Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Any employment benefit is a tax on companies to do business. This sort of thing is something that your union would have negotiated when they had powers. Nowadays the corporations hold sway and employees benefits are being squeezed.Well I dont see the connection between a dead dog and a dead child.Bereaved parents to be entitled to two weeks' paid leave from work
Working parents who suffer the loss of a child will now be entitled to two weeks of statutory paid leave, the government has announced.
Ministers have said the new legal right, known as Jack’s law, is the most generous parental bereavement pay offer in the world and will support 10,000 families a year in the UK.
Expected to come into force from April, it will cover all working parents who lose a child under the age of 18 or have a stillbirth, irrespective of how long an individual has been with their current employer.
I would think that the more advanced employers would offer this anyway.
I have no idea how I would cope in this situation but I dont think work would be uppermost in my thoughts. Should other measures be added to this ?
Good for old England.. Keep up the great work...
I've got to tell ya tho -- from sad personal experiences, that where you NEED "grievance pay" is losing a spouse or a parent.. Because it's ridiculously easy to bury and mourn a child compared to the LOSS of support from a spouse OR the govt/corporate hassles of handling estate matters, relocating and caring for a surviving parent.. This process approaches a FULL TIME JOB for MONTHS....
So expect ye Jolly Olde Taxes to go up, excuses to made and some embarrassment as your lemming leadership figures out they've open another hole in hull of the HMS Progressive.. And soon any citizen with a dead pet is included...
But this is not paid for by taxation so I think you might be confused. Going back 10 years or so my last employer gave me a weeks bereavement leave in my contract. This is ensuring that all employees enjoy the same treatment.
It's essentially a tax on companies to do business.. It comes out of the GDP and economic growth..
And I'm sorry to compare dead pets to children, but the slippery slope is already greased.. The more important point I made was that MONTHS of handling REAL LIFE financial and personal dislocations for the death of a spouse or parent FAR EXCEEDS the strain of losing a child or a pet...
Its in the link you provided.I know how the NHS is funded. But that link does not support your claim that "their tax burden is much higher"Do you have a link to that ?Our employers dont have to provide expensive health insurance for employees. What a racket that is.
Considering their tax burden is much higher, actually they do, but now government gets to take it's administrative "piece", adding to the cost.
How is the NHS funded?
Taxes and contributions, and companies do still contribute.
Then who pays for all of it?
Its in the link you provided.I know how the NHS is funded. But that link does not support your claim that "their tax burden is much higher"Do you have a link to that ?Considering their tax burden is much higher, actually they do, but now government gets to take it's administrative "piece", adding to the cost.
How is the NHS funded?
Taxes and contributions, and companies do still contribute.
Then who pays for all of it?
A bit more info.
National Insurance rates and categories
This covers the employers contribution.
My simple maths works out that if someone is on £52k a year the employer pays around £1300 a year in National Insurance contributions.
The employee would pay £1200. This also covers the state pension as well. I dont know how it is divided between healthcare and pension.
Its a bargain compared to this.
Employers to spend about $10,000 on health care for each worker
Its paid for by employers from cash generated by the staff they are looking after. Where is the problem ? It doesnt seem to be any different to the health insurance that your employers offer to their workers.Well I dont see the connection between a dead dog and a dead child.Bereaved parents to be entitled to two weeks' paid leave from work
Working parents who suffer the loss of a child will now be entitled to two weeks of statutory paid leave, the government has announced.
Ministers have said the new legal right, known as Jack’s law, is the most generous parental bereavement pay offer in the world and will support 10,000 families a year in the UK.
Expected to come into force from April, it will cover all working parents who lose a child under the age of 18 or have a stillbirth, irrespective of how long an individual has been with their current employer.
I would think that the more advanced employers would offer this anyway.
I have no idea how I would cope in this situation but I dont think work would be uppermost in my thoughts. Should other measures be added to this ?
Good for old England.. Keep up the great work...
