Employer deducting salary protection premium, but not paying it over

Luternau said:

We know nothing of the OP's situation (mortgage, outgoings etc.) or their prospects of getting similar work

Click to expand...

Indeed; but show me where I said the OP should walk out?

The OP has stated they have dependents, so in my view the very least they should do at this point is start looking for another job.

DannyBoyD said:

Indeed; but show me where I said the OP should walk out?

The OP has stated they have dependents, so in my view the very least they should do at this point is start looking for another job.

Click to expand...

Post #10, point 3...look for another job
How else is that not walking away/out ? You both can't stay and take other employment.

DannyBoyD said:

Ah here!

I'll be charitable and assume English isn't your first language.

Step 1: You look for another job
By one or more of the following steps

a. You contact recruitment agencies.​

b. You answer job advertisements.​

c. You update your LinkedIn / webpage / online profile​

d. You contact people in your industry and / or network.​

Step 2: You attend interviews

Step 3: You are offered a position & you accept it.

Step 4: You give notice to your current employer.

Step 5: You start your new job.

Click to expand...

Please don't insult or patronise.

I have nothing further to say to someone that comes across as a keyboard expert in everything.

Luternau said:

What is shocking to me is a government funded entity can jeopardise the livelihoods of so many 3rd parties just because its a total basket case for over spends. Something should be done to address the over spends, much of which is not at the coal face, rather in ineffective administration.

Click to expand...

Being government funded is no guarantee to proper governance or the proper running of a sustainable enterprise. It might be worthwhile for the OP to refer this to the Charities Regulator whose role it is to ensure proper governance in registered charities. Indeed they were set up in response to some major financial mismanagement in large charities in the past.

Leo said:

Being government funded is no guarantee to proper governance or the proper running of a sustainable enterprise. It might be worthwhile for the OP to refer this to the Charities Regulator whose role it is to ensure proper governance in registered charities. Indeed they were set up in response to some major financial mismanagement in large charities in the past.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree. By the way the entity I referred to was HSE. It's probably not correct to say it's Gloverment funder. Rather a Government (tax payer) funded health body, fully under the remit if the Dept of Health.

Luternau said:

I don't disagree. By the way the entity I referred to was HSE. It's probably not correct to say it's Gloverment funder. Rather a Government (tax payer) funded health body, fully under the remit if the Dept of Health.

Click to expand...

Yeah, fair enough. I just mentioned it in the context of the OP's situation in a charity that's largely funded by the HSE. In those circumstances, it's far less likely that the government would step in to cover any shortfalls.

I presume there is no union or if there is, it's in the management's pocket and is very compliant. I wouldn't walk out, assuming the OP is earning €600 per week or more and with 30 years service, that's a potential redundancy package of €36k+. Likewise if the HSE or another charity were to come in and take over, potentially TUPE could apply. For now, I'd continue to flag issues with management, keep a written record of every discussion, email etc and ensure you have copies of things like your contract etc saved outside of work.