Employing staff

[enduro]

Have just been talking to a mate of mine who owns a very large fencing supply buisness near me. He employes 60 full time staff, he was saying he spends most of his time these days sorting out employment matters, got one guy who suffers from migraine he has been of work for 15 months he still has to pay him £70 per week statuary sick pay, another one who had a car crash, his own fault been of two years same thing. He said its a real nightmare employing people, so anybody who wants to employ somebody. BEWARE THIS COULD HAPPEN TO YOU

[grumpygrouter]

Try employing 15 female staff in a hairdressing salon, then having 4 get pregnant at the same time! Maternity cover required, maternity pay, keep jobs open, some don't come back, regular clientelle go elsewhere, profits start to fall. Salon now closed!!!!

Employing people, forget it!

Grumpy

[whitebeam]

Totaly agree with grumpy on this one, Customers moaning at you about work quality and your paying to put right, That's if their not nicking materials for their weekend work. Don't do it

[GazTech]

I trained up one of my best mates, from him working in a computer components warehouse to tiling.20 years later he is one the finest tilers in the area. Simon was always there to sub contract with me, never employed by me. If he never turned in....(which he always did)...then he would never have been paid (which he always was). I liked that way of doing things, I could get on with tiling not pen pushing.......Gaz

[Fekin]

Originally Posted by grumpygrouter

Try employing 15 female staff in a hairdressing salon, then having 4 get pregnant at the same time! Maternity cover required, maternity pay, keep jobs open, some don't come back, regular clientelle go elsewhere, profits start to fall. Salon now closed!!!!

Employing people, forget it!

Grumpy

It's things like this that will put many people off hiring women workers.

[grumpygrouter]

Originally Posted by Fekin

It's things like this that will put many people off hiring women workers.

That would be illegal Fekin mate.

Grumpy

[tileform]

Its a minefield employing people and its also a big expense
These days some people actually look for ways to have an accident so they can claim against you! Sad but true
I find its better to sub-contract the work out

[TilingLogistics]

I have started down this route! I started with one employee and about to take on another full time. Hopefully I have made the right decision but with Health & Safety and liability insurance going through the roof I am beginning to wonder

Kev

[floydyboy]

i agree with tileform there r to many spongers out there who r outto get something for f--kall it makes me sick, a mate of mine has got 17 working for him he gets nothing but hastle, he had to sack 1 of them a short while ago the RED tape he had to go through because of the service was stupid. stay a 1 man band u b better off

[tileform]

Originally Posted by floydyboy

i agree with tileform there r to many spongers out there who r outto get something for f--kall it makes me sick, a mate of mine has got 17 working for him he gets nothing but hastle, he had to sack 1 of them a short while ago the RED tape he had to go through because of the service was stupid. stay a 1 man band u b better off

In this day and age its sad but true
i've only ever been unemployed for 3 months in my working life but now, you can actually earn more in benefits sitting on your a**e doing sod all

It really bugs me!!!!

[sibs]

I can't believe what I'm hearing in this day and age....women of child bearing age being discriminated against even though employers can claim full maternity pay back off the government plus a bit more besides if what I heard on Geremy Vine is correct. Its like going back 100 years. It disgusts me that this happens and it's happening more and more. Anyone out there who is thinking along these lines - think again! Someone has to have the child bearing role which in itself is a beautiful and natural thing and to be penalised for this is outrageous. If nature made us so that both sexes were capable of giving birth do you think that there would be any of this discrimination?????! I DON'T THINK SO !!!!! Ok this is just something I feel very strongly about as you can probably tell lol... Its not aimed at anyone in particular - just a general rant about something I keep hearing more and more about I can understand how difficult it may be as an employer be but geez I'd rather employ no one than do that to a woman ... ok rant over.. Grouphug! Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

[grumpygrouter]

I know where you are coming from sibs but it is an unfortunate fact of employment life now that the rights of employers have virutally disappeared in the last 10 years.

No one is saying that women should not have babies or have time off for it, but unfortunately legislation is such that now businesses can go bust because of it. I have first hand experience of this.

A woman is soon to be entitled to have a full 12 months off work to have a child, the employers has, by law to keep the job open, just in case the lady wishes to return to work. In the meantime, her work load either has to be redistributed amongs the other staff, or as is common, some one else employed on a temporary contract to cover. If this "new" employee is better at the job than the person being covered for, what is an amployer to do 12 months down the line, let the person doing the better job go and bring back into the fold someone who, in all probability will want to do "flexy" hours to suit her new life obligations or break the law and not take them back.

I know in many cases whether the worker is male or female in the work place is not significant, but for such women oriented business like hair or beauty, this legislation can have a devastating effect.

No disrepect meant to any ladies, whatsoever, what would we do without them, just that I think the legislation has got way out of control now. Employment is now a legal minefield for any prospective business and should be condsidered very carefully before taking on even 1 employee.

Your assumption that the government pays for maternity benefit and a little bit more is in fact factually wrong if a company has more than 250 employees. These companies have to foot something like 30% of the costs themselves. Employers with less than this amount of employees get maternity pay refunded plus a small percentage on top. this doesn't begin to cover the loss of income a hairdressing salon loses when the stylist takes 12 months off. Imagine 4 at a time!

Grumpy