On 30 Nov, 09:34, mogga  wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 13:56:50 -0800 (PST),
>
> melanie.fullw...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> >The National Minimum Wage is not in keeping with the cost of living as
> >regards to housing and even the cost of food. It's too low, and
> >employers get away with paying this in exchange for a lot of work in
> >some cases because it is perfectly legal to do so.
>
> Is it not that house prices are obscene? That little party is coming
> to an end at the moment.
>
> Food inflation is massively higher than the government's inflation
> figures. This is the same for travel, heating etc etc etc.
>
> The bakset of things that count towards inflation now contains mostly
> ipods and other electronics which have fallen in price.
>
> Tax credits also maintain low wages and short hours. Why pay full time
> staff when you can have part time workers forced into a level of
> flexibility they might not want, and have tax credits to top up the
> low wages you pay. UK PLC pays a lot towards the profits of major
> companies.
> --http://www.freedeliveryuk.co.uk

And companies pay a lot towards taxes.

In many cases, on a monthly basis. Employer NI is higher than most
people pay out of their pay packet.

But yes, tax credits help maintain short hours, which always give less
weekly pay than full time in the same job.
Without it, would the jobless figure be higher?  Would many companies
have to do without part timers and just stick to full timers?
Would it mean then that employees had to use a lot more childcare, a
lot more home help (for sick family members) but at least have a full
time pay packet?

My employer would have to change from 9 staff to just 4. Meaning less
available to cover sickness and holiday. Presumably many other
employers would be the same, less cover available to cover jobs.
Would it improve productivity or reduce it?

Martin  <><