UPDATED: Wirral salon boss hits out at 'named and shamed' list

UPDATED: Wirral salon boss hits out at 'named and shamed' list

UPDATED: Wirral salon boss hits out at 'named and shamed' list

First published in News
Last updated
Wirral Globe: Photograph of the Author by , Senior Reporter

A WIRRAL hairdressers’ is among 25 employers named and shamed by the Government after they failed to pay their staff the national minimum wage.

Renaissance, in Heswall, underpaid three workers a total of £7,310.65 but co-owner Nicola Banks claims it was a “genuine error”.

Ms Banks told the Globe that of the three staff underpaid, one still works at the Telegraph Road salon, adding that it was an “apprenticeship scheme problem” rather than a minimum wage issue.

She said the mistake came from difficulties following the Government’s advice on paying apprentices on the Pay As You Earn (PAYE) website.

She said:  “The trouble is we were following the Government’s apprentice scheme website and it’s extremely difficult to follow.”

Ms Banks said an error had followed and as soon as it was flagged up by the PAYE, she and her co-owner Christine Cadden completely complied with them, with staff members paid the money they were owed straight away.

Renaissance has since been fined by HM Revenue and Customs for the minimum wages breach, which was paid six months ago.

“We were absolutely mortified and really sorry it happened, but it was a genuine error. We were not deliberately trying to avoid paying the minimum wage.

“It is not clear on the website what the ages should be and I think a lot of salons find it very difficult to ensure they are complying properly.

“It’s confusing for a small business looking at the PAYE website and trying to find where their own employees fit in the scheme.”

The hairdressers salon was just one of 25 employers named in the list published by the Department for Business as part of a new crackdown.

The Wheatsheaf Inn, in Cheshire, was also named and shamed after it neglected to pay £2,057.88 to five workers.

Between them the 25 employers owe workers more than £43,000 in arrears and face fines totalling more than £21,000.

It is the biggest number of employers publicly named since a new regime was announced last year.

The Government also plans to increase fine, so that an employer underpaying 10 workers could face penalties of up to £200,000.

Business Minister Jenny Willott said: "Paying less than the minimum wage is not only wrong, it's illegal. If employers break the law they need to know that they will face tough consequences.

"Any worker who is entitled to the minimum wage should receive it. If anyone suspects they are not being paid the wage they are legally entitled to they should call the Pay and Work Rights helpline on 0800 917 2368."

Comments (23)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:00am Tue 10 Jun 14

uncatom says...

The pay rates are very clear and precise, and if in the unlikely event that you are unsure there are numerous sites on line or you can pick up the phone for information so it just doesn't wash (that's not a pun) mistakes don't pay the rent or food bills, you have been caught so forget about the damage limitation.
The pay rates are very clear and precise, and if in the unlikely event that you are unsure there are numerous sites on line or you can pick up the phone for information so it just doesn't wash (that's not a pun) mistakes don't pay the rent or food bills, you have been caught so forget about the damage limitation. uncatom
  • Score: 27

11:04am Tue 10 Jun 14

JimmyMercury says...

A decent employer would pay more than minimum wage. Mine does and apologised for not being able to pay more.
A decent employer would pay more than minimum wage. Mine does and apologised for not being able to pay more. JimmyMercury
  • Score: 23

12:04pm Tue 10 Jun 14

uncatom says...

I have just been on the GOV.UK site, in less than a minute there was a table displayed with all the pay rates on including apprentice rates along with the age ranges that apply, even those rates are pittance for apprentices so heaven knows what they have been paying them, as for PAYE they wouldn't qualify to pay tax on the quoted rates, and they have the nerve to try and defend their actions, disgraceful , no excuse.
I have just been on the GOV.UK site, in less than a minute there was a table displayed with all the pay rates on including apprentice rates along with the age ranges that apply, even those rates are pittance for apprentices so heaven knows what they have been paying them, as for PAYE they wouldn't qualify to pay tax on the quoted rates, and they have the nerve to try and defend their actions, disgraceful , no excuse. uncatom
  • Score: 28

12:18pm Tue 10 Jun 14

Llamedos 1 says...

