Call to double Woolies payment
Wednesday 14th January 2009, 2:57PM GMT.
SENATOR Alan Breckon has called for the States to pay former Woolworths staff almost £290,000 in compensation – more than double the figure already requested.
Earlier this month Deputy Geoff Southern lodged a proposition asking the Treasury and Resources department to pay the workers the £139,500 that they would have been entitled to if they had worked for a UK Woolworths.
But yesterday Senator Breckon lodged an amendment calling for the figure to be increased to £289,500 to cover payments owed to the workers because they did not receive the statutory notice period. Under Jersey law, workers are entitled to a minimum 16 weeks’ notice or payment in lieu.
The proposition also requests Social Security Minister Ian Gorst ask the Jersey Advisory and Conciliation Service to verify the appropriateness of any notice payments and compare the terms and conditions to those in the UK. More than 80 staff at the King Street store were made redundant when the former high-street giant went into administration in November.
Read the full story in the Jersey Evening Post. Click here for subscription details. Individual editions are also available online.
2012 CYCLE SLAM
Dallaglio Flintoff 2012 Cycle Slam
Read Graeme Le Saux's daily blogs
Greece-London Marathon on a Bike
The Dallaglio Flintoff 2012 Cycle Slam
Travel
To, from and around the Island
Airport Arrivals/Departures
Harbours Arrivals/Departures
Bus Information/Timetables
This is Jersey
Jersey Evening Post
Useful links
I do feel sorry for the ex staff but that is Jersey Law for you, unless the money comes from woolies then it should not be paid.
I think we should start a petition against payment of compensation and see how many signatures we can get, then present that to the states.
It is crazy that the Southern and Breakon expect the cost to come out of our pockets! All the woolies staff could have spent the last two weeks looking for jobs instead of protesting. I bet you they are all going to receive job seekers allowance a further burden on the taxpayer. It’s a disgrace!!
Report abuse
Why should get anyform of redundancy money, I know many people that have been made redundant in jersey and they never received a penny.
If you pay the woolies staff you have to pay everyone whos is made redundant in the future with redundancy money.
So the states dont have to incur this cost they wshould have brought in a employment law for redundancy.
Is it me or the sates try and fix problems after they happen as opposed to before they happen. (e.g redunacy law, depositors scheme for jersey account holder)
Report abuse
This should have been included in the new Employment Law, but, as usual it was rushed through with indecent haste and now all the politicians are blaming one another, no change there then!!!
Report abuse
Another reason why Jsy was lucky Breckon wasn’t voted Chief Minister.
Report abuse
Senator Alan Breckon has conveniently overlooked all the other deserving folk have also been laid off or made redundant.
Put him at the head of the redundant line for 2014, when with luck, he will experience life in the real world.
Report abuse
Also quote “Under Jersey law, workers are entitled to a minimum 16 weeks’ notice or payment in lieu.”
I think you will find this is only applicable to staff who have been with the company for 15 years or more, that is unless it is stated in their contracts, I’m almost certain Woolies would not offer that much notice by choice.
What notice is an employee entitled to?
Under the terms of current legislation an employee who has been continuously employed for less than 26 weeks will normally be entitled to receive a period of at least one week’s statutory notice to terminate his/her employment, unless there is a contractual obligation to give a greater period of notice which will take precedence. If a worker has been continuously employed for 26 weeks to two years he/she will normally be entitled to receive a statutory notice period of at least two weeks to terminate his/her employment. Again any contractual obligation for a greater period takes precedence. Notice required further increases with length of service as follows: Two years continuous employment or more but less than five requires not less than four weeks. Five years or more but less than ten years requires not less than 8 weeks. Ten years or more but less than fifteen requires not less than twelve weeks notice and fifteen years or more, not less than sixteen weeks notice. Again greater periods specified in an employment contract take precedence.
Report abuse
Does it occur to anyone against paying woolworths staff that they have been tax payers themselves so should be entitled to something and as the article says above notice should be given of 16 weeks under Jersey law. Most of the people that worked in Woolworths have been there for years and paid their duty and stamp to society so therefore they should be entitled to something in return.
