Minger:
Pity my crowd didn’t bother,been on 72 quid a week since October
I’m sorry you have been ill for so long Minger, but to put the bosses side of the story, that would have cost around 8k in broad figures for the company.
If you work for a small company that has a serious impact on the bottom line. I had a couple of bad years between 2009-2011 when the company was losing money. 8k might have been the reason to call it a day.
Franglais:
85 quid a week statutory sick pay. Aren’t we all lucky to live in such an advanced and rich country? Good job he had no financial worries hindering his recovery. [emoji15]
It shouldn’t be the responsibility of a company to pay long term sick pay. It should be the state that takes a little bit of our pay and redistributes it, without syphoning any off to shareholders in insurance companies etc. Private insurance is an option but sometimes we need a kick up the bum to make the sensible choice, so how about ? uummm ? National Insurance??Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
Mr F, you’re a treasure! Well said sir!
edd1974:
I was off sick for 6 weeks or so earlier this year. As some idiot decide to jump a red light crash my car up one weekend causing me to fracture my hand. Anyway was on ssp got back to work . 1st think work did when back wanted chat see how I was etc. Then handed me a section from my work contract with a section highlighted. Stating if any employee makes any claim to an outside party for loss of earning … The company will seek to claim back any ssp payments made to the employee plus any other costs involved insured during there absence
I’m not seeing a problem with that but you haven’t made it clear whether you have any issue with their action or not.
xichrisxi:
We are all responsible or should be in protecting ourselves against suddenly losing one or both incomes whether that be through redundancy,illness or anything else.
There are plenty of insurance policies available out there for a modest amount per month that will cover your income as albion states.
I have one in place that I’m now claiming from as I have had to leave work to be a full time carer for my wife,now at 36 years old I didn’t envisage having to claim on this but I’ve paid into it for the last 10 years for that reason…the unknown,I can now concentrate on looking after my wife without having to worry about money as the policy will pay out around £1000 per month until I return to work,which will easily cover everything and then some.
Over the 10 years this policy has cost me around £3000 (£26pm) but I have already claimed £7000 from it since leaving work,The solidarity shown to the driver in the story is great but ultimately people shouldn’t rely on employers or the government to finance an individual being unable to work.
Thankfully, your prudence has been rewarded although under very sad circumstances. Franglais makes the point that government could improve sick pay allowance by increasing National Insurance without much of that cash being diverted to parasitical shareholders, just another form of insurance but cheaper. I think you did well for £26! I’m truly glad you’re not suffering financially on top of everything else.
As Albion has said (I’m sure I’ll be corrected if wrong) too much of the media portrays taxes as unalloyed bad news.
We hear of The Government taking more tax; The Government increasing duties; and we think of the Members of Parliament sitting on money sacks.
Later we hear of increased spending (never enough!) on hospitals and roads, but we seem to ignore the obvious link between the two.
We (except Spardo?) accept wearing seatbelts. And see the logic in forcing motorcyclists to wear helmets. Taking away civil liberties? or making a sensible choice for all?
Even the way some sneer at the “Nanny State” is a clue that they would “pass by on the other side” rather than lend a hand or contribute fairly.
Climbs off of soap-box.
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
TiredAndEmotional:
xichrisxi:
We are all responsible or should be in protecting ourselves against suddenly losing one or both incomes whether that be through redundancy,illness or anything else.
There are plenty of insurance policies available out there for a modest amount per month that will cover your income as albion states.
I have one in place that I’m now claiming from as I have had to leave work to be a full time carer for my wife,now at 36 years old I didn’t envisage having to claim on this but I’ve paid into it for the last 10 years for that reason…the unknown,I can now concentrate on looking after my wife without having to worry about money as the policy will pay out around £1000 per month until I return to work,which will easily cover everything and then some.
Over the 10 years this policy has cost me around £3000 (£26pm) but I have already claimed £7000 from it since leaving work,The solidarity shown to the driver in the story is great but ultimately people shouldn’t rely on employers or the government to finance an individual being unable to work.Thankfully, your prudence has been rewarded although under very sad circumstances. Franglais makes the point that government could improve sick pay allowance by increasing National Insurance without much of that cash being diverted to parasitical shareholders, just another form of insurance but cheaper. I think you did well for £26! I’m truly glad you’re not suffering financially on top of everything else.
