Guarantee the Minimum Wage for interns

Young people are now expected to work unpaid at the start of their careers as the very few opportunities that exist are "for "interns". These are, in the main, just unpaid work.

We have a minimum wage in this country, a guaranteed sum which must be paid to every worker, however this is being abused by employers who think that, by calling their jobs "internships", they can avoid paying the legal minimum. The Minimum Wage regulations should be amended to cover "internships" (they are not mentioned at all) and for employers to be required to pay all young people what they should be paying them.

Why is this idea important?

Young people are now expected to work unpaid at the start of their careers as the very few opportunities that exist are "for "interns". These are, in the main, just unpaid work.

We have a minimum wage in this country, a guaranteed sum which must be paid to every worker, however this is being abused by employers who think that, by calling their jobs "internships", they can avoid paying the legal minimum. The Minimum Wage regulations should be amended to cover "internships" (they are not mentioned at all) and for employers to be required to pay all young people what they should be paying them.

Hate crime ..add disability

Presently if its deemed a crime was committed against someone mainly because of their race or sexuality the sentence can be more severe than if the crime was committed on other grounds . Disability tho isnt included on this list even tho attacks on disabled people because of their impairments arent infrequent.

The case of the mother who killed herself and her disabled child because of constant harassment by locals  was one which shocked and horrified many yet if those people are caught they can only be charged with public order offences not hate crimes.

Had this been a racially based or homophobic couple based harrassment they could have been charged with hate crime and been given a heavier penalty.

Why is this idea important?

Presently if its deemed a crime was committed against someone mainly because of their race or sexuality the sentence can be more severe than if the crime was committed on other grounds . Disability tho isnt included on this list even tho attacks on disabled people because of their impairments arent infrequent.

The case of the mother who killed herself and her disabled child because of constant harassment by locals  was one which shocked and horrified many yet if those people are caught they can only be charged with public order offences not hate crimes.

Had this been a racially based or homophobic couple based harrassment they could have been charged with hate crime and been given a heavier penalty.

End Positive Discrimination – Repeal ‘Positive Action’ in the Equality Act 2010

Repeal or alter the section 'Positive Action' (Part 11, Chapter 2) contained in the Equality Act 2010, enacted on 8 April 2010.

Notably:

159 Positive action: recruitment and promotion

(1) This section applies if a person (P) reasonably thinks that—

(a) persons who share a protected characteristic suffer a disadvantage connected to the characteristic, or

(b) participation in an activity by persons who share a protected characteristic is disproportionately low.

(2) Part 5 (work) does not prohibit P from taking action within subsection (3) with the aim of enabling or encouraging persons who share the protected characteristic to—

(a) overcome or minimise that disadvantage, or

(b) participate in that activity.

(3) That action is treating a person (A) more favourably in connection with recruitment or promotion than another person (B) because A has the protected characteristic but B does not.

(4) But subsection (2) applies only if—

(a) A is as qualified as B to be recruited or promoted,

(b) P does not have a policy of treating persons who share the protected characteristic more favourably in connection with recruitment or promotion than persons who do not share it, and

(c) taking the action in question is a proportionate means of achieving the aim referred to in subsection (2).

(5) “Recruitment” means a process for deciding whether to—

(a) offer employment to a person,

(b) make contract work available to a contract worker,

(c) offer a person a position as a partner in a firm or proposed firm,

(d) offer a person a position as a member of an LLP or proposed LLP,

(e) offer a person a pupillage or tenancy in barristers’ chambers,

(f) take a person as an advocate’s devil or offer a person membership of an advocate’s stable,

(g) offer a person an appointment to a personal office,

(h) offer a person an appointment to a public office, recommend a person for such an appointment or approve a person’s appointment to a public office, or

(i) offer a person a service for finding employment.

Why is this idea important?

Repeal or alter the section 'Positive Action' (Part 11, Chapter 2) contained in the Equality Act 2010, enacted on 8 April 2010.

Notably:

159 Positive action: recruitment and promotion

(1) This section applies if a person (P) reasonably thinks that—

(a) persons who share a protected characteristic suffer a disadvantage connected to the characteristic, or

(b) participation in an activity by persons who share a protected characteristic is disproportionately low.

(2) Part 5 (work) does not prohibit P from taking action within subsection (3) with the aim of enabling or encouraging persons who share the protected characteristic to—

(a) overcome or minimise that disadvantage, or

(b) participate in that activity.

(3) That action is treating a person (A) more favourably in connection with recruitment or promotion than another person (B) because A has the protected characteristic but B does not.