Its all very well paying minimum wages, working wages and work-based pensions but for companies and particularly charities bidding for local authority contracts, if they did include all this enforced legislation they would not get the contracts and would therefore be forced out of business. This is a catch 22 situation that HMG has not thought about and will ultimately create a job loss situation........wat
ch this space come 2015
Its all very well paying minimum wages, working wages and work-based pensions but for companies and particularly charities bidding for local authority contracts, if they did include all this enforced legislation they would not get the contracts and would therefore be forced out of business. This is a catch 22 situation that HMG has not thought about and will ultimately create a job loss situation........wat ch this space come 2015 Llamedos 1
  • Score: -12

12:30pm Tue 10 Jun 14

uncatom says...

Llamedos 1 wrote:
Its all very well paying minimum wages, working wages and work-based pensions but for companies and particularly charities bidding for local authority contracts, if they did include all this enforced legislation they would not get the contracts and would therefore be forced out of business. This is a catch 22 situation that HMG has not thought about and will ultimately create a job loss situation........wat

ch this space come 2015
I seem to remember the Cons saying the same thing when the minimum wage was introduced, and now they are promoting it, I wonder why that is ?
[quote][p][bold]Llamedos 1[/bold] wrote: Its all very well paying minimum wages, working wages and work-based pensions but for companies and particularly charities bidding for local authority contracts, if they did include all this enforced legislation they would not get the contracts and would therefore be forced out of business. This is a catch 22 situation that HMG has not thought about and will ultimately create a job loss situation........wat ch this space come 2015[/p][/quote]I seem to remember the Cons saying the same thing when the minimum wage was introduced, and now they are promoting it, I wonder why that is ? uncatom
  • Score: 10

1:58pm Tue 10 Jun 14

yesandorno says...

took me 18 seconds ....£6.31 over 21 .... £5.03 18 to 20 .... £3.72 under 18........ £2.68 apprentice
its an employers job to pay the no less than these amounts ...... not hard , in fact i think it would take more effort to actually pay less.
took me 18 seconds ....£6.31 over 21 .... £5.03 18 to 20 .... £3.72 under 18........ £2.68 apprentice its an employers job to pay the no less than these amounts ...... not hard , in fact i think it would take more effort to actually pay less. yesandorno
  • Score: 21

2:58pm Tue 10 Jun 14

Roadkill says...

One call to HMRC is all it would have taken.
One call to HMRC is all it would have taken. Roadkill
  • Score: 14

4:14pm Tue 10 Jun 14

uncatom says...

Just a bit puzzled as to the involvement of PAYE, it appears they have got or can get funding via PAYE for their apprentices, so not only have they not paid the correct rate, their apprentices have been funded via PAYE, and still been underpaid, outrageous, and to top it all they are bleating about being named and shamed, I do hope some of their customers read this and have a conscience.
Just a bit puzzled as to the involvement of PAYE, it appears they have got or can get funding via PAYE for their apprentices, so not only have they not paid the correct rate, their apprentices have been funded via PAYE, and still been underpaid, outrageous, and to top it all they are bleating about being named and shamed, I do hope some of their customers read this and have a conscience. uncatom
  • Score: 17

6:40pm Tue 10 Jun 14

JADEE1 says...

