Wedding Bambboo Sayings

current (II): The lowering of dismissal as solution to the crisis

Hi all,

Before anyone point demagogy of the title, saying that what I'm going to talk about is the thesis that has kept the CEOE that economic recovery requires the lowering of dismissal, as stated in the previous post.

The crux of the matter is that since this famous chaired by another employer equally famous entrepreneur , Gerardo Diaz Ferrán (pictured) has said over and over again (which prevents it from being considered a mistake or an error) which is necessary for the English business sector to recover, and with it employment, it is necessary " reduce the cost of dismissal "dry dismissal, without adjectives. Such a thing has not been well received by workers and unions, of course. But following the English tradition, it has resorted to telling lies that really looking to try to convince the injured not get hurt. Come on, the implementation of the strategy of "Guzmán el Bueno" so many other English institutions have used in the past and even today days, from the Government to the Constitutional Court: Let pounding her well, but do not worry if we stop to explain, will believe it appropriate to do so.

The culmination of this strategy is put into the collective thought the following idea which ignores a wealth of information:

to me, a businessman, I is very expensive to fire a worker- 45 days per year worked, "what my economic recovery difficult and prevents me from hiring more people, both by spending generated as dismissal for trying to avoid having to lay in the future people giving the job now. This, however, does not mean a cut in workers' rights and guarantees at all. You, the unions are wrong. What happens if you do not cheapen the dismissal is that then we have to employ people on temporary contracts, we can not hire permanent because it is very expensive to dismiss. You know that the time simply did not renew the contract. So let's just say I get a much smaller compensation than no. This is good for you boys. And no, it will give us thanks for being so generous, do not deserve.

This is more or less, which from CEOE has been said (1) . But it is curious that some men who are dedicated to the business world can not even specify what type of dismissal want cheaper, although it is not difficult to guess the meaning of the compensation that incomplete quote (45 days per year worked, selfishly ignoring the monthly cap .) Perhaps because to do so, they would duster.

Ladies and Gentlemen, what ladies and gentlemen of the CEOE want to cheapen the Unfair dismissal, which is that when the worker has no responsibility or fault in the dismissal and, moreover, is that when the law does not recognize as justified dismissal. In other words, is when the employer decides to arbitrarily and unjustifiably take the fucking street the worker. No more. There is no debate, because there is no other compensation accompanying dismissal citing the CEOE.

It is more wicked than the unsustainable economic conditions make this type of dismissal, or whatever it is, who can not afford to cut that cost templates. It is, as I said, perverse, because the businesses that have financial problems to justify the dismissal of a worker can turn to PURPOSE OF JOB (up to a certain amount of layoffs in a specified time frame) or known REGULATION OF EMPLOYMENT RECORD (ERE) (if many workers, to understand), which allows to fire a worker for reasons esconómicas with compensation of only 20 days per year worked with a corresponding monthly limit.

What happens is that in order to access these figures, it is necessary to prove with extensive documentation accounting hardship status of the company, which sheds light on your accounts and actions, to what many employers do not want exposure because they have things to hide.

In short, the cessation of the milongas and say, bluntly, that they want to keep fucking the average worker. but worse, as I said, is that they would have us go over all stupid and or convince us that this is accepted, or no work . Sure. And they are sisters of charity.

(1) : "The layoffs, which now is more expensive, it prevents small businesses get more workers" , "The management has found that, Finally, in court this workers' compensation rises to 45 days. "

not forget to visit http://cineybso.com

Ilve Microwave Wd900esl

Two half-truths Today (I): The automobile sector aid

Hi all,

Today I would like to speak to two issues that, while not exactly new, still remain the focus of current information in different media, although in most cases without going into depth. These cases are the alleged assistance to the automotive industry perpetrated by the Central Government headed by JL Zapatero and executed by the autonomous communities, on the one hand, and on the other, put forward the slogan by the CEOE employers that economic recovery is necessary lowering of dismissal.

On the first of the subjects, the half-truth is rather a complete falsehood, which has been in recent dates, but that camouflaged the truth for months with serious damage to many citizens.

As you know all aid to the automotive industry were launched by the executive with the aim of reviving a sector in decline (like many others, affected by the crisis) and consisted, in essence, make a "discount "in the price of the vehicle (by value determined by the Autonomous Communities) when accompanied old vehicle (conditions also determined on the same seniority by the autonomous communities), to promote the sale of vehicles . I put strong emphasis on this because the characterization of aid to the sector is precisely to favor it as a whole and is necessarily in conflict aid of a personal or family, where the rationale for aid is to benefit individuals or families who are in certain situations. A good example of the latter would, for example, the same "discount" but granted only to households with an income below a certain value. Therefore, it is definitely understood when we talk about aid to a sector, the beneficiary is the industry itself, albeit tangentially also get some benefit on the consumer, tangentially, I say, because if you get good at a lower price, perhaps the absence of the expectation of lower prices would never have renewed their vehicle.

