Any UKIP supporters on here? What exactly are you voting for?

[chicaguapa]

I confess I don't know what the UKIP policies are, but wondered if the people voting for them could explain to me what they are please. Thanks.

Farage said on Radio 4 this week they would not win a general election and I'm sure he's right.

The main problem at the moment is that the state has grown very big, our national debt (even with the cuts) grows bigger every day and we are in a deep recession so people are very fed up. That is why they may turn to different parties. All 3 main parties have very very similar policies. None are properly left wing. None are traditional Tory small state righter wing.

Exactly, I think he is right, he will not win it, but he might get a foot in the door the way things are going now - for exactly the reasons you described.

He feels that the impact will be influence as happened with ther SDP who never won power but changed labour policy from very left wing- Tony Benn etc to Blair middle of the road and he may be right. As many of the UKIP policies except immigration could be quite good like lower taxes, abolishing IHT, much smaller state, less fussy regulation that may be no bad thing.

'BollyGood Sun 05-May-13 23:58:26

For many women knowing you have your job to return to is enough. It would have been for me. But abolishing all rights is also ridiculous.'

You say that as if it is a small thing. The keeping open of the job is one of the biggest problems and costs to the employer!

Is this package a 'right' or a 'nice to have'. I feel in society now we seem to have a blur between the two. Between what all people should expect, and what people should be grateful they have.

'NiceTabard Sun 05-May-13 23:58:40

At the moment the trend is for shared parental leave which takes the not hiring childbearing age women thing out of the equation a bit.

I do understand that it is very hard for small businesses but I find it dismaying that if people trying to make money find something hard the answer is well obviously women should get fucked over.'

I'd love parental leave, either or for the mum or dad. Gives the couple a choice which carries working. Also a smaller time of for the individual means they wont fall too behind at work.

Is only women getting fucked over?

Oddly enough there is another group of employees affected similarly. Most of whom are men.

Beatback- what a load of patronising bollocks. People only vote UKIP because there's poor education in the UK. Ah bless us working class. There's us voting as a reflection on what we see out of our window, and what we see in our wage packets rather than what our intellectual superiors deem right for us. If only we were just more educated like you eh?

Unlucky - what is so difficult about keeping files secure and confidential? If they're dead tree, get yourself a lockable filing cabinet.If you can afford staff with an annual salary of 20K, then the filing cabinet should be in the budget as a one-off purchase, too.

If you store them electronically, use password protection.

Smaller companies not having HR is a problem, and whilst I can understand your worries about the expense, I don't think removing employment rights to make it easier for employers to treat their staff badly without having to worry about consequences is the answer.

Also, worrying about the cost of keeping a post open for someone on mat leave - if you invested in training her up and she's good at her job, you'd be foolish to not want her back surely?

delboys - why do you think education is so bad in this country? What is it you are seeing out of your window? I don't see that, but improving education is a constant struggle and lots of dedicated people work very hard to improve things for all DC. How do you think UKIP is making things better for, e.g. working class boys? By reinstating grammar schools? The apprenticeship system has been destroyed by constant change and no real connection with industry, but that can only be fixed long term.

What do you see in your wage packet? I think taxes are pretty low and I don't pay any working part-time. Minimum pay is still not a living wage but I don't think UKIP takes about that, that's the Green party I believe.

'WidowWadman Mon 06-May-13 08:49:04

Unlucky - what is so difficult about keeping files secure and confidential? If they're dead tree, get yourself a lockable filing cabinet.If you can afford staff with an annual salary of 20K, then the filing cabinet should be in the budget as a one-off purchase, too.

If you store them electronically, use password protection.'

If only it was as simple as bunging files in a cheap filing cabinet or putting a password on your computer.

this is how confidential staff files were stored at every place i have ever worked

is it the norm elsewhere to have lasers and armed guards? i can certainly see how that can add to the cost. best not hire anyone who might be forrin then, eh? better safe than sorry and all that

DP got a big blue lockable box from work to take home to lock away any confidental files. If I was a burgler though that's exactly what I would go for - big locked security boxes.

I remember them just being kept in filing cabinets.

WidowWadman - Also, worrying about the cost of keeping a post open for someone on mat leave - if you invested in training her up and she's good at her job, you'd be foolish to not want her back surely?'

Problem is, if she is really good at her job, she leaves you with an airgap that must be filled in her absence.

For this you either need to get a temp in or promote/move someone up/sideways.

Unlucky will probably know the costs more, but you put out a 1 year contract and it will cost a little more than an annual salary to attract a quality applicant.

Worse if new mum decides to come back 6 months early... you've still got a temp to pay.

If you've invested in her training, again no small matter, but what if you have to invest in training her temp replacement?

By removing the mandatory bit, and allowing businesses to negotiate with the parties involved do you not think a firm who had a good worker, well trained and qualified they would want her back?

True story. We had a new mum go on leave, and several people moved up one level. A temp was brought in at the bottom of the pile.

When she returned everyone moved down... a whole ladder of disgruntled employees, some with extra training and experience of working one level up from their current post. Worse, naturally the employer had promoted the better candidate from each tier...

So your logic is that by removing maternity rights employers would start hiring women? Really? Is that because women wouldn't get pregnant anymore, or how does it work?

Gabsid- I didn't punctuate my post well. there was supposed to be a question mark after education. it was in response to a poster earlier who decided that UKIP voters were uneducated. It's that kind of attitude which will prob make me vote for them. I'm sick to the back teeth of not being listened to (politically) and it's the attitude displayed by that poster that we just don't know what's good for us that really gets on my tits

'chibi Mon 06-May-13 09:01:25

this is how confidential staff files were stored at every place i have ever worked

is it the norm elsewhere to have lasers and armed guards? i can certainly see how that can add to the cost. best not hire anyone who might be forrin then, eh? better safe than sorry and all that'

Or indeed don't employee imbeciles...