WELL THERES NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME FOR HMRC,ASWELL AS THE DWP,TO TAKE A VERY CLOSE LOOK AT ALL OF THE OTHER BUSINESES,THAT TAKE CASH FOR SERVICES ON THE WIRRAL, & REFUSE POINT BLANK TO FOLLOW WAGE HEALTH & SAFETY AT WORK,HOLIDAY & REFUSAL TO PAY SICK PAY,,ESPECIALLY THE COMPANYS THAT SEND THERE WORKERS HOME WITH NO PAY WHEN ITS QUIET,THEN REFUSES TO GIVE THEM PROPER MEAL BREAKS WHEN THEY ARE BUSY,SAVES UP THE WORKERS TIPS GIVEN BY THE PUBLIC TO PASS ON TO ITS WORKERS ONCE A MONTH,SOUNDS OK ,BUT HERE IS THE CATCH, NO ONE KNOWS HOW MUCH HAS BEEN COLLECTED EXCEPT THE BOSS,& IF ANY WORKERS ARE LATE OR HAVE A DAY OFF ,THEY LOSE THERE TIPS FOR THAT MONTH,,& HE POCKETS IT,!! HE CHARGES THEM FOR HIS UNIFORMS & BOOTS,DIRECT OUT OFF THERE PAY WHEN THEY HAVE ANY,& VERY FEW STAFF HAVE PROPER CONTRACTS MOST ARE LUCKY TO GET 20 HOURS A WEEK ,BUT HEY LETS FACE IT THATS A TAX FIDDLE INN ITS,SELF, YES ITS YOUR LOCAL AMERICAN CAR WASH WITH OUTLETS ALL OVER THE WIRRAL & CHESTER,,!!LETS HOPE THE POLICE ,DWP,HMRC ,ASWELL AS THE HEALTH & SAFETY TAKE A PROPER LOOK AT THIS BUSINESS,& MANY OTHERS ON THE WIRRAL ,& STOP THIS ABUSE OF WORKERS & THEFT FROM ALL .!!
WELL THERES NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME FOR HMRC,ASWELL AS THE DWP,TO TAKE A VERY CLOSE LOOK AT ALL OF THE OTHER BUSINESES,THAT TAKE CASH FOR SERVICES ON THE WIRRAL, & REFUSE POINT BLANK TO FOLLOW WAGE HEALTH & SAFETY AT WORK,HOLIDAY & REFUSAL TO PAY SICK PAY,,ESPECIALLY THE COMPANYS THAT SEND THERE WORKERS HOME WITH NO PAY WHEN ITS QUIET,THEN REFUSES TO GIVE THEM PROPER MEAL BREAKS WHEN THEY ARE BUSY,SAVES UP THE WORKERS TIPS GIVEN BY THE PUBLIC TO PASS ON TO ITS WORKERS ONCE A MONTH,SOUNDS OK ,BUT HERE IS THE CATCH, NO ONE KNOWS HOW MUCH HAS BEEN COLLECTED EXCEPT THE BOSS,& IF ANY WORKERS ARE LATE OR HAVE A DAY OFF ,THEY LOSE THERE TIPS FOR THAT MONTH,,& HE POCKETS IT,!! HE CHARGES THEM FOR HIS UNIFORMS & BOOTS,DIRECT OUT OFF THERE PAY WHEN THEY HAVE ANY,& VERY FEW STAFF HAVE PROPER CONTRACTS MOST ARE LUCKY TO GET 20 HOURS A WEEK ,BUT HEY LETS FACE IT THATS A TAX FIDDLE INN ITS,SELF, YES ITS YOUR LOCAL AMERICAN CAR WASH WITH OUTLETS ALL OVER THE WIRRAL & CHESTER,,!!LETS HOPE THE POLICE ,DWP,HMRC ,ASWELL AS THE HEALTH & SAFETY TAKE A PROPER LOOK AT THIS BUSINESS,& MANY OTHERS ON THE WIRRAL ,& STOP THIS ABUSE OF WORKERS & THEFT FROM ALL .!! JADEE1
  • Score: 16

6:51pm Tue 10 Jun 14

djrimmer says...

Tom, I re-iterate, there will be many companies, particularly charities who create local employment would go out of business if and when living wages and work-based pensions are enforced. I can ensure you that if these costs were built into council contract tenders the applicant would not win the tender. "The cowboy contractors" who pay cash in hand and skimp on quality of service will get the contracts and then our services will deteriorate. Believe me, quality when bidding for such contracts only counts for 20% of the scoring. Yes minimum wage should be paid to employees but all these other impositions will undoubtedly create higher employment particularly from the charities who under charitable law are not allowed to make a profit anyway. So if you could advise me where all this extra money could come from I would be much obliged.
Tom, I re-iterate, there will be many companies, particularly charities who create local employment would go out of business if and when living wages and work-based pensions are enforced. I can ensure you that if these costs were built into council contract tenders the applicant would not win the tender. "The cowboy contractors" who pay cash in hand and skimp on quality of service will get the contracts and then our services will deteriorate. Believe me, quality when bidding for such contracts only counts for 20% of the scoring. Yes minimum wage should be paid to employees but all these other impositions will undoubtedly create higher employment particularly from the charities who under charitable law are not allowed to make a profit anyway. So if you could advise me where all this extra money could come from I would be much obliged. djrimmer
  • Score: -11