I've got to tell ya tho -- from sad personal experiences, that where you NEED "grievance pay" is losing a spouse or a parent.. Because it's ridiculously easy to bury and mourn a child compared to the LOSS of support from a spouse OR the govt/corporate hassles of handling estate matters, relocating and caring for a surviving parent.. This process approaches a FULL TIME JOB for MONTHS....
So expect ye Jolly Olde Taxes to go up, excuses to made and some embarrassment as your lemming leadership figures out they've open another hole in hull of the HMS Progressive.. And soon any citizen with a dead pet is included...
But this is not paid for by taxation so I think you might be confused. Going back 10 years or so my last employer gave me a weeks bereavement leave in my contract. This is ensuring that all employees enjoy the same treatment.
It isn’t free, someone does pay and it is forced. More government less freedom.
Any employment benefit is a tax on companies to do business. This sort of thing is something that your union would have negotiated when they had powers. Nowadays the corporations hold sway and employees benefits are being squeezed.Well I dont see the connection between a dead dog and a dead child.Bereaved parents to be entitled to two weeks' paid leave from work
Working parents who suffer the loss of a child will now be entitled to two weeks of statutory paid leave, the government has announced.
Ministers have said the new legal right, known as Jack’s law, is the most generous parental bereavement pay offer in the world and will support 10,000 families a year in the UK.
Expected to come into force from April, it will cover all working parents who lose a child under the age of 18 or have a stillbirth, irrespective of how long an individual has been with their current employer.
I would think that the more advanced employers would offer this anyway.
I have no idea how I would cope in this situation but I dont think work would be uppermost in my thoughts. Should other measures be added to this ?
Good for old England.. Keep up the great work...
I've got to tell ya tho -- from sad personal experiences, that where you NEED "grievance pay" is losing a spouse or a parent.. Because it's ridiculously easy to bury and mourn a child compared to the LOSS of support from a spouse OR the govt/corporate hassles of handling estate matters, relocating and caring for a surviving parent.. This process approaches a FULL TIME JOB for MONTHS....
So expect ye Jolly Olde Taxes to go up, excuses to made and some embarrassment as your lemming leadership figures out they've open another hole in hull of the HMS Progressive.. And soon any citizen with a dead pet is included...
But this is not paid for by taxation so I think you might be confused. Going back 10 years or so my last employer gave me a weeks bereavement leave in my contract. This is ensuring that all employees enjoy the same treatment.
It's essentially a tax on companies to do business.. It comes out of the GDP and economic growth..
And I'm sorry to compare dead pets to children, but the slippery slope is already greased.. The more important point I made was that MONTHS of handling REAL LIFE financial and personal dislocations for the death of a spouse or parent FAR EXCEEDS the strain of losing a child or a pet...
I take your point about bereavement in general though. Its an awful time and maybe this should cover more family members.
Bereaved parents to be entitled to two weeks' paid leave from work
Working parents who suffer the loss of a child will now be entitled to two weeks of statutory paid leave, the government has announced.
Ministers have said the new legal right, known as Jack’s law, is the most generous parental bereavement pay offer in the world and will support 10,000 families a year in the UK.
Expected to come into force from April, it will cover all working parents who lose a child under the age of 18 or have a stillbirth, irrespective of how long an individual has been with their current employer.
I would think that the more advanced employers would offer this anyway.
I have no idea how I would cope in this situation but I dont think work would be uppermost in my thoughts. Should other measures be added to this ?
Employers dont give anything voluntarily.Its paid for by employers from cash generated by the staff they are looking after. Where is the problem ? It doesnt seem to be any different to the health insurance that your employers offer to their workers.Well I dont see the connection between a dead dog and a dead child.Good for old England.. Keep up the great work...
I've got to tell ya tho -- from sad personal experiences, that where you NEED "grievance pay" is losing a spouse or a parent.. Because it's ridiculously easy to bury and mourn a child compared to the LOSS of support from a spouse OR the govt/corporate hassles of handling estate matters, relocating and caring for a surviving parent.. This process approaches a FULL TIME JOB for MONTHS....