Report abuse
I am confused if jersey las states you are to be given 16 weeks notice or payment in Lieu then what on earth is that for, if not redundancy?
Also, if that is the law then Woolies must pay up or at least their creditors. Not the taxpayer. It states in my conditions of employment that my employer does not pay redundancy so why should i pay for theirs. Sorry woolies staff, maybe an ex employee would like to explain to me why they should be treated differently.
Report abuse
Maybe we should stand in town for two weeks, I’m sure we would get more signatures to NOT pay them. I was made redundant two years ago, but guess what, I looked for and found another job. I didn’t get a single penny from anyone, nor did I ask as this is Jersey law. I do feel sorry for the staff but I’m afraid that’s life your not the first and you wont be the last. Anyway from what I’ve heard you’ll be better off not working!
Report abuse
When will Jersey ever wake up, and realise that UK companies love moving into Jersey, because they can avoid almost all E.U. regulations. The taxes these companies pay into Jersey, are probably the equivelant of a directors night out
Come on Jersey look after your Jersey people, and tie in clauses that make jersey no longer the soft touch that it has been for decades. If redundancy payments are the norm within the EU and the UK, then introduce them in Jersey!
Report abuse
Sorry I have had what I think is a better idea,
If high street department stores wish to move into Jersey, make sure they have to abide by the legistlation laid down in their own countries, regarding maternity leave, compassionate leave, and redundancy. Jersey has been a soft toch to long.
Report abuse
I’m all for the States of Jersey supporting the Ex Woolworths staff in recovering their notice and redundancy pay from the administrators, and I would also be happy to see an interest free loan arrangement until such money is recovered, but this money must not be given from the tax payers pocket.
If we are talking £300,000 for 90 staff working in retail, you can double or triple that for higher paid earners in proffessional employment whose jobs may also not be safe. I fear many redundancies this year and if the states pay out to the woolies staff this will set a precedent that could cost hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions.
The law needs changing so that employers are held accountable and employees are not left in this position.
Of course, people need to take responsibility for themselves as well. One solution would have been for people to have paid income protection insurance. For as little as £20 a month with some companies a person can insure themselves to recieve 60% of their salary for up to 1 year after they have been made redundant.
Whilst I agree the employer has a responsibility, accountability to protect oneself has to lie with the individual also.
Report abuse
No !
Report abuse
i’ve been made redundant twice, and had a new job in no time. Different field though.
However, that’s the world and island we’re in – the law is the law, and cheap political tricks to boost their profile (with people who are in fear of redundancy, obviously not of sensible people).
Utterly ridiculous. I’d much rather see Southern and Breckon swiftly bringing legislative changes to the table to avoid future problems – but no, they take the easy option.
Hopefully any idea of depositor guarantees won’t succeed either, since our government are not in control – I could understand it if they somehow had the power to influence the viability of these businesses (like in UK), but they don’t. Again, cheap trick to look good to the people who’re in fear of loss of their savings.
Last one out, turn off the lights.
Report abuse
My heart does go out to the staff at woollies I was made redundant are you going to pay me? I had to find another job as States wouldn’t help…. member of states don’t have clue as to how the other half live.but then again your not really bothered all you think about is all the monies on this rock and your doing nothing with it just make the poor poorer and the rich richer..we struggle to make ends meet and you can’t put a redundancy policy in place between you.
Report abuse
thats life, just find a new job, you never know it may open new doors and all that. There is no way it down to the tax payer to fork out for it
Report abuse
Tell me why on earth should the States (Us the tax payer) pay someone elses debt? £300,000, Thats about the amount I have paid in taxes in the last 35 years. I am disgusted that these States members should even suggest that our money is flittered away in this manner. Majeeka states the woolie staff have paid their taxes and should get it, Gee wake up, They haven’t paid their taxes to get money back when out of work !!
No to paying them, an absolute disgrace to even think about it.
Report abuse
I quote, “Under Jersey law, workers are entitled to a minimum 16 weeks’ notice or payment in lieu.” Why should this come from the tax payer? This is for Woolworths and the administrators to pay.