I am going to take a stab in the dark here and assume you only saw filing cabinets.

What you DIDN'T see is the paper trail and policy documents and response procedures that would need to be written for the safe storage of the files.

It is all dependent upon the company. Perhaps, your cabinet may only be opened by ONE person, who books out the files. Taking note of who took them out and why. In other cases you my find employees or former employees requesting their files.

After a period of time the files need to be destroyed, how do you document this destruction? How long does this document have to e kept?

If a FoI request comes in for information, do you just give them the whole docket, or only information relevant to the request? How do you record the request, and follow up action?

ico.org.uk/ if you're ever wide awake at night. I don't think you'll find any references to lasers or armed guards though.

The only reason to vote for a party should be their policies and some of the things they say in their election manifesto is what most people want, but looking at some of their policies make me feel very frightened considering that 1/4 of people actually voted for them.

Is it that they want a quick and simple solution to complex problems? Well, I don't think that exists and the main parties don't seem to be making any progress either.

given that at least some information needs to be kept on employees, such a system is going to be necessary, surely

just because data protection procedures are complicated and multistep doesn't mean they ought be dispensed with

NT It is not discrimination to ask to see someone's passport to check they have the right to work in the UK. Why do you think that?
Off the subject a bit ...but that would be common sense wouldn't it? Are you an employer? If you are and think that's all you need is common sense and decency - you aren't protecting yourself...
The information sent out about the law being changed to make the employer liable to check an employees 'right to work' (10 yrs ago now) also reminded employers you mustn't discriminate on the grounds of race against current/future employees and therefore must ask everyone for the same proof...and therefore you have to be able to prove that is what you have done...
Sex discrimination and Women rights - are worse because they are more complex and it is easier to get caught out on...
(A good eg - the business is struggling, a month before employee goes on maternity leave all employers agree to take a cut in hours. As agreed maternity leave employee is taking paid holiday at end of their maternity leave -but that paid holiday isn't based on the hours the employee would now have worked but on the average worked 12 weeks before maternity leave started ...not what they would have actually accrued during the maternity leave - get that wrong and you are open to tribunal ... )

Basically as much as you want to do the right thing you have to cover your back (or you won't be covered by your liability insurance)...and a disagreement over something different that turns nasty can pull all these things into it...
Not my business but working for a small employer, we have someone on maternity leave - I have spent a good few hours (wouldn't have needed to do this if it was a man!) making sure we are doing the right things -writing the right letters etc. Speaking to ACAS and then double checking what we are doing with the insurance company's legal dept... Do I think that worker is likely to screw us over? No -but experience tells me you can never be certain...

'WidowWadman Mon 06-May-13 09:15:47

So your logic is that by removing maternity rights employers would start hiring women? Really? Is that because women wouldn't get pregnant anymore, or how does it work?'

You're rehashing what has been said with an emotional input and a dose of implied outrage in order to cause a response from myself that you can further pursue.

That is is how it works.

Yes, it is a legal requirement to check right to work here and very important mumsnetter who may become employers realise that. However you are not allowed under that law simply to ask those who are black or who have dodgy foreign accents for their passports. You have to apply it in a non discriminatory way.

This is just the sort of thing which stops small employers hiring people - I just checked for the rules on this and here is 23 page booklet from the Government just on that one topic!
www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/employersandsponsors/preventingillegalworking/currentguidanceandcodes/summary-guidance.pdf?view=Binary

Oh and employers can be fined up to £10,000 if they do not do the checks.

www.gov.uk/employers-checks-job-applicants This looks like a simpler link.

I think there was a politician a few years back who had not checked their cleaner had a right to work in the UK and was in trouble.

It looks like you need to ask for full the birth certificate and the passport although there is no legal requirement have a passport in the UK so plenty of employees will not have one and there is no requirement you have to see one therefore.

'chibi Mon 06-May-13 09:30:50

given that at least some information needs to be kept on employees, such a system is going to be necessary, surely

just because data protection procedures are complicated and multistep doesn't mean they ought be dispensed with'

No one has said dispense with them. You are trying to bring 'outrage' n to the discussion again.

The rules for big businesses apply to small businesses. Even if you have 1 employee.

the difference is a big business will have a HR department, a finance dept etc, etc. It makes sense for them to do that. A small business will require the 'boss' to do all that. And run a business, and possibly share the dirty work.

Big business bureaucracy is stifling small businesses. Small businesses employ (if you look at) more people to do a job than big and keep money in the local area (think international conglomerates shipming money out to tax havens).

Thus we need to do something to help small businesses. A simplificatiion of certain rules will help.

Not one said dispense with data protection procedures.

Stop fishing, just discuss.

Yes, brought in my Labour if remember rightly, yet another pointless hoop of administration the state has imposed. Clever villains get round all these things including background checks for school visits and only those who are not breaking the rules are subject to them so a load of pointless admin is created.

Every job I have applied for I have been asked whether I was allowed to work here and I needed a visa or similar was on the application form. I feel that's fair enough and everyone would be asked those questions etc., as described in your link from the Home Office Xenia:

^You should carry out checks on all people before they start working for you to ensure you avoid
discrimination. You should not make presumptions about a person?s right to work in the UK on the
basis of their background, appearance or accent.^

It seems all fair enough to me. Why is there a problem with smaller business doing that?