So expect ye Jolly Olde Taxes to go up, excuses to made and some embarrassment as your lemming leadership figures out they've open another hole in hull of the HMS Progressive.. And soon any citizen with a dead pet is included...
But this is not paid for by taxation so I think you might be confused. Going back 10 years or so my last employer gave me a weeks bereavement leave in my contract. This is ensuring that all employees enjoy the same treatment.
It isn’t free, someone does pay and it is forced. More government less freedom.
THE DIFFERENCE IS YOURS REQUIRES FORCE AND OURS IS VOLUNTARY,,,
Our employers dont have to provide expensive health insurance for employees. What a racket that is.Its paid for by employers from cash generated by the staff they are looking after. Where is the problem ? It doesnt seem to be any different to the health insurance that your employers offer to their workers.Well I dont see the connection between a dead dog and a dead child.Good for old England.. Keep up the great work...
I've got to tell ya tho -- from sad personal experiences, that where you NEED "grievance pay" is losing a spouse or a parent.. Because it's ridiculously easy to bury and mourn a child compared to the LOSS of support from a spouse OR the govt/corporate hassles of handling estate matters, relocating and caring for a surviving parent.. This process approaches a FULL TIME JOB for MONTHS....
So expect ye Jolly Olde Taxes to go up, excuses to made and some embarrassment as your lemming leadership figures out they've open another hole in hull of the HMS Progressive.. And soon any citizen with a dead pet is included...
But this is not paid for by taxation so I think you might be confused. Going back 10 years or so my last employer gave me a weeks bereavement leave in my contract. This is ensuring that all employees enjoy the same treatment.
It isn’t free, someone does pay and it is forced. More government less freedom.
The problem becomes is it adds another cost to having a person working for you, and an unpredictable cost at that. Then progressives come up with more and more things employers have to subsidize, maternity leave, paternity leave, other forms of leave, forms of insurance, etc, and sooner or later costs go up, or they will be forced to get more work out of less people.
This shows the difference in spending in a clearer way.Its in the link you provided.I know how the NHS is funded. But that link does not support your claim that "their tax burden is much higher"Do you have a link to that ?
How is the NHS funded?
Taxes and contributions, and companies do still contribute.
Then who pays for all of it?
A bit more info.
National Insurance rates and categories
This covers the employers contribution.
My simple maths works out that if someone is on £52k a year the employer pays around £1300 a year in National Insurance contributions.
The employee would pay £1200. This also covers the state pension as well. I dont know how it is divided between healthcare and pension.
Its a bargain compared to this.
Employers to spend about $10,000 on health care for each worker
Um, that's just 20% of the value of the NHS. If you read the article 80% comes from taxes.
You can't compare the US values that don't include the tax portion.
If you check out the previous post (29) you will see that the opposite is true.Our employers dont have to provide expensive health insurance for employees. What a racket that is.Its paid for by employers from cash generated by the staff they are looking after. Where is the problem ? It doesnt seem to be any different to the health insurance that your employers offer to their workers.Well I dont see the connection between a dead dog and a dead child.
But this is not paid for by taxation so I think you might be confused. Going back 10 years or so my last employer gave me a weeks bereavement leave in my contract. This is ensuring that all employees enjoy the same treatment.
It isn’t free, someone does pay and it is forced. More government less freedom.
The problem becomes is it adds another cost to having a person working for you, and an unpredictable cost at that. Then progressives come up with more and more things employers have to subsidize, maternity leave, paternity leave, other forms of leave, forms of insurance, etc, and sooner or later costs go up, or they will be forced to get more work out of less people.
You pay excessive taxes every single year to pay for your "free" healthcare.....only to have it denied when you get too old. That is the crime.
This shows the difference in spending in a clearer way.Its in the link you provided.I know how the NHS is funded. But that link does not support your claim that "their tax burden is much higher"
Then who pays for all of it?
A bit more info.
National Insurance rates and categories
This covers the employers contribution.
