A Christmas Carol by the High Court

Scene:
Any solicitor’s office in the country (except the Strand).
Solicitor:
So, Ms Peasant you have been sacked because you are pregnant and you have come in for a free interview.  Typical of your sort if I may say so.
Client: 
It’s so unfair.  I want to bring a claim.  You do no win no fee don’t you?
Solicitor: 
WE do. The State doesn’t.  Tribunal fees are £1,200.00 win or lose.
Client: 
I haven’t got that sort of money!  I am unemployed.  I’ve been sacked.
Solicitor: 
Come, come now.  I am an employment lawyer.  I know the minimum wage is £6.50 an hour.  Easy to remember; it is one hundredth of what I charge – 200 hours work and you have the fee, unless we need to appeal.  Cut out the foreign holidays. Sack the nanny – she won’t be able to afford the fee to sue you.  My little joke!
Client:  
My Mum looks after the children.  We only just got by when I was working.
Solicitor: 
There I can help you.  You need to prioritise your spending.  The High Court has said so.  Eat your existing children – Swift said that and he was a clever man, but you peasants don’t read you just watch Sky.
Client: 
We don’t have Sky.  Murdoch is nearly as right wing as the High Court.
Solicitor: 
Go down the library and read Swift.
Client: 
They’ve closed the library.
Solicitor:  
Have an abortion.  Save you money and I might be able to get your job back.
Client: 
I don’t want an abortion.  Anyway they’ve closed the clinic.
Solicitor:
Find a rich man.
Client: 
I am married.  My husband was sacked for complaining about my treatment at work.
Solicitor: 
Oh then he has a claim as well then.  Another £1,200.00 mind.
Client:  
I’ve had enough!
Solicitor: 
I advise on the law; I don’t make it.  I want to read to you what the High Court said:
“The question many potential claimants have to ask themselves is how to prioritise their spending; what priority should they give to paying fees in a possible legal claim as against many competing and pressing demands on their finances?”
It goes on a bit but basically do you want to bring a claim or eat and feed and clothe your children?
Client: 
But no-one should have to make that choice in Britain in 2014.
Solicitor:  
That’s where you are wrong.  The court said:
“The question is not whether it is difficult for someone to be able to pay – there must be many claimants in that position – it is whether it is virtually impossible and excessively difficult for them to do so”.
Client:  
That’s wicked.
Solicitor: 
That’s the High Court. Lord Justice Elias is paid £198,674.00 and Mr Justice Foskett £174,481.00 so they know all about having to count the pennies.
Client:
Surely Labour will change all this.
Solicitor: 
Nope.
Client:  
I think I will vote for the Fascists then.
Solicitor:
They tried that in Germany. Didn’t do them much good. Nice rallies mind.
Client leaves.  Solicitor hums the Horst Wessel.  There is a muffled explosion.  The local court is in ruins.

Hat tip Daniel Barnett and Kerry Underwood

(My lesson number one - if you are in work and want justice at work, join a Union  http://www.tuc.org.uk/about-tuc/union-finder)

A Christmas Carol 2011

This is a modern day “A Christmas Carol” tale. Christmas this year must be looking pretty bleak for the 1000 carers and their families employed by Family Mosaic Housing Association. Their employer is trying to cut their wages by up to 35% in some cases. According to their own figures 242 carers will lose up to £2000 pa; 58 between £2000 and £4000 and 107 over £4000 pa.

Many of these carers are already relatively poorly paid. They work with the mentally ill and other vulnerable adults doing a demanding job that they love but which most people would run a mile away from doing themselves. A large number are single mums who rely on working weekends and shifts' allowances in order to raise their wages to a decent level to look after their kids.

While it seems that the Senior Management team at Family Mosaic are not going to suffer any cut in their pay: 25 of whom earn over £60,000 pa, while 4 earn over £100,000 a year. Its Chief Executive, Brendan Sarfield, on £172,000 pa is also safe. Family Mosaic made a surplus of £34 million pounds last year.

Yesterday morning in my Councillor’s post I received a glossy magazine (Winter 2011) from Family Mosaic wishing me “A very Happy Christmas and New Year”. There was also a letter from the CEO saying how wonderful his organisation is doing. In the magazine there was no mention whatsoever about the cuts to carers' pay and conditions. Nor that staff are balloting for strike action. With no apparent sense of irony, Mr Sarfield in an editorial criticised others for not facing up to “Challenging” issues!