7:35pm Tue 10 Jun 14

uncatom says...

Council contracts work to a strict criteria, and the basic requirements are that they pay nationally agreed pay rates and or the minimum wage and that they subscribe to HASWA, tenders are not about the cheapest bid, as for charities do not people offer their services for free ? can you see my point? it would not be charitable to employ somebody on lesser terms considering some of the vast amounts some charities pay for admin and to their directors etc, a fair days pay for a fair days work is that not unreasonable, or perhaps you think that the taxpayers should continue to subsidise skinflint employers
Council contracts work to a strict criteria, and the basic requirements are that they pay nationally agreed pay rates and or the minimum wage and that they subscribe to HASWA, tenders are not about the cheapest bid, as for charities do not people offer their services for free ? can you see my point? it would not be charitable to employ somebody on lesser terms considering some of the vast amounts some charities pay for admin and to their directors etc, a fair days pay for a fair days work is that not unreasonable, or perhaps you think that the taxpayers should continue to subsidise skinflint employers uncatom
  • Score: 8

8:51pm Tue 10 Jun 14

David Scott says...

Of course the government (and Labour) like to talk tough on minimum pay, as it distracts from policies that depress rates of pay for the lower paid in the UK.
Of course the government (and Labour) like to talk tough on minimum pay, as it distracts from policies that depress rates of pay for the lower paid in the UK. David Scott
  • Score: 1

1:03am Wed 11 Jun 14

Llamedos 1 says...

Tom , I dont wish to be rude, thats not my style but it does appear to me that you do not understand how charities work and the legislation that they have to abide by. Firstly, charites, as long as they work they do fits their charitable status can use unpaid volunteers or indeed engage staff and pay them. If they do employ people on a wage it has to be under minimum pay rules. However the old assumption that charity workers are all unpaid volunteers is certainly not the case theses days. In fact it was mostly down to the employment service that charities had to start employing people as they did not paticularly like claimants doing voluntary work even when the rules said it was OK..
Any of the council contracts I have been involved with do not state anything about what you can and cant pay employees....the very fact that current contracts are scored 80% price and only 20% quality will give you a clue as to where their priority lies, so I am afraid I strongly disagree with your statement that "tenders are not about the cheapest bid" If all the invited tenderers score the same quality mark, who will get the contract....yes , the cheapest. And just finally, Charity directors and trustees are not, by charitable law, allowed to be paid other than out of pocket expenses, paid on receipt of bills although some board members can charge for professional services (such as accountancy) if authorised by the Charity Commission, although this is a rare occurrance.
So to sum up Tom I am not advocating paying employees peanuts but there is a financial limit as to what some companies and particularly charities can pay.
I would dearly love to pay my dedicated staff twice the living wage never mind the minimum wage but if that was built into contract tenders we would all be jobless
Tom , I dont wish to be rude, thats not my style but it does appear to me that you do not understand how charities work and the legislation that they have to abide by. Firstly, charites, as long as they work they do fits their charitable status can use unpaid volunteers or indeed engage staff and pay them. If they do employ people on a wage it has to be under minimum pay rules. However the old assumption that charity workers are all unpaid volunteers is certainly not the case theses days. In fact it was mostly down to the employment service that charities had to start employing people as they did not paticularly like claimants doing voluntary work even when the rules said it was OK.. Any of the council contracts I have been involved with do not state anything about what you can and cant pay employees....the very fact that current contracts are scored 80% price and only 20% quality will give you a clue as to where their priority lies, so I am afraid I strongly disagree with your statement that "tenders are not about the cheapest bid" If all the invited tenderers score the same quality mark, who will get the contract....yes , the cheapest. And just finally, Charity directors and trustees are not, by charitable law, allowed to be paid other than out of pocket expenses, paid on receipt of bills although some board members can charge for professional services (such as accountancy) if authorised by the Charity Commission, although this is a rare occurrance. So to sum up Tom I am not advocating paying employees peanuts but there is a financial limit as to what some companies and particularly charities can pay. I would dearly love to pay my dedicated staff twice the living wage never mind the minimum wage but if that was built into contract tenders we would all be jobless Llamedos 1
  • Score: -1

