And, maybe, just maybe, the Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, etc that “his” money goes to pay?
Have a nice weekend.
I was being deliberately flippant, the whole Ltd Co set up has been a joke for years. I’m sure there are some legit ones but I’m pretty sure the aim most of the time was tax avoidance.
ATJT:
Franglais:
ATJT:
TruckDriverBen:
I agree it make other undercut, what do you think the agency give driver ph though 14ph?If they paid a driver £14 they’d be making a loss, hol pay is 12.07% and NI about 13.8%
Even at £13 they’d only be making about 50p an hour margin and I’m sure they’d want to make more than that.
This is why agencies hate IR35 just as much as the drivers, you could pay a Ltd Co £15, make a nice couple of quid margin and everyone’s a winner. Apart from the taxman…
The taxman loses out?
And, maybe, just maybe, the Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, etc that “his” money goes to pay?
Have a nice weekend.
I was being deliberately flippant, the whole Ltd Co set up has been a joke for years. I’m sure there are some legit ones but I’m pretty sure the aim most of the time was tax avoidance.
In that case: my apologies.
But there are more than one or two on here that feel genuinely aggrieved they have to contribute to the society they are in.
Franglais:
But there are more than one or two on here that feel genuinely aggrieved they have to contribute to the society they are in.
Do you look at where your tax money goes? I’m fairly certain according to the HMRC’s own admission the biggest share goes to welfare.
Contribution, more like a shakedown “pay us or else we riot in the name of social justice” sort of deal 
ETS:
Franglais:
But there are more than one or two on here that feel genuinely aggrieved they have to contribute to the society they are in.Do you look at where your tax money goes? I’m fairly certain according to the HMRC’s own admission the biggest share goes to welfare.
Contribution, more like a shakedown “pay us or else we riot in the name of social justice” sort of deal
Money well spent.
It`s messy getting vagrants and beggars out of your tyre treads.
Franglais:
It`s messy getting vagrants and beggars out of your tyre treads.
True that 
ETS:
Franglais:
But there are more than one or two on here that feel genuinely aggrieved they have to contribute to the society they are in.Do you look at where your tax money goes? I’m fairly certain according to the HMRC’s own admission the biggest share goes to welfare.
What they call “welfare” is everything from paying for soldiers with legs blown off, to paying for those who are gravely mentally ill, to paying for everything pensioners get which isn’t covered by the state pension, to subsiding the wages of those paid a pittance by bosses.
These “tax summaries” are little more than right-wing propaganda, insofar as the descriptions and the choice of what kinds of spending fall under what heading, are carefully chosen to encourage working people to create more misery for themselves.
If you really want to see a shocking summary of where our collective money goes, look at the share of national wealth and income going to or held by the rich, compared to that going to the poor. Or look at what the company spends on the bosses compared to the workers. Oh sorry, yes, we don’t get any summaries of those figures.
Rjan:
These “tax summaries” are little more than right-wing propaganda, insofar as the descriptions and the choice of what kinds of spending fall under what heading, are carefully chosen to encourage working people to create more misery for themselves.If you really want to see a shocking summary of where our collective money goes, look at the share of national wealth and income going to or held by the rich, compared to that going to the poor. Or look at what the company spends on the bosses compared to the workers. Oh sorry, yes, we don’t get any summaries of those figures.
You can’t eliminate poverty by throwing money at poor people. Ask the USA how their ‘war on poverty’ is going.
ETS:
Rjan:
These “tax summaries” are little more than right-wing propaganda, insofar as the descriptions and the choice of what kinds of spending fall under what heading, are carefully chosen to encourage working people to create more misery for themselves.If you really want to see a shocking summary of where our collective money goes, look at the share of national wealth and income going to or held by the rich, compared to that going to the poor. Or look at what the company spends on the bosses compared to the workers. Oh sorry, yes, we don’t get any summaries of those figures.
You can’t eliminate poverty by throwing money at poor people. Ask the USA how their ‘war on poverty’ is going.
I do believe that the Working Families Tax Credits introduced in the Labour years of the late 1990’s raised 2 million children out of poverty.