Is it not too late for the modern day equivalent of Jacob Marley to pay a visit to Mr Sarfield to remind him about the real meaning of Christmas? Or will he continue to say to his staff facing desperate financial straits "I'm alright Jack" and “Bah, Humbug!”.

Old Town Hall Stratford Christmas Lights Carols

Last night I went to a Christmas Carol concert inside the historic Old Town Hall in Stratford.  There was a choir from Carpenters Primary School who sang a lovely mixture of traditional and modern carols.  Including (I think) Gloria in excelsis Deo in Latin.

This was in front of the Mayor, Sir Robin Wales, Councillors, Council officers, teachers and parents.

Afterwards the Old Town Hall Christmas lights were switched on and there was a reception for the Children and their parents.

Everyone was pleased when Robin asked the Children how many were learning to play instruments at the School.  Nearly all of them put their hand up. The "Every Child a Musican" programme is now
bring run in 61 Newham Schools.

Keeping a beady eye on the performance in the left hand corner of the hall was this bust of the first ever Labour MP Keir Hardie.  I think he would have been pleased as well.

Another 2010 Christmas Carol

Carol is a single mum with three small children who works in the kitchen of the Executive dining room of a British FT100 listed company in East London. She earns £13,000 per year for an average 40 hour week (the national minimum wage of £5.93 per hour is £12,334). She prepares food and cleans the dishes of people who earn up to 100 times what she is paid. She does not work directly for the company but is employed by a subcontractor on rolling 3 month temporary contracts.

Since her wages are so low she receives working tax credits from the government to supplement her income. She also has housing benefit to help her pay the rent and Council tax benefit at her two bed Council flat. Her children receive free school meals. All of this desperately needed support is paid for by the British taxpayer.

She of course does not receive any company pension or any sick pay. Despite the state benefits Carol and her children live hand-to-mouth and she has to rely on moneylenders to pay for emergencies as well as her children’s birthday and Christmas presents.

It is already pretty well known that the marginal rate of tax for the very low paid is far less than the extremely well paid executives that Carol serves and cleans up after.

But what is less well known that both the company who employs her and the FT100 Company she works at also outsources its revenue and profits abroad and pays the British Government relatively little in taxes.

Therefore the financial supplement to Carol’s meagre wages is being paid for by British taxpayers yet both companies who benefit from paying her poverty wages are avoiding paying taxes to the British government. Double bubble exploitation?

Why should British taxpayers subsidise miserable pay and conditions while at the very same time letting these same Scrooge employers avoid paying their fair share of British taxes. Surely this is not right?

Remember before feeling too outraged and smug that you probably have pension and insurance funds that invest in both these companies and make money out of them. Your future pension could be financed by other people’s personal misery.

Hat tip Fair Pensions. Watch out for their next campaign on a Living Wage for all top FT100 employees and their contractors. 

Check above Picture and the other Christmas Carol

A 2010 Christmas Carol

In an east London state nursery, staff noticed that a three year old new starter, a little girl, was still wearing nappies.  They were concerned and when the mother came to pick the toddler up, they spoke to the Mum.

Her mother was a single parent who was originally from East Europe.  She explained that the only accommodation she could afford was a small room in a large house full of strangers.  The one toilet in this house had no door on it.  The toddler refused to use this toilet since there was no privacy.  Therefore she still wore nappies.

Extreme poverty and deprivation still occurs in this country.  Not the same scale as in the times of Dickens but still here - and now.  Coalition cuts in building and refurbishing homes, housing benefit, protection against eviction, regulations of HMO's, massive increase in rents and the farming of homeless to the private sector will make things far, far worse.

There was redemption for this family as nursery staff rallied around to rescue Mother and daughter, from the slum and help find them a self contained flat to live.  Well done to them. No Tory "Big Society" saved them but rather experienced and trained public sector professionals - thinking out of the box.

It goes without saying that you could hope against hope that a Christmas spirit would mean that Cameron, Clegg, Shapps and Boris (four guilty men) will change their ways to prevent the "shadows of what may be."

Which always reminds me of the saying "you've got two hopes, Bob Hope and no hope" of this.

Update: Another Christmas Carol