All quotas require discrimination and all discrimination is bad, whether it's negative or supposedly positive. If it's good for one community, it's bad for another one and what the writer says about tokenism and resentment is absolutely right. You can't, in any event, ever specify that you're going to hire 12% BAME in your surveyors department if there aren't that number of BAME surveyors in the job market. Quotas may satisfy the left/liberals and look good in the annual report, but they don't work and are divisive not inclusive.
If your firm is an ICAEW practice, you should contact them about a Level 4 Apprenticeship, covering AAT, which will fund 90% or 95% of the training costs.
I'd like to see one of the articles on this subject covering the situation of about 1 million small companies where there is one director drawing a salary of £8,000 a year or less and taking profits as dividends. As I understand it, they are not relevant employees, or whatever the expression is, so they don't have to be auto-enrolled. However, they have the right to opt in and what nobody has yet told me is whether the company has to set up an empty pension scheme that the director could opt into, however unlikely this is.
Another thought is the banks in CI or IOM who play a pivotal part in many of these schemes by making "loans" to clients they don't know, at the behest of dodgy promoters and where is is manifest that there is no bona fide commercial purpose. Which is to say that the bank's only commercial purpose is to make a fat fee for not doing very much. The Treasury might find that they are susceptible to a modest amount of pressure to keep away from this sort of thing.
I've read quite a lot, including some of the judgments, about schemes that have recently come before the tribunals and courts. It seems to me that the promoters and their clients of the more far-fetched schemes, such as the second-hand motor cars, could be accused of conspiracy to defraud the public revenue. I would have no hesitation in seeing this as criminal activity.
My answers
All quotas require discrimination and all discrimination is bad, whether it's negative or supposedly positive. If it's good for one community, it's bad for another one and what the writer says about tokenism and resentment is absolutely right. You can't, in any event, ever specify that you're going to hire 12% BAME in your surveyors department if there aren't that number of BAME surveyors in the job market. Quotas may satisfy the left/liberals and look good in the annual report, but they don't work and are divisive not inclusive.
If your firm is an ICAEW practice, you should contact them about a Level 4 Apprenticeship, covering AAT, which will fund 90% or 95% of the training costs.
Not applicable
I'd like to see one of the articles on this subject covering the situation of about 1 million small companies where there is one director drawing a salary of £8,000 a year or less and taking profits as dividends. As I understand it, they are not relevant employees, or whatever the expression is, so they don't have to be auto-enrolled. However, they have the right to opt in and what nobody has yet told me is whether the company has to set up an empty pension scheme that the director could opt into, however unlikely this is.
Banks
Another thought is the banks in CI or IOM who play a pivotal part in many of these schemes by making "loans" to clients they don't know, at the behest of dodgy promoters and where is is manifest that there is no bona fide commercial purpose. Which is to say that the bank's only commercial purpose is to make a fat fee for not doing very much. The Treasury might find that they are susceptible to a modest amount of pressure to keep away from this sort of thing.
Fraud
I've read quite a lot, including some of the judgments, about schemes that have recently come before the tribunals and courts. It seems to me that the promoters and their clients of the more far-fetched schemes, such as the second-hand motor cars, could be accused of conspiracy to defraud the public revenue. I would have no hesitation in seeing this as criminal activity.