(4) But subsection (2) applies only if—

(a) A is as qualified as B to be recruited or promoted,

(b) P does not have a policy of treating persons who share the protected characteristic more favourably in connection with recruitment or promotion than persons who do not share it, and

(c) taking the action in question is a proportionate means of achieving the aim referred to in subsection (2).

(5) “Recruitment” means a process for deciding whether to—

(a) offer employment to a person,

(b) make contract work available to a contract worker,

(c) offer a person a position as a partner in a firm or proposed firm,

(d) offer a person a position as a member of an LLP or proposed LLP,

(e) offer a person a pupillage or tenancy in barristers’ chambers,

(f) take a person as an advocate’s devil or offer a person membership of an advocate’s stable,

(g) offer a person an appointment to a personal office,

(h) offer a person an appointment to a public office, recommend a person for such an appointment or approve a person’s appointment to a public office, or

(i) offer a person a service for finding employment.

Job grant, unfair to the hard working people in society

Why is a Job Grant of 100 pounds  available to people who have been out of work for six or more months. Why is a tax free grant given to people who have been out of work the longest?  Adding to this, if you return to work after six months or more you also get additional support with rent and council tax.

Therefore if you have lost your job and searched endlessly for another job and then start work where your pay is on a monthly basis, but have been out of work for less six months you get no Job Grant, or help with housing benefit or council tax since all benefit ceases. You are then left to somehow survive and pay all rent and council tax, which would mean that you would very likely be much worse off than being on job seekers allowance.

It's a bit annoying like the appointment system at Jobcentreplus offices, where they book you an appointment and you arrive on time to be seen 20 minutes later. When making a query about this I was told " your husand is a RARE case, many people can't be bothered to get out of bed in the morning" .  Well if somebody can't " be bothered" to get out of bed should they be allowed extra time, surely if they can't get out of bed once every two weeks to sign on then surely there is little enthusiasm to get a job? and would they be allowed to roll into work 30 minutes late without being sacked? I very much doubt it.  

 

Why is this idea important?

Why is a Job Grant of 100 pounds  available to people who have been out of work for six or more months. Why is a tax free grant given to people who have been out of work the longest?  Adding to this, if you return to work after six months or more you also get additional support with rent and council tax.

Therefore if you have lost your job and searched endlessly for another job and then start work where your pay is on a monthly basis, but have been out of work for less six months you get no Job Grant, or help with housing benefit or council tax since all benefit ceases. You are then left to somehow survive and pay all rent and council tax, which would mean that you would very likely be much worse off than being on job seekers allowance.

It's a bit annoying like the appointment system at Jobcentreplus offices, where they book you an appointment and you arrive on time to be seen 20 minutes later. When making a query about this I was told " your husand is a RARE case, many people can't be bothered to get out of bed in the morning" .  Well if somebody can't " be bothered" to get out of bed should they be allowed extra time, surely if they can't get out of bed once every two weeks to sign on then surely there is little enthusiasm to get a job? and would they be allowed to roll into work 30 minutes late without being sacked? I very much doubt it.  

 

Replace National minimum wage with a Regional minimum wage

There have been suggestions on this site to scrap national minimum wage altogether.

I can't agree with that. I think it would be a backwards step, hence me starting a new thread.

My idea is that we should alter the National Minimum Wage law and introduce a Regional Minimum Wage linked to the cost of living.

It's blindingly obvious that the current minimum wage stretches a lot further in the North than it does in the South. This needs to be adressed.

My belief is that the banks and call centers do actually want UK staff talking to UK people, and the UK car companies also would prefer to have UK people too, but everyone in the UK costs the same price…and that price is too expensive when compared to other regions in Europe and the rest of the world.

A call center staff member living in London might indeed need £6 an hour to simply survive, but £6 an hour in Newcastle or Liverpool buys a whole lot more where the rents, council tax, travel costs and house prices are so much lower.

Why is this idea important?

There have been suggestions on this site to scrap national minimum wage altogether.

I can't agree with that. I think it would be a backwards step, hence me starting a new thread.

My idea is that we should alter the National Minimum Wage law and introduce a Regional Minimum Wage linked to the cost of living.

It's blindingly obvious that the current minimum wage stretches a lot further in the North than it does in the South. This needs to be adressed.

My belief is that the banks and call centers do actually want UK staff talking to UK people, and the UK car companies also would prefer to have UK people too, but everyone in the UK costs the same price…and that price is too expensive when compared to other regions in Europe and the rest of the world.

A call center staff member living in London might indeed need £6 an hour to simply survive, but £6 an hour in Newcastle or Liverpool buys a whole lot more where the rents, council tax, travel costs and house prices are so much lower.