My simple maths works out that if someone is on £52k a year the employer pays around £1300 a year in National Insurance contributions.
The employee would pay £1200. This also covers the state pension as well. I dont know how it is divided between healthcare and pension.
Its a bargain compared to this.
Employers to spend about $10,000 on health care for each worker
Um, that's just 20% of the value of the NHS. If you read the article 80% comes from taxes.
You can't compare the US values that don't include the tax portion.
Reality Check: Does UK spend half as much on health as US?
As you can see we spend a lot less on both the NHS and private. We live longer as well. The point being is that the tax burden in the UK is a lot less than in the US and you even spend more on private health as well. US healthcare is bad for business and bad for the patient.
This shows the difference in spending in a clearer way.Its in the link you provided.I know how the NHS is funded. But that link does not support your claim that "their tax burden is much higher"
Then who pays for all of it?
A bit more info.
National Insurance rates and categories
This covers the employers contribution.
My simple maths works out that if someone is on £52k a year the employer pays around £1300 a year in National Insurance contributions.
The employee would pay £1200. This also covers the state pension as well. I dont know how it is divided between healthcare and pension.
Its a bargain compared to this.
Employers to spend about $10,000 on health care for each worker
Um, that's just 20% of the value of the NHS. If you read the article 80% comes from taxes.
You can't compare the US values that don't include the tax portion.
Reality Check: Does UK spend half as much on health as US?
As you can see we spend a lot less on both the NHS and private. We live longer as well. The point being is that the tax burden in the UK is a lot less than in the US and you even spend more on private health as well. US healthcare is bad for business and bad for the patient.
This shows the difference in spending in a clearer way.Its in the link you provided.I know how the NHS is funded. But that link does not support your claim that "their tax burden is much higher"
Then who pays for all of it?
A bit more info.
National Insurance rates and categories
This covers the employers contribution.
My simple maths works out that if someone is on £52k a year the employer pays around £1300 a year in National Insurance contributions.
The employee would pay £1200. This also covers the state pension as well. I dont know how it is divided between healthcare and pension.
Its a bargain compared to this.
Employers to spend about $10,000 on health care for each worker
Um, that's just 20% of the value of the NHS. If you read the article 80% comes from taxes.
You can't compare the US values that don't include the tax portion.
Reality Check: Does UK spend half as much on health as US?
As you can see we spend a lot less on both the NHS and private. We live longer as well. The point being is that the tax burden in the UK is a lot less than in the US and you even spend more on private health as well. US healthcare is bad for business and bad for the patient.
“It is quite challenging to disentangle the share of international differences in spending driven by differences in the quantity of care used and differences in the prices paid for that care, given how difficult it is to measure quality and intensity of care,” Katherine Baicker, author of a separate editorial and dean of the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago, said by email.
Well we are able to sue the NHS but I agree we need to spend more on the NHS than we currently do. In real terms the spend has gone down every year under our conservative government. They would prefer an American style system.This shows the difference in spending in a clearer way.Its in the link you provided.I know how the NHS is funded. But that link does not support your claim that "their tax burden is much higher"
Then who pays for all of it?
A bit more info.
National Insurance rates and categories
This covers the employers contribution.
My simple maths works out that if someone is on £52k a year the employer pays around £1300 a year in National Insurance contributions.
The employee would pay £1200. This also covers the state pension as well. I dont know how it is divided between healthcare and pension.
Its a bargain compared to this.
Employers to spend about $10,000 on health care for each worker
Um, that's just 20% of the value of the NHS. If you read the article 80% comes from taxes.
You can't compare the US values that don't include the tax portion.
Reality Check: Does UK spend half as much on health as US?
As you can see we spend a lot less on both the NHS and private. We live longer as well. The point being is that the tax burden in the UK is a lot less than in the US and you even spend more on private health as well. US healthcare is bad for business and bad for the patient.
