crater
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,444 
|
Post by crater on Dec 8, 2017 20:13:38 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2017 21:27:36 GMT
That's pretty unimpressive. Sort it out Rovers.
Edit: the statement shows they have sorted it out.
|
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Dec 8, 2017 21:38:37 GMT
Dc did allude to this recently. We must up the wages..
|
|
|
|
Post by The Concept on Dec 8, 2017 21:45:04 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2017 22:03:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by chelt_gas on Dec 9, 2017 5:36:00 GMT
With reported debt limits fastly approaching then I hope there will not be a case of pot calling the kettle black with our current owners!! |
|
Igitur
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 2,294
|
Post by Igitur on Dec 9, 2017 11:49:55 GMT
From OS:
Recently HMRC has published that Bristol Rovers Football Club Ltd had failed in its duty to pay at least National Minimum wage due under section 17 of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998.
The investigation by HMRC was over a six year period from Season 2010/2011 up to and including Season 2015/2016 and found that all employees’ wages were in line with the National Minimum wage rate.
However, according to HMRC, away match travel for Academy Scholars (16 to 18 year olds) must form part of their working hours for which they must be paid. The discrepancy arose because of the hours worked by the scholars during certain fortnightly pay periods. Had they been paid monthly instead of fortnightly this underpayment would not have arisen.
The total arrears due to 52 scholars for this six year period amounted to £1651.86. The minimum being £11.97 per scholar and the maximum £55.25 per scholar. All employees’ underpayment of travel time has been paid to all the 52 scholars concerned. HMRC now consider the matter closed.
The Club will make no further comment on this issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Dec 9, 2017 11:57:10 GMT
From OS:
Recently HMRC has published that Bristol Rovers Football Club Ltd had failed in its duty to pay at least National Minimum wage due under section 17 of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998.
The investigation by HMRC was over a six year period from Season 2010/2011 up to and including Season 2015/2016 and found that all employees’ wages were in line with the National Minimum wage rate.
However, according to HMRC, away match travel for Academy Scholars (16 to 18 year olds) must form part of their working hours for which they must be paid. The discrepancy arose because of the hours worked by the scholars during certain fortnightly pay periods. Had they been paid monthly instead of fortnightly this underpayment would not have arisen.
The total arrears due to 52 scholars for this six year period amounted to £1651.86. The minimum being £11.97 per scholar and the maximum £55.25 per scholar. All employees’ underpayment of travel time has been paid to all the 52 scholars concerned. HMRC now consider the matter closed.
The Club will make no further comment on this issue.storm met tea-cup here I think average due to each scholar was £31.75 |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2017 12:18:06 GMT
From OS:
Recently HMRC has published that Bristol Rovers Football Club Ltd had failed in its duty to pay at least National Minimum wage due under section 17 of the National Minimum Wage Act 1998.
The investigation by HMRC was over a six year period from Season 2010/2011 up to and including Season 2015/2016 and found that all employees’ wages were in line with the National Minimum wage rate.
However, according to HMRC, away match travel for Academy Scholars (16 to 18 year olds) must form part of their working hours for which they must be paid. The discrepancy arose because of the hours worked by the scholars during certain fortnightly pay periods. Had they been paid monthly instead of fortnightly this underpayment would not have arisen.
The total arrears due to 52 scholars for this six year period amounted to £1651.86. The minimum being £11.97 per scholar and the maximum £55.25 per scholar. All employees’ underpayment of travel time has been paid to all the 52 scholars concerned. HMRC now consider the matter closed.
The Club will make no further comment on this issue. Fair enough. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2017 12:34:32 GMT
Maybe I'm being thicker than usual, but can someone explain how being paid fortnightly rather than monthly makes a difference to either the number of hours paid for traveling or the hourly rate paid for traveling time please?
|
|
|
|
Post by laughinggas on Dec 9, 2017 12:51:05 GMT
Maybe I'm being thicker than usual, but can someone explain how being paid fortnightly rather than monthly makes a difference to either the number of hours paid for traveling or the hourly rate paid for traveling time please? If they are not paid hourly but every two weeks then the hours in one period may be greater than the other, therefore the calculated hourly rate may differ in each period. Sometimes could be greater than the min sometimes lower. Now the maths work but am not saying that is the reason. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2017 13:00:18 GMT
Maybe I'm being thicker than usual, but can someone explain how being paid fortnightly rather than monthly makes a difference to either the number of hours paid for traveling or the hourly rate paid for traveling time please? If they are not paid hourly but every two weeks then the hours in one period may be greater than the other, therefore the calculated hourly rate may differ in each period. Sometimes could be greater than the min sometimes lower. Now the maths work but am not saying that is the reason. Yes, but it would self correct over each month, assuming, as that statement seems to be claiming, that the problem wouldn't have arisen had the payroll been run monthly. Clearly I'm missing something? Or maybe Rovers should have just said that they didn't realise that they had to pay traveling time, they are sorry, they have paid all of the arrears and they are sorry? |
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,067
|
Post by Angas on Dec 9, 2017 13:02:28 GMT
So about as much of a story as the one Rad Bris were also running about Charlotte Leslie going into the BB house. Still between the two, the non stories helped fill schedules and column inches. Tough life being a journalist - I bet none of them are on minimum wage though, so that's a comfort.
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,067
|
Post by Angas on Dec 9, 2017 13:04:55 GMT
If they are not paid hourly but every two weeks then the hours in one period may be greater than the other, therefore the calculated hourly rate may differ in each period. Sometimes could be greater than the min sometimes lower. Now the maths work but am not saying that is the reason. Yes, but it would self correct over each month, assuming, as that statement seems to be claiming, that the problem wouldn't have arisen had the payroll been run monthly. Clearly I'm missing something? Or maybe Rovers should have just said that they didn't realise that they had to pay traveling time, they are sorry, they have paid all of the arrears and they are sorry? Edit - actually I'm talking nonsense. Nothing new there  Ignore me. |
|
Ignore me.