evil woman Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 It all seems perfectly straightforward to me. The Queens households are funded from the public purse. So give a 50% pay rise to all the staff and increase the national contribution to fund it. In turn folk up here can pay a bit more tax or have services cut to pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 So the royals have poorly paid staff providing them with additional labour for nothing? David Cameron recently gave a speech condemning the ' Something for nothing culture ', I hadn't realised he was talking about the queen! https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fyougov.co.uk%2Fnews%2F2012%2F06%2F25%2Fsomething-nothing-culture%2F&ei=eRQdVebdJoffU5_egKgI&usg=AFQjCNERWQfS0CtulUyKIyB0-TzE4QqmIw Its not just the queen. If you work in an office, you will undoubtedly be working for free, if its not going home a bit late when something needs sorting its taking your lunch break at your desk while continuing to work. The extra work these people do is voluntary. They are not required to do it and offer their services for free. Maybe jobs working in the royal household are more cushy than people on the outside understand and this is why they never have problems filling posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms Macbeth Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 There are four jobs going in Buck house atm. I'd imagine a living in kitchen porter would be better off even on the quoted wages than doing a similar job in London, and having to pay market rent. https://theroyalhousehold.tal.net/vx/lang-en-GB/mobile-0/appcentre-1/brand-2/candidate/jobboard/vacancy/4/adv/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 There are four jobs going in Buck house atm. I'd imagine a living in kitchen porter would be better off even on the quoted wages than doing a similar job in London, and having to pay market rent. https://theroyalhousehold.tal.net/vx/lang-en-GB/mobile-0/appcentre-1/brand-2/candidate/jobboard/vacancy/4/adv/ The live in positions do specify "with salary adjustment".....So accommodation and meals would be deductible... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 The live in positions do specify "with salary adjustment".....So accommodation and meals would be deductible... I think you have that the wrong way round. The salary adjustment is already in place. The £14,676.00 per annum is what you would receive after the adjustment. So no rent or council tax to pay in central London. That's a fair amount to receive for what is an unskilled position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 I think you have that the wrong way round. The salary adjustment is already in place. The £14,676.00 per annum is what you would receive after the adjustment. So no rent or council tax to pay in central London. That's a fair amount to receive for what is an unskilled position. You may well be right...I don't know....But the wage quoted seems to me to be a bit ambiguous at the very least.... My guess would be that I'm right....But of course I can't say for certain...I think it highly unlikely if that figure quoted was already adjusted, otherwise, why put the caveat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjw47 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 You may well be right...I don't know....But the wage quoted seems to me to be a bit ambiguous at the very least.... My guess would be that I'm right....But of course I can't say for certain...I think it highly unlikely if that figure quoted was already adjusted, otherwise, why put the caveat? Think you're right on this, if not ,whoever worded the advert needs to think a bit more about what they're doing. The simple statement ' includes accommodation and meals' would attract a lot more interest I would have thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berberis Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 You may well be right...I don't know....But the wage quoted seems to me to be a bit ambiguous at the very least.... My guess would be that I'm right....But of course I can't say for certain...I think it highly unlikely if that figure quoted was already adjusted, otherwise, why put the caveat? Its ambiguous due to the deduction, plus you have to understand the tax implications of being provided with a 'perk' especially one that would be valued so highly by the HMRC. Food is tax deductible while providing accommodation for staff while they are not working is not. This is why it is not also included in the salary statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 One also has to take into account the pride and prestige in working for our monarch and the environments they work in. Visitors have to pay for the privilege of entering and viewing these buildings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted April 2, 2015 Share Posted April 2, 2015 Its ambiguous due to the deduction, plus you have to understand the tax implications of being provided with a 'perk' especially one that would be valued so highly by the HMRC. Food is tax deductible while providing accommodation for staff while they are not working is not. This is why it is not also included in the salary statement. So why make it ambiguous at all then?....Just say exactly what the package is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now