“It is quite challenging to disentangle the share of international differences in spending driven by differences in the quantity of care used and differences in the prices paid for that care, given how difficult it is to measure quality and intensity of care,” Katherine Baicker, author of a separate editorial and dean of the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago, said by email.
U.S. health spending twice other countries' with worse results
it's easy to contain costs when you don't let people sue the health provider when they screw up and pay doctors and nurses less.
If you didnt spend so much on bombs you would be able to have a proper system. We pay too much for defence as it is.This shows the difference in spending in a clearer way.Its in the link you provided.I know how the NHS is funded. But that link does not support your claim that "their tax burden is much higher"
Then who pays for all of it?
A bit more info.
National Insurance rates and categories
This covers the employers contribution.
My simple maths works out that if someone is on £52k a year the employer pays around £1300 a year in National Insurance contributions.
The employee would pay £1200. This also covers the state pension as well. I dont know how it is divided between healthcare and pension.
Its a bargain compared to this.
Employers to spend about $10,000 on health care for each worker
Um, that's just 20% of the value of the NHS. If you read the article 80% comes from taxes.
You can't compare the US values that don't include the tax portion.
Reality Check: Does UK spend half as much on health as US?
As you can see we spend a lot less on both the NHS and private. We live longer as well. The point being is that the tax burden in the UK is a lot less than in the US and you even spend more on private health as well. US healthcare is bad for business and bad for the patient.
You live safely on your island because American men and women protect you....at great sacrifice to themselves and their families......and you think you are superior?
Well we are able to sue the NHS but I agree we need to spend more on the NHS than we currently do. In real terms the spend has gone down every year under our conservative government. They would prefer an American style system.This shows the difference in spending in a clearer way.Its in the link you provided.Then who pays for all of it?
A bit more info.
National Insurance rates and categories
This covers the employers contribution.
My simple maths works out that if someone is on £52k a year the employer pays around £1300 a year in National Insurance contributions.
The employee would pay £1200. This also covers the state pension as well. I dont know how it is divided between healthcare and pension.
Its a bargain compared to this.
Employers to spend about $10,000 on health care for each worker
Um, that's just 20% of the value of the NHS. If you read the article 80% comes from taxes.
You can't compare the US values that don't include the tax portion.
Reality Check: Does UK spend half as much on health as US?
As you can see we spend a lot less on both the NHS and private. We live longer as well. The point being is that the tax burden in the UK is a lot less than in the US and you even spend more on private health as well. US healthcare is bad for business and bad for the patient.
“It is quite challenging to disentangle the share of international differences in spending driven by differences in the quantity of care used and differences in the prices paid for that care, given how difficult it is to measure quality and intensity of care,” Katherine Baicker, author of a separate editorial and dean of the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago, said by email.
U.S. health spending twice other countries' with worse results
it's easy to contain costs when you don't let people sue the health provider when they screw up and pay doctors and nurses less.
Yep, heres a lawyer if you fancy it.Well we are able to sue the NHS but I agree we need to spend more on the NHS than we currently do. In real terms the spend has gone down every year under our conservative government. They would prefer an American style system.This shows the difference in spending in a clearer way.Its in the link you provided.
A bit more info.
National Insurance rates and categories
This covers the employers contribution.
My simple maths works out that if someone is on £52k a year the employer pays around £1300 a year in National Insurance contributions.
The employee would pay £1200. This also covers the state pension as well. I dont know how it is divided between healthcare and pension.
Its a bargain compared to this.
Employers to spend about $10,000 on health care for each worker
Um, that's just 20% of the value of the NHS. If you read the article 80% comes from taxes.
You can't compare the US values that don't include the tax portion.
Reality Check: Does UK spend half as much on health as US?
As you can see we spend a lot less on both the NHS and private. We live longer as well. The point being is that the tax burden in the UK is a lot less than in the US and you even spend more on private health as well. US healthcare is bad for business and bad for the patient.
“It is quite challenging to disentangle the share of international differences in spending driven by differences in the quantity of care used and differences in the prices paid for that care, given how difficult it is to measure quality and intensity of care,” Katherine Baicker, author of a separate editorial and dean of the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago, said by email.
