Early Risers.

[station cat]

Some foreign nuisance caller just asked me to speak more clearly. Bloomin' cheek. Or maybe she just didn't understand me asking if she'd had a car accident in the past two years.

[Tony_S]

Some foreign nuisance caller just asked me to speak more clearly. Bloomin' cheek. Or maybe she just didn't understand me asking if she'd had a car accident in the past two years.

The nuisance callers must be working through a new load of dialling codes, we haven't had any for a week now.

[trisonic]

I’ll email you a US 1(900) XXXX number, which is a SEX Chatline to redirect them to...it’ll only cost them about $25.00 per minute.

 

Best, Pete.

Edited May 28, 2014 by trisonic

[Tony_S]

I’ll email you a US 1(900) XXXX number, which is a SEX Chatline to redirect them to...it’ll only cost them about $25.00 per minute.

 

Best, Pete.

They tend to hang up as soon as you show any signs of wit or even sentience.

[trisonic]

They tend to hang up as soon as you show any signs of wit or even sentience.

So they should be on the Chatline for some time, then?

 

Best, Pete.

[Ian Abel]

'ello all...

 

Wish Aditi the best in resolving the issues - areshole work environments can quickly get you down and may not be worth the attacks on ones mental health. It's so unfortunate when folks enjoy and are good at what they do, and get no recognition, or worse still abuse into the bargain <sigh> condolences and wishes for a speedy/preferred resolution.

 

Tea - well, as with many ex-pats (except in potential ex-pat "friendly" locations like Aus. and NZ) finding decent tea especially at a sensible price in the US can be a challenge!

At least now a couple of local store stock Twinnings and Tetleys. Yorkshire (GOLD or otherwise) is deemed truly that, GOLD, so is extortionately priced for some stupid reason best known only to the locals that consider tea some direct method of becoming either i) Lord of the Manor or ii) an aristocrat of Downton Abbey!!

Generally I have Tetleys now, as it suddenly became the most well priced and available at the local shop, a short walk away.

My father drank tea so strong you could've used it as floor polish or a sealer for the driveway - can't manage that level myself, I go for a more whimpy brew.

 

Weather "FACTOID", for those with such odd interests - today marks the OFFICIAL END OF THE SNOW SEASON in Minneapolis/St. Paul.

Yes, hard to believe but true - there's NO RECORD of snow falling later than May 27th. here, so we're in the bliss of a snow free period until mid-September - WOT!!!

Generally, we don't get our first snow until early October, but it has been recorded as early as Sept. 15th. We have 16 weeks of GUARANTEED snow free weather! Sod me!!!

 

18 and partly cloudy right now and very pleasant, headed for 27 later...  

 

Have a Happy Hump Day!

[BoD]

I’ll email you a US 1(900) XXXX number, which is a SEX Chatline to redirect them to...it’ll only cost them about $25.00 per minute.

How do you know?

[Ian Abel]

So they should be on the Chatline for some time, then?

 

Best, Pete.

Here's where we need the ability to add multiple emoticons, particularly duplicates - this deserved three "funny" ratings at least

[trisonic]

How do you know?

Because that’s what happened when I redirected you there........

 

Best, Pete.

[The Stationmaster]

Here's where we need the ability to add multiple emoticons, particularly duplicates - this deserved three "funny" ratings at least

Multiple emoticons  .  Not so difficult really, in fact rather    And all you need to do is read the instructions - or write your own

 

Signed         

[BoD]

Because that’s what happened when I redirected you there........

 

Best, Pete.

.... but I charged it to your card as they already had the details.

[Ian Abel]

Multiple emoticons  .  Not so difficult really, in fact rather    And all you need to do is read the instructions - or write your own

 

Signed         

Mike,

  Sorry my error - I meant "ratings". I have used multiple emoticons frequently...  as shown    

Then again I forget stuff too!   

[The Stationmaster]

Mike,

  Sorry my error - I meant "ratings". I have used multiple emoticons frequently...  as shown    

Then again I forget stuff too!   

Don't we all - I'm told it's an age thing (or I think that was what I was told).  And yes, i agree with your original, now clarified point.

[Ian Abel]

Don't we all - I'm told it's an age thing (or I think that was what I was told).  And yes, i agree with your original, now clarified point.

It maybe an age thing, I don't remember

 

<--- coat, hat, etc...

[PhilJ W]

I forgot, redundancy payments decrease dramatically when you become 60, something else to bear in mind. My retirement lump sum was a lot more than £30,000 but I did not pay any tax on it.

[Two_sugars]

Still precipitating . . . .

[The Stationmaster]

I forgot, redundancy payments decrease dramatically when you become 60, something else to bear in mind. My retirement lump sum was a lot more than £30,000 but I did not pay any tax on it.

How come?  Is this some sort of state sector fiddle?  Redundancy payments are legally linked to length of service and salary level thus the longer you have worked the more you are entitled to (although sometimes service is capped - in my case it was capped at 32 years but I was only in my early 50s when I went under redundancy).  Sometimes voluntary schemes might work on a different basis of course and accepted as such for tax purposes by HMRC.  

 

Having just checked - Statutory Redundancy Pay is capped at 20 years service and a maximum salary/wage of £464 per week. The entitlement rates per week for calculation change at ages 22 & 41, there is no change at age 60 or above.

 

 

But whatever, the simple fact is that redundancy will produce an additional lump payment sum which won't come with retirement - where the only lump sum is that from the pension fund.  In my case it was all quite simple, most of the surplus above the tax free element was put into the pension fund and I then took out of the pension fund the maximum lump sum permitted by HMRI - which happened to be a bit more than the money which had been put in.  I also took the maximum allowable, under HMRI rules, pension which was quite severely capped because of my age but was considerably increased then, and forever due to index linking, by the redundancy money being put into the fund.