I am happy to pay my taxes. The day may come when I may need to rely on the Welfare State.
ETS:
Rjan:
These “tax summaries” are little more than right-wing propaganda, insofar as the descriptions and the choice of what kinds of spending fall under what heading, are carefully chosen to encourage working people to create more misery for themselves.If you really want to see a shocking summary of where our collective money goes, look at the share of national wealth and income going to or held by the rich, compared to that going to the poor. Or look at what the company spends on the bosses compared to the workers. Oh sorry, yes, we don’t get any summaries of those figures.
You can’t eliminate poverty by throwing money at poor people. Ask the USA how their ‘war on poverty’ is going.
Actually, paying people more in wages, in more secure jobs, and cutting the share of the rich, is a great way to eliminate poverty. So is forcing up the supply of homes using the brute force of the state (to compulsorily purchase land, to direct labour to build, and to tax the rich to pay for whatever the land costs), whilst controlling private rents. It’s what they did after 1945.
I didn’t even realise the USA had a “war on poverty”, unless it’s the “we had to destroy the poor in order to save them” kind of war against poverty.
We’ve known since the Speenhamland system of relief that half-measures against the capitalist market do not work, and for example subsidising incomes without controlling rents and wages, will simply lead the capitalists to drop wages or to hike rents, so that the overall financial position of the poor returns to the miserable level they were before the state intervened.
That’s why the rich supported New Labour. It was a winning combination for increasing their returns on capital, and for shifting a portion of their wage bill onto the state, dressed up as doing something for the working man, whilst actually doing nothing for the working man.
I suspect the rates posted will be spot hire rates, with different rates for regular clients who have continuity or greater volumes of work
msgyorkie:
I do believe that the Working Families Tax Credits introduced in the Labour years of the late 1990’s raised 2 million children out of poverty.
That was a policy they stole from the Tories called Family Credit which was introduced in 1986 and “rebranded” as Working Families Tax Credits.
With Family Credit:
The benefit was designed for families with children if at least one person is working more than 24 hours a week on average. There was a maximum credit for each family. One adult credit, regardless of whether there was one or two adults, was £47.65, plus an amount for each child that varied by age: £12.05 under 11, £19.95 from 11 to 15, £24.80 from 16 to 17 and £34.70 at 18.
A family whose net income, not including Child Benefit, Maternity Allowance or One-Parent Benefit, was £77.15 or less got the maximum. Income was calculated by using the same principles as for Housing Benefit but without a disregard for earnings. Up to £60 was deductible for the cost of childcare if neither claimant nor partner could care for the children while working. If the income was higher, 70% of the difference was deducted from the maximum for the purpose of entitlement. An extra £10.55 was added if the claimant worked 30 or more hours a week.
Sound familiar to how Tax Credits work?
Conor:
msgyorkie:
I do believe that the Working Families Tax Credits introduced in the Labour years of the late 1990’s raised 2 million children out of poverty.That was a policy they stole from the Tories called Family Credit which was introduced in 1986 and “rebranded” as Working Families Tax Credits.
With Family Credit:
The benefit was designed for families with children if at least one person is working more than 24 hours a week on average. There was a maximum credit for each family. One adult credit, regardless of whether there was one or two adults, was £47.65, plus an amount for each child that varied by age: £12.05 under 11, £19.95 from 11 to 15, £24.80 from 16 to 17 and £34.70 at 18.
A family whose net income, not including Child Benefit, Maternity Allowance or One-Parent Benefit, was £77.15 or less got the maximum. Income was calculated by using the same principles as for Housing Benefit but without a disregard for earnings. Up to £60 was deductible for the cost of childcare if neither claimant nor partner could care for the children while working. If the income was higher, 70% of the difference was deducted from the maximum for the purpose of entitlement. An extra £10.55 was added if the claimant worked 30 or more hours a week.
Sound familiar to how Tax Credits work?
Cant be arsed to get bogged down in the details but all I know is that when Labour introduced WFTC I instantly was entitled to a nice little payment every month. I never recieved this payment under the tories.