188体育

Employers who owe their workers thousands of pounds for failing to pay them the National Minimum Wage (NMW) have been named by Business Minister Jo Swinson.

Today (27 November 2014), a further 25 employers who failed to pay their workers the National Minimum Wage have been named under the revised naming scheme - introduced in October 2013. The scheme was revised to make it simpler to name and shame employers that do not comply with minimum wage rules. Between them they owe workers a total of over 拢89,000 in arrears and have been charged financial penalties totalling over 拢36,000.

The government has already named 30 employers since the new regime came into force. They had total arrears of over 拢50,000 and total penalties of over 拢24,000

Business Minister Jo Swinson said:

Paying less than the minimum wage is wrong and illegal. Employers need to know that they will face tough consequences if they break the law.

All workers are entitled to the minimum wage. This isn鈥檛 a generous gesture, this is the law. Government takes the enforcement of workers鈥� rights seriously and those who don鈥檛 pay will be named, shamed and fined.

If anyone suspects they are not being paid the wage they are legally entitled to, they can call the Pay and Work Rights Helpline for free and confidential advice and to make a complaint.

Employers who are unsure of National Minimum Wage rules can also get free advice via the Pay and Work Rights Helpline on 0800 917 2368 or by visiting www.gov.uk.

The government has introduced a series of tougher measures to crack down on employers that break National Minimum Wage law. As well as being publicly named and shamed, employers that fail to pay their workers the National Minimum Wage also face penalties of up to 拢20,000.

The government is also legislating through the Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill so that this penalty can be applied to each underpaid worker rather than per employer.

The 25 employers named today are:

• The Barber Institute of Fine Arts, Birmingham, neglected to pay 拢25,553.40 to 16 workers
• Walsall FC Community Programme, Walsall, neglected to pay 拢9,353.63 to 6 workers
• KIG (Nottm) Ltd, trading as Little Bears Day Nursery Nottingham, neglected to pay 拢9,298.86 to 2 workers
• Narvida Ltd, Dunfermline, neglected to pay 拢7,629.00 to 8 workers
• Associates Hair, Body and Mind Ltd, Durham, neglected to pay 拢5,349.79 to 6 workers
• Worthingtons The Salon Ltd, Reading, neglected to pay 拢5,054.89 to a worker
• Heropreneurs, Suffolk, neglected to pay 拢4,374.84 to a worker
• Gurdal Ltd trading as Lyng Pharmacy, West Bromwich, neglected to pay 拢4,120.94 to a worker
• Mrs Christine O鈥橫ara, Mr Terry Krause & Mr Anthony O鈥橫ara trading as Discount Sports, Rotherham, neglected to pay 拢3,475.94 to 5 workers
• Civil Defence Supply Ltd, Lincoln, neglected to pay 拢3,454.80 to a worker
• Ms J Bonaldi trading as Glow Hair Boutique, Prestwick, neglected to pay 拢3,295.63 to a worker
• Mr Terence Brown, trading as Twins Fruiterers, Sunderland, neglected to pay 拢2,140.82 to a worker
• The Gearbox Company Ltd, trading as South West Transmissions, Exeter, neglected to pay 拢1,524.22 to a worker
• Mr G Ieronimo, Mrs C Ieronimo & Mrs J Dean trading as Cutting Club, Cleethorpes, neglected to pay 拢835.76 to 9 workers
• Mrs J Norbury & Miss B Norbury, trading as Rare, Oldham, neglected to pay 拢671.86 to a worker
• Valentino鈥檚 Hair & Beauty Ltd, Rotherham, neglected to pay 拢655.70 to 2 workers
• Ms Tuyet Vo, trading as Modern Nails, Manchester, neglected to pay 拢604.74 to a worker
• Xios 1 Ltd, trading as L鈥橴nico Richmond, neglected to pay 拢485.46 to a worker
• Mrs R Collins, trading as Somtum Thai Takeaway Cafe, Dorset, neglected to pay 拢418.59 to a worker
• Premier Autos (Hednesford) Ltd, Staffordshire, neglected to pay 拢339.12 to a worker
• Armonia Ltd, trading as Armonia Health & Beauty Treatment & Training Centre, Doncaster, neglected to pay 拢286.12 to 6 workers
• TopCon Construction Ltd, Grimsby, neglected to pay 拢276.02 to a worker
• Danhouse Security Ltd, Surrey neglected to pay 拢161.83 to 2 workers
• Rucola Ltd, Amersham, neglected to pay 拢130.29 to 2 workers
• Ms D Perry, trading as Dog in a Doublet, Peterborough, neglected to pay 拢108.97 to 3 workers

The 25 cases named today were thoroughly investigated by HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) after workers made complaints to the free and confidential Pay and Work Rights Helpline.

Notes to editors:

1.Employers have a duty to be aware of the different legal rates for the National Minimum Wage.

The current National Minimum Wage rates are:

• adult rate (21 and over) - 拢6.50 per hour
• 18 to 20 year olds - 拢5.13 per hour
• 16 to 17 year olds - 拢3.79 per hour
• apprentice rate - 拢2.73 per hour

The apprentice rate applies to apprentices aged 16 to 18 year olds and those aged 19 years and over who are in their first year. All other apprentices are entitled to the National Minimum Wage rate for their age.

2.The government is committed to increasing compliance with minimum wage legislation and effective enforcement of it. Everyone who is entitled to the minimum wage should receive it. The BIS scheme to name employers who break minimum wage law came into effect on 1 January 2011. The scheme is one of a range of tools at the government鈥檚 disposal to tackle this issue. Employers who pay workers less than the minimum wage not only have to pay back arrears of wages at current minimum wage rates but also face financial penalties of up to 拢20,000. In the most serious cases employers can be prosecuted.

3.From 1 October 2013 the government revised the naming scheme to make it simpler to name and shame employers who break the law. Under this scheme the government will name all employers that have been issued with a Notice of Underpayment (NoU) unless employers meet one of the exceptional criteria or have arrears of 拢100 or less. All 25 cases named today failed to pay the National Minimum Wage and have arrears of over 拢100.

4.Employers have 28 days to appeal to HMRC against the NoU (this notice sets out the owed wages to be paid by the employer together with the penalty for not complying with minimum wage law). If the employer does not appeal or unsuccessfully appeals against this NoU, BIS will consider them for naming. The employer then has 14 days to make representations to BIS outlining whether they meet any of the exceptional criteria:

• naming by BIS carries a risk of personal harm to an individual or their family
• there are national security risks associated with naming in this instance
• other factors which suggest that it would not be in the public interest to name the employer (employer to provide details)

If BIS do not receive any representations or the representations received are unsuccessful, the employer will be named via a BIS press release under this scheme.

5.Further information about the revised BIS NMW naming scheme can be found at: Enforcing national minimum wage law.