9:10am Wed 11 Jun 14

uncatom says...

Llamedos, You are quite correct I do not fully understand charity work, I only understand that most charities strive to look after those that are less fortunate or disadvantaged, so one would think that by example they would start with their own employees and wouldn't accept anything less, as to the tendering process I have been involved in a rather large tender with WBC and that WBC maintain overall responsibility for any outside contract tenders they accept ( HASWA and general terms and conditions) that is because they are law, the payment of the minimum wage and health and safety, so for all it is a level playing field in that aspect, so I don't understand how cash in hand can be a factor.
Llamedos, You are quite correct I do not fully understand charity work, I only understand that most charities strive to look after those that are less fortunate or disadvantaged, so one would think that by example they would start with their own employees and wouldn't accept anything less, as to the tendering process I have been involved in a rather large tender with WBC and that WBC maintain overall responsibility for any outside contract tenders they accept ( HASWA and general terms and conditions) that is because they are law, the payment of the minimum wage and health and safety, so for all it is a level playing field in that aspect, so I don't understand how cash in hand can be a factor. uncatom
  • Score: 0

11:25am Wed 11 Jun 14

Llamedos 1 says...

Tom I hope I am wrong but I get the impression that you think my employees are paid peanuts, in fact they are paid over the minimum wage and as I stated in my last post I would dearly love to pay them much more. However every one of our employees are well aware of the fact that we have to very carefully balance the books and are equally aware that if we built into tender costs much higher wages and work based pensions we would not get the tenders and consequently we would all be out of our jobs. I totally agree with you that the council builds various safety factors into the terms and conditions of contracts but as previously explained the fact that the scoring of tenders is based on 20% quality and 80% price should tell anyone what the councils priority is. I am not blaming the council in particular for this in-balance as the financial impositions imposed by nation government have force local authorities down the disasterous route which will produce inferior services over the coming years. My hands are tied, I either increase tender prices to pay staff higher wages and undoubtedly lose the contracts and close the business putting a reasonably large number of people out of work or put in reasonably competitive prices to retain contracts and continue employing people at a wage slightly above minimum wage. What would you want me to do?....I certainly know the action my staff want me to take
Tom I hope I am wrong but I get the impression that you think my employees are paid peanuts, in fact they are paid over the minimum wage and as I stated in my last post I would dearly love to pay them much more. However every one of our employees are well aware of the fact that we have to very carefully balance the books and are equally aware that if we built into tender costs much higher wages and work based pensions we would not get the tenders and consequently we would all be out of our jobs. I totally agree with you that the council builds various safety factors into the terms and conditions of contracts but as previously explained the fact that the scoring of tenders is based on 20% quality and 80% price should tell anyone what the councils priority is. I am not blaming the council in particular for this in-balance as the financial impositions imposed by nation government have force local authorities down the disasterous route which will produce inferior services over the coming years. My hands are tied, I either increase tender prices to pay staff higher wages and undoubtedly lose the contracts and close the business putting a reasonably large number of people out of work or put in reasonably competitive prices to retain contracts and continue employing people at a wage slightly above minimum wage. What would you want me to do?....I certainly know the action my staff want me to take Llamedos 1
  • Score: 0

1:27pm Wed 11 Jun 14

uncatom says...

