|
Post by Clinton Cool on May 3, 2024 7:30:56 GMT
A question for the zealots who like government to regulate all aspects of the employer/ employee relationship.
I choose to work for one of my customers at a rate which is below the minimum wage. I do this because the work is varied and always physical, which I enjoy. The customer is on my doorstep, I like her, we have a great relationship of mutual trust and give and take. If I need to borrow one of her many tools, or store something for a while in her grounds, I don't even need to ask. I just let myself in. She never calls me when the weather is good for kayaking. I don't need to charge her more than I do, so there's no need to do this.
My only consideration regarding government is to tot up my earnings and declare them on my annual return. Anything else is no business of theirs.
Am I doing anything wrong?
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on May 3, 2024 7:33:19 GMT
A question for the zealots who like government to regulate all aspects of the employer/ employee relationship. I choose to work for one of my customers at a rate which is below the minimum wage. I do this because the work is varied and always physical, which I enjoy. The customer is on my doorstep, I like her, we have a great relationship of mutual trust and give and take. If I need to borrow one of her many tools, or store something for a while in her grounds, I don't even need to ask. I just let myself in. She never calls me when the weather is good for kayaking. I don't need to charge her more than I do, so there's no need to do this. My only consideration regarding government is to tot up my earnings and declare them on my annual return. Anything else is no business of theirs. Am I doing anything wrong? Yes. You are probably hoping she wants to borrow your tool.
|
|
|
Post by kris on May 3, 2024 7:35:41 GMT
But most see the cynical and pernicious exploit of cheap labour for what it is. However apparently there will be an option to continue with it if such is your choice. You are conflating zero hours contracts with minimum wage. They are not the same thing and being on one doesn’t mean one is on the other. There are loads of self employed people on “zero hours contracts” - whereby they decide what work to take on and how many days to take off, but they may well be well paid. Being on minimum wage and zero hours contract usually arises because the person doesn’t have much in the way of skills to offer an employee other than basic grunt. This usually arises because they didn’t bother to pay attention at school and are too lazy or stupid to train for some higher grade employment, spending their leisure time gawping at the box, pissing it up down the pub etc. rather than on self-improvement. oh look an exspurt with no direct experience.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on May 3, 2024 7:36:00 GMT
A question for the zealots who like government to regulate all aspects of the employer/ employee relationship. I choose to work for one of my customers at a rate which is below the minimum wage. I do this because the work is varied and always physical, which I enjoy. The customer is on my doorstep, I like her, we have a great relationship of mutual trust and give and take. If I need to borrow one of her many tools, or store something for a while in her grounds, I don't even need to ask. I just let myself in. She never calls me when the weather is good for kayaking. I don't need to charge her more than I do, so there's no need to do this. My only consideration regarding government is to tot up my earnings and declare them on my annual return. Anything else is no business of theirs. Am I doing anything wrong? Yes. You are probably hoping she wants to borrow your tool.
|
|
|
Post by on May 3, 2024 7:36:43 GMT
A lady with grounds sounds rather good.
I could do with one of these.
One thing I did experience with the Woman was that although I have about 500 more tools than she does she always has the right tool and knows where it is.
Mine are all over the place in random locations.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on May 3, 2024 7:38:51 GMT
A question for the zealots who like government to regulate all aspects of the employer/ employee relationship. I choose to work for one of my customers at a rate which is below the minimum wage. I do this because the work is varied and always physical, which I enjoy. The customer is on my doorstep, I like her, we have a great relationship of mutual trust and give and take. If I need to borrow one of her many tools, or store something for a while in her grounds, I don't even need to ask. I just let myself in. She never calls me when the weather is good for kayaking. I don't need to charge her more than I do, so there's no need to do this. My only consideration regarding government is to tot up my earnings and declare them on my annual return. Anything else is no business of theirs. Am I doing anything wrong? Yes. You are probably hoping she wants to borrow your tool. She's married, to another women. Neither of them are particularly attractive. Having said said, not so long ago I might well have fancied having a pop at both of them together. Just for devilment. I've moved on from all that though.
|
|
|
Post by Telemachus on May 3, 2024 7:39:31 GMT
You are conflating zero hours contracts with minimum wage. They are not the same thing and being on one doesn’t mean one is on the other. There are loads of self employed people on “zero hours contracts” - whereby they decide what work to take on and how many days to take off, but they may well be well paid. Being on minimum wage and zero hours contract usually arises because the person doesn’t have much in the way of skills to offer an employee other than basic grunt. This usually arises because they didn’t bother to pay attention at school and are too lazy or stupid to train for some higher grade employment, spending their leisure time gawping at the box, pissing it up down the pub etc. rather than on self-improvement. oh look an exspurt with no direct experience. Where? I can’t see them!