Jersey Tax payers should pay nothing, unless retrospectively, all redundancies are compensated exactly the same.
Report abuse
Again I must state that the 16 week entitlement is only for employees that have been there for 15 years.
I wonder the exact number of people that have been there for 15 years I doubt it is all 80 of them.
I’m guessing that the average would be 4 weeks notice, I’m not sure of the exact amount of notice the staff received but if it is under the amount required by the law then they need to take the case to JACS who will follow it up in an employment tribunal, this will then be picked up by the administrators and not the states. I feel that Senator Breckon has his facts wrong and as mentioned above is jumping on a publicity train to try and boost his profile with lower income islanders.
Report abuse
An Article on the news states that a Woolworths worker was recently made redundant from Woolworth’s and won’t receive anything from income support, because they hasn’t lived in Jersey long enough.
So why is this person so active in gaining signitures for the petetion when they should be looking for further employment.
I have commented before on this subject and i am still saying the same and that is they should have been planning their own futures as soon as they knew that Woolworths were in administration back in November time.
Woolwooths paid just above the minimum wage of Jersey and there are plenty of jobs paying this same hourly rate.
Yes in a time of need the community should rally and help people who need it via charity support or donations but to stand there and not help yourself at the sametime is just bone lazy or Naive.
This person who has not worked in Jersey long enough sould not be standing in all weathers trying to seek compensation for their loss and expect tax payers to pay but should be lookng for further employment.
Report abuse
I’m sorry but MANY people have been made redundant and not received a penny – yes they are taxpayers and as such enjoy the benefits we all do – and they can troddle on down to social security and claim income support. Read your contract before you decide to work somewhere – thats the moral of this story.
I for one am not paying for wollies staff to get redundancy pay when I know at least 15 people who have been made redundant and were just left out to dry.
Report abuse
I say sack the militant bus drivers and employ the Woolies staff as replacements. I for one would much rather have a nice friendly Woolies lady on the buses than one of those grumpy jobsworths who currently drive them.
Report abuse
My mum has just lost her job and the tax office phoned her last week to say that they are putting her rate up to 18%. She really has no idea where she is going to find the money – is anyone going to help her?
Report abuse
What is required is a decision to provide 21st Century standards and legislation to employment, housing and welfare rights to ALL islanders that matches or exceeds the UK/EU templates.
Unfortunately that requires our “politicians” to think ahead and lead rather than “knee jerk” for a few column inches of PR and a picture in the paper. After all we pay them a lot of money to lead already don’t we?
Report abuse
Phil, Your idea sounds very nice.
You would make a great JDA rep, they too dont care how much tax and SS would have to rise to acheive their dreams
Report abuse
Whilst I sympathise with the woolies staff, I still cannot understand how they consider that their plight is worse than other islanders who have been made redundant by their employers on the island. They are struggling along too but without Mr Alan Breckon from the States to fight their corner.
Report abuse
Ab,
If your mum is paying 18% tax she’s earnt it. Full stop. Nothing wrong with that. The more tax I pay at the present rate the happier I am. No ones going to pay it for her, and we the tax payers should not pay the woolies staff. These Deputies proposing the payout are only looking for sympathy votes from the lower paid workers.
I don’t trust them and would never get a vote from me. They are an absolute disgrace.
Report abuse
Given the glacial rate of movement on the incinerator, casino, {Insert your favourite hobbyhorse here}, etc it is possible that we may see them by 2209.
21st Century standards for the 22nd Century!
Report abuse
I’d like to apologise for anything that came across as misleading. I myself don’t think the Taxpayer/states should have to pay out the redundency money to woolies staff. I am only supporting the fact that woolies staff do deserve some form of compensation. I happen to know quite a few that worked there, the ones that have worked for over 20-30 years, and as far as I know they were only given a total of 2 weeks notice, so like you say under Jersey law and with the help from JACS they should be able to take a case to the tribunal and this is what they have been attempting to do. As an english company who provided english contracts for the woolies staff to sign they should be paying the staff what they deserve. I would like to see people of Jersey supporting woolies staff on receiving payment from the administrators like they should.