U.S. health spending twice other countries' with worse results
it's easy to contain costs when you don't let people sue the health provider when they screw up and pay doctors and nurses less.
Suing the government in government courts.....
Yep.
Bereaved parents to be entitled to two weeks' paid leave from work
Working parents who suffer the loss of a child will now be entitled to two weeks of statutory paid leave, the government has announced.
Ministers have said the new legal right, known as Jack’s law, is the most generous parental bereavement pay offer in the world and will support 10,000 families a year in the UK.
Expected to come into force from April, it will cover all working parents who lose a child under the age of 18 or have a stillbirth, irrespective of how long an individual has been with their current employer.
I would think that the more advanced employers would offer this anyway.
I have no idea how I would cope in this situation but I dont think work would be uppermost in my thoughts. Should other measures be added to this ?
Yep, heres a lawyer if you fancy it.Well we are able to sue the NHS but I agree we need to spend more on the NHS than we currently do. In real terms the spend has gone down every year under our conservative government. They would prefer an American style system.This shows the difference in spending in a clearer way.Um, that's just 20% of the value of the NHS. If you read the article 80% comes from taxes.
You can't compare the US values that don't include the tax portion.
Reality Check: Does UK spend half as much on health as US?
As you can see we spend a lot less on both the NHS and private. We live longer as well. The point being is that the tax burden in the UK is a lot less than in the US and you even spend more on private health as well. US healthcare is bad for business and bad for the patient.
“It is quite challenging to disentangle the share of international differences in spending driven by differences in the quantity of care used and differences in the prices paid for that care, given how difficult it is to measure quality and intensity of care,” Katherine Baicker, author of a separate editorial and dean of the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago, said by email.
U.S. health spending twice other countries' with worse results
it's easy to contain costs when you don't let people sue the health provider when they screw up and pay doctors and nurses less.
Suing the government in government courts.....
Yep.
Suing the NHS - NHS compensation
Its paid for by employers from cash generated by the staff they are looking after. Where is the problem ? It doesnt seem to be any different to the health insurance that your employers offer to their workers.Well I dont see the connection between a dead dog and a dead child.Bereaved parents to be entitled to two weeks' paid leave from work
Working parents who suffer the loss of a child will now be entitled to two weeks of statutory paid leave, the government has announced.
Ministers have said the new legal right, known as Jack’s law, is the most generous parental bereavement pay offer in the world and will support 10,000 families a year in the UK.
Expected to come into force from April, it will cover all working parents who lose a child under the age of 18 or have a stillbirth, irrespective of how long an individual has been with their current employer.
I would think that the more advanced employers would offer this anyway.
I have no idea how I would cope in this situation but I dont think work would be uppermost in my thoughts. Should other measures be added to this ?
Good for old England.. Keep up the great work...
I've got to tell ya tho -- from sad personal experiences, that where you NEED "grievance pay" is losing a spouse or a parent.. Because it's ridiculously easy to bury and mourn a child compared to the LOSS of support from a spouse OR the govt/corporate hassles of handling estate matters, relocating and caring for a surviving parent.. This process approaches a FULL TIME JOB for MONTHS....
So expect ye Jolly Olde Taxes to go up, excuses to made and some embarrassment as your lemming leadership figures out they've open another hole in hull of the HMS Progressive.. And soon any citizen with a dead pet is included...
But this is not paid for by taxation so I think you might be confused. Going back 10 years or so my last employer gave me a weeks bereavement leave in my contract. This is ensuring that all employees enjoy the same treatment.
It isn’t free, someone does pay and it is forced. More government less freedom.
The problem becomes is it adds another cost to having a person working for you, and an unpredictable cost at that. Then progressives come up with more and more things employers have to subsidize, maternity leave, paternity leave, other forms of leave, forms of insurance, etc, and sooner or later costs go up, or they will be forced to get more work out of less people.