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on May 3, 2024 7:42:27 GMT
A lady with grounds sounds rather good. I could do with one of these. One thing I did experience with the Woman was that although I have about 500 more tools than she does she always has the right tool and knows where it is. Mine are all over the place in random locations. She has two large sheds full to the brim with tools. Everything you could imagine, often in duplicate. It's a dream. I'm not badly off in that repect but have to limit my stock to 3 large plastic containers which live under my bed. I raised it, for this very purpose.
|
|
|
Post by on May 3, 2024 7:47:52 GMT
I'm looking for a tooled up lady with a mansion to be honest. I quite like the idea of a mansion.
Having said that when we did have a mansion "One of the lesser country houses of today" according to Country Life magazine it all went wrong very badly for our family.
But there are some good memories.
So yeah. Mansion and a decent acreage and capital stabling would do. I could even move off the Boat if it meant residing in a mansion.
Cor the temptation!
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on May 3, 2024 8:06:55 GMT
I'm looking for a tooled up lady with a mansion to be honest. I quite like the idea of a mansion. Having said that when we did have a mansion "One of the lesser country houses of today" according to Country Life magazine it all went wrong very badly for our family. But there are some good memories. So yeah. Mansion and a decent acreage and capital stabling would do. I could even move off the Boat if it meant residing in a mansion. Cor the temptation! It wouldn't be for me. Just mowing the lawns takes her probably a day a week. She knows better than to ask me to do that mundane job. I think the positive of having ample land is the opportunity it brings for improvements/ random building projects. We've built loads of raised planters from the heavy timbers salvaged when they recently rebuilt the Barmouth railway bridge. Only 150 quid for 100 of them, absolute bargain. The next job is to build a garage/ carport to store her mower and utility vehicle. This will be a fun one as there's a decent sized hazel tree to fell, then some sizeable rocks to shift before we can crack on with the building.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on May 3, 2024 8:07:57 GMT
A fetching lady with grounds has just gone by. Emptying the coffee pot onto the compost!
|
|
|
Post by Aloysius on May 3, 2024 8:08:00 GMT
'After deputy Labour leader Angela Rayner urges Rishi Sunak to "call a general election and let the country move forward", Keir Starmer takes the mic in Blackpool.' (BBC)
I feel this sort of thing is uncalled for. One should be magnanimous in victory.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on May 3, 2024 8:43:08 GMT
Angela Rayner spoke of ending 'Tory austerity' during her speech. Ms. Reeves has stated that Labour will be 'fiscally prudent'. They will follow the rules on this, those invented by the Tories.
So, if Labour are going to be 'fiscally prudent', won't increase taxes (as they have also stated) how might they possibly end 'Tory austerity'?
It doesn't all add up.
|
|
|
Post by ianali on May 3, 2024 9:11:30 GMT
Angela Rayner spoke of ending 'Tory austerity' during her speech. Ms. Reeves has stated that Labour will be 'fiscally prudent'. They will follow the rules on this, those invented by the Tories. So, if Labour are going to be 'fiscally prudent', won't increase taxes (as they have also stated) how might they possibly end 'Tory austerity'? It doesn't all add up. They ‘might’ even wealth out a little between top and bottom. They ‘might’ stop the big corporations screwing people over. They ‘might’ put management into the NHS, trains and CRT that can run with efficiency. They probably won’t though.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on May 3, 2024 10:30:33 GMT
Angela Rayner spoke of ending 'Tory austerity' during her speech. Ms. Reeves has stated that Labour will be 'fiscally prudent'. They will follow the rules on this, those invented by the Tories. So, if Labour are going to be 'fiscally prudent', won't increase taxes (as they have also stated) how might they possibly end 'Tory austerity'? It doesn't all add up. They ‘might’ even wealth out a little between top and bottom. They ‘might’ stop the big corporations screwing people over. They ‘might’ put management into the NHS, trains and CRT that can run with efficiency. They probably won’t though. Have you decided if you're going to give them your vote yet?
|
|