Lamedos, If you see this as a slight on you and your employees that not what was implied at all , it was more about how you perceive the minimum wage, and I totally agree with you on some points, companies tendering loss leaders to gain contracts etc to gain unfair advantage but that is the fault of the tendering process not the minimum wage, the war of fear instigated by this unelected government on the most vulnerable in society to pressurise them into accepting anything at any price, that is the problem we face not the minimum wage, and the consequence that the alleged path of austerity was caused by those least able to defend themselves, the poor ,disabled and the unemployed.
Lamedos, If you see this as a slight on you and your employees that not what was implied at all , it was more about how you perceive the minimum wage, and I totally agree with you on some points, companies tendering loss leaders to gain contracts etc to gain unfair advantage but that is the fault of the tendering process not the minimum wage, the war of fear instigated by this unelected government on the most vulnerable in society to pressurise them into accepting anything at any price, that is the problem we face not the minimum wage, and the consequence that the alleged path of austerity was caused by those least able to defend themselves, the poor ,disabled and the unemployed. uncatom
  • Score: 0

4:32pm Wed 11 Jun 14

Llamedos 1 says...

Tom, I didnt take your comments personally but tried to explain the situation a vast number of charities are in in the country including my own. The only way we can survive providing a valuable service to the community is by undertaking contracts with local authorities, NHS`s and the like. To win those contracts (to allow us to survive and keep employing people) we have to compete with what I would call cowboys who would almost certainly get the contracts on price....so I just repeat "do my tenders include work based pensions and living wages or even more or do I make sure my staff continue in employment by being competitive on pricing. I do accept your point about the fault of the tendering process but until the council wakes up and sees that 80% scoring on price is causing this problem we have to play the game otherwise its the loss of a considerable number of quality (if not highly paid) jobs...I know which choice I am going with and which my staff would want me to go along with.
Tom, I didnt take your comments personally but tried to explain the situation a vast number of charities are in in the country including my own. The only way we can survive providing a valuable service to the community is by undertaking contracts with local authorities, NHS`s and the like. To win those contracts (to allow us to survive and keep employing people) we have to compete with what I would call cowboys who would almost certainly get the contracts on price....so I just repeat "do my tenders include work based pensions and living wages or even more or do I make sure my staff continue in employment by being competitive on pricing. I do accept your point about the fault of the tendering process but until the council wakes up and sees that 80% scoring on price is causing this problem we have to play the game otherwise its the loss of a considerable number of quality (if not highly paid) jobs...I know which choice I am going with and which my staff would want me to go along with. Llamedos 1
  • Score: 0

5:05pm Wed 11 Jun 14

uncatom says...

Liamedos, a living wage is slightly higher than the minimum wage, the law as yet does not require you to pay a living wage, but I believe you must make provision for a pension, however a lot of factors go on the size of your workforce, but again to reiterate other competitors must also take the regulations into account and tender within those parameters, good luck with your venture.

Regards uncatom
Liamedos, a living wage is slightly higher than the minimum wage, the law as yet does not require you to pay a living wage, but I believe you must make provision for a pension, however a lot of factors go on the size of your workforce, but again to reiterate other competitors must also take the regulations into account and tender within those parameters, good luck with your venture. Regards uncatom uncatom
  • Score: 0

3:35pm Thu 12 Jun 14

Llamedos 1 says...

Thanks Tom.....yes, I believe the "living wage" is quoted as £7.50 but the council are trying to encourage tenderers to adopt the living wage and this is where the hyprocracy comes in. They want contractors to pay it but they generally take the cheapest bid. So you can see my position....its catch 22,
damned if you do and damned if you dont. As far as work based pensions go
not one of my considerable staff have said they want to opt in.....they are all aware that pensions over the years have generally performed very poorly and do not appear to be interested. And my cynicism tells me that HMG with this legislation will eventually devastate state pensions.
Thanks Tom.....yes, I believe the "living wage" is quoted as £7.50 but the council are trying to encourage tenderers to adopt the living wage and this is where the hyprocracy comes in. They want contractors to pay it but they generally take the cheapest bid. So you can see my position....its catch 22, damned if you do and damned if you dont. As far as work based pensions go not one of my considerable staff have said they want to opt in.....they are all aware that pensions over the years have generally performed very poorly and do not appear to be interested. And my cynicism tells me that HMG with this legislation will eventually devastate state pensions. Llamedos 1
  • Score: -2

4:48pm Thu 12 Jun 14

uncatom says...