 

The result was that my monthly income from pay/pension was reduced by nearly 50% but the nett result was a drop of £10 per week because a substantial part of the lump sum was used to clear the mortgage and my tax rate dropped from 40% of course.  As I said above while there are certain basics which are common the result can only be assessed on the basis of personal circumstances and one's financial situation and in many respects we differ.  A colleague who left at the same time as me, and with the same amount of redundancy but fewer superannuation fund years played it a different way because unlike me he didn't need an immediate income from his pension.

Edited May 28, 2014 by The Stationmaster

[Tony_S]

Still precipitating . . . .

It stopped here around lunchtime and a chap appeared at the bottom of my garden. He didn't need my electricity supply as he had a cable long enough to reach across the neighbour's garden. He hasn't finished and has had to lean the old panel back. His "breaker" looked a bit puny compared to the one my (very nice, no Leylandii)  next door neighbour used when replacing our fence. His breaker then broke. He tried to dig the concrete out but it filled up with mud quite quickly when it started raining again. Miserable lot employing him didn't even bring him a cup of tea!

[PhilJ W]

How come?  Is this some sort of state sector fiddle?  Redundancy payments are legally linked to length of service and salary level thus the longer you have worked the more you are entitled to (although sometimes service is capped - in my case it was capped at 32 years but I was only in my early 50s when I went under redundancy).  Sometimes voluntary schemes might work on a different basis but technically they might not be regarded as redundancy although treated as such for tax reasons and accepted as such by HMRC.

 

But whatever, the simple fact is that redundancy will produce an additional lump payment sum which won't come with retirement - where the only lump sum is that from the pension fund.  In my case it was all quite simple, most of the surplus above the tax free element was put into the pension fund and I then took out of the pension fund the maximum lump sum permitted by HMRI - which happened to be a bit more than the money which had been put in.  I also took the maximum allowable, under HMRI rules, pension which was quite severely capped because of my age but was considerably increased then, and forever due to index linking, by the redundancy money being put into the fund.

 

The result was that my monthly income from pay/pension was reduced by nearly 50% but the nett result was a drop of £10 per week because a substantial part of the lump sum was used to clear the mortgage and my tax rate dropped from 40% of course.  As I said above while there are certain basics which are common the result can only be assessed on the basis of personal circumstances and one's financial situation and in many respects we differ.  A colleague who left at the same time as me, and with the same amount of redundancy but fewer superannuation fund years played it a different way because unlike me he didn't need an immediate income from his pension.

Sorry my mistake, redundancy payments drop considerably once you are 64 not 60. That was 6 years ago when I retired and its probably altered by now with the raising of the normal retirement age. Tax is payable on the lump sum over a certain limit, as my lump sum was nowhere near that limit and there must be very few if any ER's who have such an enormous pension pot this should not worry them.

[NGT6 1315]

Still precipitating . . . .

Same here. But at least, the long weekend's finally there! Wrote up the draft for the English exam I'm letting my eighters write next Tuesday, too, though I'll be thinking about how to balance the marking criteria.

[Tony_S]

I looked up the age related redundancy stuff and now age discrimination legislation applies but it seems quite complex. Employers have to justify why voluntary redundancy has any age limit. As Aditi's college guaranteed never to age discriminate even before legislation they might find it difficult. There are also agreements between unions and colleges. I suspect there will be some who are keen to go but if the college is strapped for cash any enhancements to do so may not be attractive.

Aditi feels a lot of sympathy for those in the middle of their careers and still have mortgages. Other colleges in the area are also downsizing and have already issued "at risk" letters. One area of the college that is still growing is the HE sector, as there are more degree opportunities than before.

[pH]

Sitting here watching three bald eagles riding a thermal - and one brave (or foolish) crow trying to 'mob' one of the eagles!

[Tony_S]

Same here. But at least, the long weekend's finally there! Wrote up the draft for the English exam I'm letting my eighters write next Tuesday, too, though I'll be thinking about how to balance the marking criteria.

One of my students wondered which group Mark Scheme was in as he always got 100%

[NGT6 1315]

One of my students wondered which group Mark Scheme was in as he always got 100%

I suppose he was constantly scheming!

[The Stationmaster]

Sorry my mistake, redundancy payments drop considerably once you are 64 not 60. That was 6 years ago when I retired and its probably altered by now with the raising of the normal retirement age. Tax is payable on the lump sum over a certain limit, as my lump sum was nowhere near that limit and there must be very few if any ER's who have such an enormous pension pot this should not worry them.

Certainly not the case with statutory redundancy although individual company schemes might well do that.  Full explanation - as I understand things - of how the tax etc works is in my post on page 2608 and that shows how your liability can be legitimately reduced.  Nobody is going to get anywhere near the £30,000 threshold of the statutory scheme because of the salary and length of service limits but it is quite possible with many company schemes especially if they are looking to get shot of people and are offering 'inducements' to get them to go.

 

As Tony has indicated some employers might not have the funds so won't necessarily improve on the statutory offering although a lot can depend on what they have agreed with unions as well.  In BR's case the various offers changed over the years mainly in order to induce older folk to go and some of the privateers continued to offer the final BR scheme to their ex BR staff although they restricted the amount you might get by capping the length of service - as happened in my case.  We also had a company scheme but for me it did not work as well as the BR scheme although it was still way in excess of the statutory minimum.