Report abuse
Ab- If anyone becomes unemployed, whatever their ITIS payments should be, they do not pay anything whilst they are unemployed. Once they re-commence employment they let the Income Tax Department know the dates when they were unemployed and the Income Tax Department are supposed to adjust subsequent ITIS payments accordingly.
Therefore your mum should not worry how she is going to fund these payments whilst she is unemployed.
Report abuse
Majeeka – why? They knew the terms and conditions of working for Woolworths when they signed they contract of employment. Sorry if that sounds harsh but it is the relality.
Report abuse
Like many others I feel very sorry for Woolworths workers, many have long service.
But I disagree very strongly with public money being used for payments to them.
Report abuse
Just a thought…
Is it fair that we expect people to come here and pay taxes for 12 years before we will let them buy?
Is it fair that many employment licences won’t even let them be employed until they have been here 5 years?
Is it fair that you can move to England and get housing / money / medical care but English people get nothing here?
So how dare an English firm refuse redundancy pay…..Karma me thinks!
Report abuse
i too know many ppl who have been made redundant…no pay outs… taxpayers should not have to pay these ppl.
Move on and get another job…Jersey is not like the UK,
Report abuse
I’m not sure why John (comment 33)is harping on about immigration and employment laws, but it is not just Jersey that has regulations on immigrants. Most countries you will find regulate immigration and employment. Look at Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the US, Europe. Shall I go on?
What this has to do with the Woolies staff I have no idea.
Report abuse
If the States could sort out all the benefit abuse the Island suffers (which runs into the millions!), then maybe there could be a pot of social security money that is used in the equivalent of the Insolvency Service/Redundancy Payments Offices in the UK – which pay out if the employer is not able to make the statutory redundancy payments.
It does not seem right to me that workers who pay their 6% every month for years are given no immediate short term help in cases of redundancy.
Report abuse
John
I’ll tell you why it’s fair… English people can get the rights you talk of all over Europe; Jersey people cannot. Jersey’s rules are there to protect Jersey born with no relatives with a foreign passport. Oh, and English people do free get medical care here as part of our reciprocal agreement with the UK.
Report abuse
Whatever
The 6% they pay is not for the benefit of redundancy. It’s there to pay for sickness benefits if they find themselves out of work due to illness or accidents. If you want it to cover redundancy too then you’ll have to pay another 1% or so.
Report abuse
Personally I’d prefer to stick to the 6.5% we are charged and have a personal rainy day fund incase of redundancy.
Also in reply to comment 33. Yes it is
Jersey is a small island! If everyone was allowed to move over and buy then what would be left for the locals?
As with the new proposals with UK immigration, people should be made to prove themselves and serve their time in the country before receiving all the benefits that are on offer.
Report abuse
Joker – the point is that there may be no need to increase social to create a redundancy scheme, if benefit abuse was stopped.
In fact, there may be no need to increase social security in any event as any statutory obligation to make redundancy payments would fall on the employer and it would only ever come out of a States reserve fund in the event of a bankrupt employer – which is not that common.
Satutory redundancy would not make life any harder for most employers because currently, the majority, when making redundancies, pay out more than the UK statutory redundancy pay under compromise agreements anyway.
They do this to avoid having to implement and administer fair redundancy procedures. In return for the compensation payments, employees waive their rights to bring an unfair dismissal claim which would otherwise arise where a redundancy procedure has not been followed or is not fair and reasonable.
Report abuse
At the moment we have a law in Jersey that enforces minimum notice periods.
This gives the permanent employee of 1 years service a minimum 4 and up to 16 weeks notice , depending on length of service to find another job.
If the required full notice period is not given, then the employee must be given the (remaining)amount in cash.
This is payable by the employer.
Why should the taxpayer add to this ?
Report abuse
PJG. The law you refer to is useless if the employer is bankrupt, as in the case of Woolworths.
It seems to me that every taxpayer would prefer to see (although not an easy task), the millions in social security funds taken away from benefit fraudsters and made available to people that would, but for redundancy, be working.
Report abuse