Liamedos, If I remember correctly you were allowed to put two bids in, high and low, but don't quote me on this, Your dilemma has become clear and I do now see your point, the difference between Living and minimum wages would make a huge difference in a bid, hypocrisy indeed!
Liamedos, If I remember correctly you were allowed to put two bids in, high and low, but don't quote me on this, Your dilemma has become clear and I do now see your point, the difference between Living and minimum wages would make a huge difference in a bid, hypocrisy indeed! uncatom
  • Score: 0

10:59am Fri 13 Jun 14

pooboy says...

It's plain to see to a blind man what has happened here.
The employers were trying to pull a fast one and have been caught out and are using pathetic lame excuses to justify their actions.
Heswall is an afluent area,so I very much doubt they were short of money to pay their staff.
I would suggest the reason the underpaid staff are still working there is not by choice, but due to the fact that there are little other jobs to apply for.
I hope this business is given a wide berth by the paying public as they deserve to go out of business.That is the simple truth, no matter how harsh it may seem.They will be getting no custom from my family and friends.
It's plain to see to a blind man what has happened here. The employers were trying to pull a fast one and have been caught out and are using pathetic lame excuses to justify their actions. Heswall is an afluent area,so I very much doubt they were short of money to pay their staff. I would suggest the reason the underpaid staff are still working there is not by choice, but due to the fact that there are little other jobs to apply for. I hope this business is given a wide berth by the paying public as they deserve to go out of business.That is the simple truth, no matter how harsh it may seem.They will be getting no custom from my family and friends. pooboy
  • Score: 9

12:11pm Mon 16 Jun 14

herradu says...

To clarify the situation for you, when an apprentice is taken on after they leave school often in June, they usually start college in September after they have been signed up and have taken a Maths test and an English test. During that three month period before they start college they have to be on the minimum wage. There is no mention of this on the government website. The college were unaware of this and so there must be many employers who are unaware also and will automatically start paying them the apprentice rate and not the minimum wage.
To clarify the situation for you, when an apprentice is taken on after they leave school often in June, they usually start college in September after they have been signed up and have taken a Maths test and an English test. During that three month period before they start college they have to be on the minimum wage. There is no mention of this on the government website. The college were unaware of this and so there must be many employers who are unaware also and will automatically start paying them the apprentice rate and not the minimum wage. herradu
  • Score: -2

9:51am Tue 17 Jun 14

uncatom says...

herradu wrote:
To clarify the situation for you, when an apprentice is taken on after they leave school often in June, they usually start college in September after they have been signed up and have taken a Maths test and an English test. During that three month period before they start college they have to be on the minimum wage. There is no mention of this on the government website. The college were unaware of this and so there must be many employers who are unaware also and will automatically start paying them the apprentice rate and not the minimum wage.
So how come they owed a total of £7,310,65 ? this is a sum that has been built up over a period of time, not just interim payments for college £3.72 minimum wage for under 18s £2.68 for apprentices approx. £480 odd difference over the three month period, this has been sustained underpayment.
[quote][p][bold]herradu[/bold] wrote: To clarify the situation for you, when an apprentice is taken on after they leave school often in June, they usually start college in September after they have been signed up and have taken a Maths test and an English test. During that three month period before they start college they have to be on the minimum wage. There is no mention of this on the government website. The college were unaware of this and so there must be many employers who are unaware also and will automatically start paying them the apprentice rate and not the minimum wage.[/p][/quote]So how come they owed a total of £7,310,65 ? this is a sum that has been built up over a period of time, not just interim payments for college £3.72 minimum wage for under 18s £2.68 for apprentices approx. £480 odd difference over the three month period, this has been sustained underpayment. uncatom
  • Score: 3

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree