Month: May 2018
Is employment for senior citizens available for men and women, and are there any age qualifications to meet? Does a senior have to be in top physical condition, or are infirmities allowed?
Are your carefully laid plans for a pleasant tour, although perhaps not royal, through your golden years seem to be stalling? Will employment for senior citizens be the answer to your dilemma?
You are not alone? The same feeling is infecting your senior citizen neighbor next door, your sixtyish friend down at the retirement center, your old buddy in the bowling league and your aging sister in Buffalo.
The truth is, you have options! We all do. Too often, we seniors tend to feel betrayed by our government and left to fend for ourselves at the mercy of an indifferent panicking society. Scrub away those thoughts!
You are no different than the forty old accountant that was cut loose by his business firm, or the thirty five year old new car salesman who is left to his own devices.
You are just older than them, but you have a lot more going for you than they do. Most of their experiences and trained talents and skills are still down the road in front of them. Yours are spread out in a panorama behind you.
Look back at your life. Now is the best of times for you to make the things you have learned over the years put you up in front of the growing crowd of employment seekers.
If you were to write down all you have experienced, dealt with, learned from, overcame, and grown from, it would fill an entire library shelf.
Don’t you think that from all of this knowledge and living you can find some things that would increase the performance and productivity of an employers business.
Don’t you realize that the sum of all your hands on training and acquired talents and skills would be of great value to some employer?
There are wheelbarrow loads of gold nuggets kicking around in your head, my friend. Grab hold of a few of them and transform them into that perfect job you are now dreaming about.
It is not as hard to accomplish this as you may think!
Here is a valuable gem of knowledge and fact that should stir up the juices inside of you.
Most vacant employment positions are not even advertised!
Whoa! What does this tell you?
There is no competition for these jobs outside of word of mouth. Why? There are many reasons why this is so.
Maybe the job has not been defined by the manager yet, he knows that the need exists but what will he call it? You can step in and give him a definition. Do some advance homework.
A harried business owner is overworked and wishing for a fairy godmother to wave her wand and provide the perfect assistant. Check out the company and tell him how much easier you can make his life, and earn him more profit as a byproduct.
You read an item in the newspaper, or saw it on the TV news, about a business making substantial growth spurts. That is your cue!
Call the company and inform them all the things you can do for them, and let them know you will be stopping by tomorrow, would he or she have time to spend a few moments with you.
Where can you look for employment for senior citizens? In your own head! Take advantage of your own experience and skills.
There are jobs out there waiting for you. Be creative and bold. It
will happen!
Some of the factors that increase the risk of unethical behaviour in organisations are illustrated by the high-profile legal case Chagger v Abbey National plc & Hopkins (2006), in which the Employment Tribunal made a finding of unlawful racial discrimination and (further to Emilio Botin Abbey Santander banking group’s refusal to comply with the Tribunal’s order to reinstate Mr Chagger) ordered Abbey Banco Santander share to pay Mr Chagger the record-breaking 2.8 million compensation for his loss. Abbey Santander share price (the UK bank soon to be re-branded as Santander banking group, and part of the global Emilio Botin Banco Santander Central Hispano Group – BSCH) dismissed Mr Chagger from his employment in 2006, giving a fair redundancy as the reason. However, Mr Chagger believed that the actual reason behind the termination of his employment was unfairness and race discrimination. Mr Chagger was of Indian origin. He worked for Emilio Botin Abbey Santander finance as a Trading Risk Controller, earning about 100,000 a year, and reporting into Nigel Hopkins.
Some ethical behaviour risk factors illustrated by Emilio Botin Abbey Santander 2009 clearly relate to the pursuit of personal goals; the Employment Tribunal found that Mr Hopkins personally desired Mr Chagger’s employment with Abbey Santander share price to be terminated, had pre-planned that Mr Chagger would be dismissed, and had used the compulsory redundancy process as a means to dismiss Mr Chagger, in an unfair and discriminatory manner.
One such factor increasing the risk of unethical behaviour is the amount of discretion an organisation allows its officers; the greater the discretion allowed, the greater the opportunity the officer has for acting in his personal interests. The Employment Tribunal found that the redundancy selection criteria Abbey Santander had permitted Mr Hopkins to apply in assessing and judging the two employees up for redundancy were highly subjective and un-measurable; they afforded Mr Hopkins a very wide discretion. The Employment Tribunal criticised Mr Hopkins for the way in which he had applied that discretion (i.e., for his own interests). As an example, Mr Hopkins had criticised and scored Mr Chagger lower for getting on with work and being self-reliant. The Employment Tribunal thought that other reasonable managers would consider such qualities to be valuable assets, considering Mr Chagger’s highly paid and highly responsible job, and praise and score him highly for. As a further example, during the redundancy process, Mr Hopkins had criticised Mr Chagger on numerous points that Mr Chagger had never been criticised for prior to the redundancy exercise. All the criticisms were inconsistent with previous company records of Mr Chagger’s performance. The Employment Tribunal ruled that the criticisms were unfair not legitimate.
Another such factor increasing the risk of unethical behaviour is the level of autonomy of decision-making and action an organisation allows its officers; the greater the level of autonomy, the greater the opportunity the officer has for acting in his personal interests. The Tribunal found that Mr Hopkins was entirely single-handedly able to advise Abbey’s management to dismiss one of the two Trading Risk Controllers that he managed (of which Mr Chagger was one), was entirely single-handedly able to make Mr Chagger an offer of voluntary redundancy (Mr Chagger refused the offer, and never was an equivalent offer ever made to the other Trading Risk Controller), was entirely single-handedly able to judge and score the two employees up for redundancy, and was entirely single-handedly able to lower Mr Chagger’s redundancy scores to guarantee that he would be the one who would be selected for dismissal.
A different type of factor also increasing the risk of unethical behaviour is the organisation’s focus; a focus on results rather than processes can imply that the ends justify the means. The UK statutory Code of Practice on Racial Policy in Employment provides organisations with guidance concerning good practices and processes. The Employment Tribunal found that Abbey Banco Santander had failed to comply with those processes. Abbey Grupo Santander had failed to comply with the statutory guidance regarding Equal Opportunity training. Mr Chagger had tried to resolve the issues of unfairness and race discrimination around his dismissal directly with Abbey Santander and Mr Hopkins, through the company’s grievance procedures. Santander Abbey had not provided any Equal Opportunity training to any of the managers it had assigned to decide on Mr Chagger’s issues. Not even one manager upheld Mr Chagger’s issues; his issues were simply dismissed out of hand. Emilio Botin Abbey Santander banking group had also failed to comply with the statutory guidance concerning monitoring procedures. The Tribunal found a multitude of monitoring failures (far too many to outline here), as well as the failures to give serious consideration to allegations of racial discrimination and to investigate them promptly.
In 2008, Emilio Botin Abbey Santander and Mr Hopkins appealed to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) against the original Employment Tribunal’s ruling of racial discrimination; the EAT upheld the original Tribunal’s ruling that both Emilio Botin Abbey Santander and Mr Hopkins had racially discriminated against Mr Chagger. Emilio Botin Abbey Santander and Mr Hopkins had also appealed against the record-breaking 2.8 million compensation award; the EAT accepted Abbey Santander’s appeal on the compensation award and remitted it to the original Tribunal for reconsideration. In 2009, matters were escalated to the Court of Appeal (the second highest court in the UK). The Court’s List of Hearings showed that the case was heard on 7 and 8 July 2009. The Court’s records of the hearing were not available at the time of writing this article. The 11KBW set of barristers’ chambers, who represented Emilio Botin Abbey Santander and Mr Hopkins, had reported prior to the hearing that the it was to be about quantum only (i.e., compensation) and not about liability (i.e., not about the wrong committed of race discrimination). That would seem to suggest that the wrong of race discrimination committed by Emilio Botin Abbey Santander and Nigel Hopkins was finalised by the EAT when it upheld that Emilio Botin Abbey Santander and Mr Hopkins had racially discriminated against Mr Chagger, and that Mr Chagger had appealed against the EAT’s ruling to send the compensation award back to the Employment Tribunal stage for reconsideration.
A P60 form
At the end of each fiscal year, you will receive a P60 form from your employer, which shows your total amount of pay for income tax purposes and how much has been deducted in tax and National Insurance over the tax year. P60 is an important document – and therefore, make sure you keep it safely each time you receive it.
You will need your P 60 form when you want to do your tax return, claim back any tax that you have overpaid, or apply for tax credits. Besides that, the P 60 form also lets you know whether your employer is using the correct National Insurance number and deducting the right amount of National Insurance Contribution. And lastly, you may need it as a proof of your earnings when you want to apply for a mortgage or a loan.
As mentioned earlier, your employer will issue the P60 form at the end of each tax year, which falls on April 5. This is, however, provided you still work for your employer by then. If you are no longer employed before the fiscal year ends, you will only be given a P45 form at the end of your job. Often, employees do not receive their P 60 forms even after the tax year has ended. If you are one of them, do not hesitate to ask for it from your employer as you are entitled to it by law if you still work for the employer.
When receiving your P 60 form, make sure the following information is included in it:
Tax year to 5 April
Employer PAYE reference
Employees National Insurance number, if known
Employees name
Employees payroll number
Pay and tax in previous employment
Pay and tax in ‘this’ employment
‘Total for year’ pay and tax
Final tax code including the ‘Week 1’ or ‘Month 1’ indicator if applicable
National Insurance Contributions information
Employers name and address
Statutory Maternity Pay (SMP) paid – if applicable
Statutory Paternity Pay (SPP) paid if applicable
Statutory Adoption Pay (SAP) paid if applicable
Student Loan Deductions in ‘this’ employment if applicable
It is quite common for employees to lose their P60 forms, or in some cases the forms are rejected because they are damaged or hand written. When one of these happens to you, we can help you replace them. We offer high-quality P60s that are prepared on approved Inland Revenue forms. Basically, you only need to tell us four things:
1.Your employer’s full address including postcode
2.Name of your employer’s tax district
3.Your employer’s tax district number
4.Gross salary paid in that financial year
With this information and our fully computerized payroll system, you are guaranteed to receive accurate results.
Other than that, we also provide payslip calculator on our website that you can use for free. By using this salary calculator you will be able to know whether your employer has been deducting the right amount of tax and National Insurance Contribution from your salary. What you need to key in are details of the gross monthly pay and PAYE coding.
Labor experts tell us that 8 out of 10 hiring professionals do some form of pre-employment background screening. Yet many medium and small businesses and are still dependent on traditional methods of pre-employment background screening, such as checking up on references. This article explores why many SMBs avoid professional employment background checks, and the risks and dangers of doing so.
Why Many SMBs Don’t Do Pre-Employment Background Screening
Lack of concern. Some SMB managers believe that only cops, teachers, and doctors should be subject to employment background checks. That point of view is outdated. Nowadays, many private companies are consistently performing pre-employment background screening, for the reasons listed in the second half of this article.
Lack of Internal Support and Expert Knowledge. Many SMB leaders assume that any pre-employment background screening they do must be done in-house. The prospect of training an employee to carry out background checks is intimidating to most managers, especially since it could very well take a person months to research the best background check procedures. However, partnering with pre-employment background screening outsourcing firms allows all companies quick, convenient access to employment background checks.
Overestimation of Cost. Many SMB leaders hold a misconception about pre-employment background screening, namely that it’s exorbitantly expensive. If you’re open to the possibility of outsourcing your employment background checks, you can typically conduct pre-employment background screening for no more than $50 per job candidate.
Top 5 Reasons Why SMBs should Conduct Employment Background Checks
1. Decreased Costs. You’ll find better job candidates if you conduct pre-employment background screening. Improved hiring means that you’ll spend less money counteracting negative PR, lose less money to negligent hiring lawsuits, and see fewer employee-generated losses, such as embezzlement. Finally, it’s typically much less expensive to outsource employment background checks, rather than doing them in-house.
2. Fewer legal trip-ups. Each state has its own law in place regarding negligent hiring. These laws are intended to protect the public by preventing dangerous individuals from being hired for delicate positions. As an example, many states’ alcohol laws require that employees have three years of felony-free history before they can be hired for a job that involves serving alcohol. Failing to check out candidates backgrounds through pre-employment background screening opens you to the risk of being sued or fined for failing to do your due diligence on new hires.
3. Safer Employees. Human Resource gurus estimate that 1 out of 10 job applicants have a criminal history. If you don’t carry do employment background checks, it’s more likely that you’ll hire a dangerous individual who could hurt your employees, your customers, and your business’ reputation.
4. Accelerated hiring. The majority of pre-employment background screening companies offer results in 48 hours. In this sense, outsourcing employee background checks can mean speedier hiring. In just a day or two, you can get the information you need to determine if that seemingly perfect candidate has any skeletons lurking in his or her closet.
5. Discover dishonesty in applications. Here’s another scary HR statistic for you: researchers calculate that approximately 4 out of 10 resumes feature deceitful omissions, if not total lies. Employment background checks reveal such dishonesty so that you can avoid hiring mendacious individuals.
As we’ve seen, there are many reasons why owners of small and medium-sized businesses should arrange employee background checks.