Thank you .
Franglais:
As Albion has said (I’m sure I’ll be corrected if wrong)
Well, obvs like, cos I’m a womanBut you aren’t in that one, so as you were.
Even the way some sneer at the “Nanny State” is a clue that they would “pass by on the other side” rather than lend a hand or contribute fairly.
Climbs off of soap-box.Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
Depends of definition of Nanny State though. I’m definitely on the side of less state involvement, I’m an advocate of taking responsibility for yourself and not enough people do in my book 
, but that doesn’t exclude me from feeling that I have an obligation to others who are less fortunate through no fault of their own.
What a sad story, people being driven to despair over finances when off sick…especially cancer…there should always be a payment plan in these instances…i say good luck to his mates who offered their support, and i hope he gets back on track…an illness is bad enough, but to get only £85 a week, and to have to pay everything out of that measly sum is a downright disgrace…especially as his wife has to pay £70 out of that for bus fares, so she can visit him in hospital…laws need to be changed to benefit everyone in situations like this one.
albion:
Franglais:
As Albion has said (I’m sure I’ll be corrected if wrong)
Well, obvs like, cos I’m a woman [emoji38] But you aren’t in that one, so as you were.
Even the way some sneer at the “Nanny State” is a clue that they would “pass by on the other side” rather than lend a hand or contribute fairly.
Climbs off of soap-box.Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
Depends of definition of Nanny State though. I’m definitely on the side of less state involvement, I’m an advocate of taking responsibility for yourself and not enough people do in my book
Can we unpick that a little? You’re obviously a caring person(Yeh, it’s a feminine trait and in spite of being a nasty boss, you haven’t escaped that) and “would help those who are less fortunate through no fault of their own”. But what of those not as prudent, who fall on hard times? Do we pass by the feckless ones as we thank our own foresight?
They would clutter up our streets with their begging bowls wouldn’t they?
I think most of us need to be herded into doing the right and sensible thing. Twenty somethings rarely make sensible choices. (pause for thought).
We shouldn’t let 8 year olds spend all their birthday money on sweets: they aren’t financially mature, nor are many 58 year olds!
Nanny knows best?
Most times yes! You wilful child, you!
[emoji3]
I confess I’ve written all that but ain’t entirely happy with it. In an ideal world we could be free to make bad as well as good choices. I do think we should give up the freedom to be stupid sometimes. Maybe?
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
SSP is NOT paid automatically. It has to be applied for, and there are certain hoops to jump through to get it.
Chances are, that for most people - “It’s not worth the time-wasting hassle of filling in the forms” - and the government saves a fortune in “unclaimed SSP” every year. 
Good sick pay system when people get percentage depend from wages.More was paid tax more sick pay must be.But in England if one person get 200 per week ,another 500 but sick pay same.Sorry but stupid sister.
Andrejs:
Good sick pay system when people get percentage depend from wages.More was paid tax more sick pay must be.But in England if one person get 200 per week ,another 500 but sick pay same.Sorry but stupid sister.
An option to top up the state payments, by private insurance is good. No arguments. But I reckon the state sick payment is too low.
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
The answers to this post tells a whole lot
Drivers living beound there means while working for buttons
Anyone who works and is depending on there current weekly wages to live or pay bills is living beound there means
As you all seem to believe you all earn a fortune every week
I don’t think so more like below minimum wage if the truth be told
Franglais:
Andrejs:
Good sick pay system when people get percentage depend from wages.More was paid tax more sick pay must be.But in England if one person get 200 per week ,another 500 but sick pay same.Sorry but stupid sister.An option to top up the state payments, by private insurance is good. No arguments. But I reckon the state sick payment is too low.
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
but why people with low and high income get same sick pay .But if people get 12000k per years that he pay minimum tax but who get 40K that he pay about 9K per years for tax.
Whilst I agree that employer/state needs to get involved in assisting someone who temporarily can’t work, but why should they pay someone’s £500 per month mortgage. Realistically, how much does someone need per week to live on? The state provides that. What it doesn’t provide is all the extras that people voluntarily take out: mortgages, car loans, credit cards etc.
Andrejs:
Franglais:
Andrejs:
Good sick pay system when people get percentage depend from wages.More was paid tax more sick pay must be.But in England if one person get 200 per week ,another 500 but sick pay same.Sorry but stupid sister.An option to top up the state payments, by private insurance is good. No arguments. But I reckon the state sick payment is too low.
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
but why people with low and high income get same sick pay .But if people get 12000k per years that he pay minimum tax but who get 40K that he pay about 9K per years for tax.
If someone earns more then they pay more taxes. I think that’s ok.
If someone pays more into health funds should they get better health care?
I’d say no. My and my family’s health and welfare shouldn’t be determined by the job I have and the pay I receive.
If a high rate tax payer gets attacked by a mugger, should they get two squad cars turn up, when all I’d get is an “incident number”?
The phrase has always been:
“We pay according to our means,
And take according to our needs”.
Maybe it sounds corny to some, but I still think it’s right.
And as I said there are private “top ups” available.
Might it be better if there weren’t? With no private education allowed, would state education get better funding?
But that’s drifting off topic. Sorry.
For me, an increase in tax/national insurance to fund better health and sickness benefits.
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
Franglais:
Andrejs:
Franglais:
Andrejs:
Good sick pay system when people get percentage depend from wages.More was paid tax more sick pay must be.But in England if one person get 200 per week ,another 500 but sick pay same.Sorry but stupid sister.An option to top up the state payments, by private insurance is good. No arguments. But I reckon the state sick payment is too low.
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
but why people with low and high income get same sick pay .But if people get 12000k per years that he pay minimum tax but who get 40K that he pay about 9K per years for tax.
If someone earns more then they pay more taxes. I think that’s ok.
If someone pays more into health funds should they get better health care?
I’d say no. My and my family’s health and welfare shouldn’t be determined by the job I have and the pay I receive.
If a high rate tax payer gets attacked by a mugger, should they get two squad cars turn up, when all I’d get is an “incident number”?The phrase has always been:
“We pay according to our means,
And take according to our needs”.Maybe it sounds corny to some, but I still think it’s right.
And as I said there are private “top ups” available.
Might it be better if there weren’t? With no private education allowed, would state education get better funding?
But that’s drifting off topic. Sorry.
For me, an increase in tax/national insurance to fund better health and sickness benefits.Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
in most Eu country if people get more money from job that he get more jobseekers allowance,sick pay,pension.But in England one man work 40 years and he get 500 state pension.Another worked 5 years and all the time was benefit man ,lazy and more but he get 100 pension and 400 pension credit.
nightline:
The answers to this post tells a whole lot
Drivers living beound there means while working for buttons
Anyone who works and is depending on there current weekly wages to live or pay bills is living beound there means
As you all seem to believe you all earn a fortune every week
I don’t think so more like below minimum wage if the truth be told
I don’t disagree that some live beyond their means but as said going from £500 a week to around £85 is a big drop if more than a week or 2
If all get same sick pay,pension that why people with high income pay more national insurance. May be need pay fixed national insurance.
kcrussell25:
nightline:
The answers to this post tells a whole lot
Drivers living beound there means while working for buttons
Anyone who works and is depending on there current weekly wages to live or pay bills is living beound there means
As you all seem to believe you all earn a fortune every week
I don’t think so more like below minimum wage if the truth be toldI don’t disagree that some live beyond their means but as said going from £500 a week to around £85 is a big drop if more than a week or 2
Living within one’s means - also means “refusing to borrow cash to pay for stuff that can gone without.”
Thus, if you don’t borrow at all - you are living within your means, regardless of one’s earnings, or outgoings - which might still leave a deficit each month.
There must be over a million people in this country who, one week before the monthly payday - are living on noodles, watching a lot of TV, and hanging around supermarkets late on friday night…