Yes! Thanks to Zapatero, finally I can buy the car you always wanted.

So, the sector has increased its sales volume and everyone seemed satisfied. But the surprise has come, worse for many people, to begin the campaign of income, where they have been told is that this aid is taxed on income. What explains this?. With some difficulty, the truth and falsehood there dae told by the Government in its day.

If two paragraphs ago we agreed that aid to a sector is not a personal aid, it can hardly taxed in the income tax, taxing it is to obtain income PERSONAL. Of course, the poor fools who have accepted this plan had the ingenious interpretation of the tax thereon: That amount is "discount" was not such, but was a payment that must be done by the city acquiring the vehicle, was met by other (public administration and dealers), which actually is an income received by the city, rent has never gone through their hands. It would be apreço to pay taxes to obtain a college scholarship for developing and destination whose sole purpose is to supplement those with the argument that this amount it should have satisfied the citizen and therefore income (using an action similar to taxation of community fees paid by the tenant within the meaning of home, it pays him when he had to pay me, so it's a perecpción income-).

is true that the law of tax exemption is not listed as getting aid, so we really did not hide the fact. But realistically, hard to believe that any ordinary citizen to know the exact content and accu-rate of the rule, properly interpreted or, alternatively, be counseled, especially when revenues "common" (that do not involve much difficulty) in terms of their settlement, the "normal" people tend to make the income statement under the draft that they sent the tax, so that their contact with the world is zero tax. Seems more credible than a normal person before changing car for what he has heard in the media is simply the dealership that the vehicle has a lower price, and no one will explain the consequences, which can be really harmful to the public.

In short, the income tax has two components, the general base and the base of savings. The first is comprised of certain types of income (such as wages) and are taxed at a progressive rate is applied using a table (which you can see below is the table of the stretch state, it would have to add it to determine tables for each regional autonomy for the section). The second taxed in the current year at a fixed rate (although in such reform is increased from the first 6,000 €) does not take into account what you earn to establish what% will pay. Both have a state section (both percent that "you are charged the State", so to speak) and a regional section (section that defines the CCAA and that "they charge you") whose sum is the amount that ultimately we have to pay the Treasury. Hence, we will discount what we have paid because we have been holding (we have been paying during the year, hence it's "pay or return" if we paid in advance over what we corresponded we returned and if not touch us pay the difference.)

'20 2,772

tax base - to Euros	tax payable - Rest	Euros tax base - to Euros	Applicable Type - Percentage
	0 0		'20 17,707 15'66 17,707
		'95 '00 15,300 18'27
	'20 5,568 33,007 '20 20,400 '00
24'14 '20 53,407 10,492 '82		Thereafter	27'13

State Fee Table

The table varies its figures each fiscal year, but the system is almost the same in order to explain how the euro affects tributene aid rent and its damaging consequences for citizens.

As shown, the table determines the percentage that will apply to the general base. We can put some explanatory purposes:

If I have a taxable income in the general (RBG) below € 17,707 '20, I applied on the amount the 15'66%: Paco has earned, net of Social Security contributions , 15,000 € gross salary in the year to pay off not having other sources of income. Paco is calculated on the income effects of 15'66% of 15,000 €.

Following the structure of the previous example, if € 21,000 (between the second and third section of the table) would pay for the first € 17,107 '20 '95 the amount of 2,772 € and the rest up to € 21,000 would apply to the 18'27%.

assistance for the vehicle is a direct sum of the amount of the general base, for which there is no deductible expense. An example:

Paco has worked until 30 September in Spain Krane Chemical, a company dedicated to the manufacture of pesticides, including the so-called "pillamar5" with a full monthly salary of 1,750 euros. The Social Security contributions satisfied charge amounting to 1,250 euros and the annual membership of the UGT satisfied amounts to 200 euros.

If you have more income, the general base is calculated by adding what has won in Gross minus deductible expenses (social security contributions and unions, to limit the latter), which does not really apply the % to everything we have gained. However, in helping us add all of a sudden the help.

The really bad for the citizen is that if its income was in a section of the table, with that brutal increase "income" is may make the leap to the next level, so all his money from the general basis will be taxed at a higher rate when their real incomes have really been the same. and this, of course, unknown and unable to make suitable provision. For example, someone who was paying a 18 ' 27% applied to all income can go to pay a 24'14% only for the accounting for the help.

As you see, is a lie or half truth of the Government of marketing we have, which sells in the face of public opinion and yet one thing then things are never so.

Regards.

PS: Do not know why the table not centered and the proper size, try to fix it.

not forget to visit http://cineybso.com