The use of the first nane is part of the belittling anď misogyny.
I’ve always thought it misogynistic.
Though I have used the Rachel from Accounts to refer to her myself, it is actually quite witty. But no doubt it’s misogynistic, and I felt guilty doing it.
Let’s face it who would you rather have as Chancellor - Kwasi Kwarteng or Mrs Rachel Reeves ? She at least has a related academic qualifcation from a respected university and is not doing half as badly as she could have.
Hi Steph,
Thank you for the link and detailed reply, it’s much appreciated.
I still find this quite confusing… It seems to imply if you set up class 3 payments before April 2026, things will continue as normal. If you wait, get the letter, and have to transition, then you risk being considered a new applicant, and will therefore likely fall foul of the rules (if you haven’t paid for 10 years whilst living in the UK for example). That would be a rather cruel way of kicking people out of the system.
I will have to consider making an early transition in 2026 in the hope the transition will be seamless. 5 years ago, I paid to catch up with the decade I’d already been living in France without contributing, so I’m currently up-to-date. I’m not sure if there’s a way of switching class 2 to class 3 payments online, or whether it requires giving them a call?
I also noticed that they state: **Transitional arrangements :**Further details and guidance will be published at a later date.
I have to admit I know nothing about ASPA. Is it means tested as a couple (if you’re married), if so I’ll probably not be eligible. I will certainly have to look into it.
Yes, it does seem like a very underhand way to kick people out of the system … which is why I imagine that’s exactly what they’re doing! The system is always set up against Joe Bloggs, while James Blaggart can pay for people to understand and work the system in their favour. Personally I wouldn’t trust them with a barge pole. 
There isn’t a way of switching on line from class 2 to class 3 but you could apply to pay Class 3 online and then cancel the Class 2 payments.
If you follow the link above you can go through the process. It only gets submitted right at the end. But it may be just as well to call them and just ask them to change it for you if they’ll do it over the phone if you aren’t confident on the HMRC digital system.
Yes ASPA will be based on the income of the couple so is really only there if you both have very limited incomes. Good luck!
If I hadn’t chanced upon a recommended video then seen this thread, I wouldn’t have known about it.
It would be very devious of the government to get rid of people this way. They should be informing people before April 2026, not after. I agree, that it’s better to remain sceptical, and so I’ll probably give them a call around January of 2026 and see if I can get the ball rolling early, even if that means paying more before the allotted date. This is assuming they allow me to switch to class 3. I’m now paranoid they will try to keep me on class 2 until after April.
My wife will have a more passive income when she retires, alongside a basic French state pension, so I imagine ASPA won’t help me personally. Although I’ve no doubt my other half would be happy to help support me, I’d really like a degree of financial independence for myself when I eventually retire. I guess a lot can still change between now and then.
Devious? Governments? Never! 
I’m under the impression that if you’re entitled to pay Class 3 then you can start paying them as soon as you apply. If you’ve paid Class 2 already for the period you won’t get refunded but I can’t see any guidance that says you can’t pay Class 3 any time if you’re eligible. So apply and stand your ground. Good luck!
Thank you. If they won’t switch me, I could always say I’m no longer self-employed, then I’d have to pay class 3. I understand if you tried that in the other sense you could have problems, but offering to pay more than you need to shouldn’t land a person in hot water (I hope) ! 
I mentioned your comment to my wife over dinner last night Jennifer (I often recount what’s bubbling along on SFR) and she laughed. "Doesn’t she realise we ARE “other nationalities” she asked. “If she, as British person, want’s to see it as sexist, fine. But don’t tell us how to see it” 
That’s the point I’ve been, far less eloquently, trying to make in previous posts.
Edit: We also had a laugh at the term “accounts department”. Neither of us had heard that in decades and decades.
Well I don’t know where you’ve both been hiding then. In the process of buying a house in the UK our solicitor asked me to let her know when I sent the deposit (on Friday), so she could let her “accounts department” know,
That proves our point perfectly Sue, a British solicitor, did she also use a Dictaphone? I suppose if large enough they might still have a typing pool, staffed by the “girls”.
Mind you, if so, the staff needs to watch out, my daughter tells me AI is becoming prevalent for medical histories and case notes. I’m sure Sue, Grabbit and Runne will try climbing on that cost cutting bandwagon.
I suppose a solicitor’s practice doesn’t really need a Finance function, just a big ledger to record dosh in and dosh out (and dosh gone missing ). This whole conveyancing stuff is such a scam, though more competitive than it was. I’ve pals who have made very good livings shuffling deeds around the place. All to little practical effect. Note to self, must check they haven’t lost mine 
We haven’t been hiding Sue, we’ve been working (in my wife’s case for thirty-four years up to 2017) for one of the world’s leading IT companies. I spent years running interesting parts of it.
No “Accounts” departments there, or in any of its peers. Any of our excellent finance professionals, Finance Directors or CFOs would look at you askance if you spoke of an “Accounts” department. It’s so seventies.
Though I’d say ICL probably had one, and British Leyland too, if you get my drift. Run by a Chief Accountant.
With respect John, calling it Finance, which originally started in the UK in US owned UK companies then US-dominated industries , has become more widespread but is absolutely still not universal. And does not change the fact that what Accounts Departments do is pretty much the same thing as people in Finance Departments do until you get to a very high level.
Thoigh I will agree with you that most large companies call the function Finance these days. An “Accoints Department” referred to by a country solicitor, say, might be as little as a part-time person doing only a day or two a week.
And as we are talking smaller businesses that are more likely to be using the “Accounts Department” naming and as for bigger businesses calling it an “Accounts Department” was indeed long ago, of course calling Mrs Rachel Reeves “Rachel from Accounts’ has several further layers of insult brought in by …from Accounts”. As well as belittling her and making her sound junior by using her first name.
Don’t get me wrong I actually found it witty myself but let’s not refrain from unpacking all the levels of insult here. There are quite a few and these particular insults would not be tried on a man, as they reflect real female work history.
I think the ‘rachel from accounts’ is used - because the person we are referring to HAD lied about her ‘important’ position’ at some bank; and secondly she had been discovered spending her ‘work’ time actually putting in hours on her union work - unknown to her bosses at the bank - and there’s been other accusations about her financial decisions - including the legal requirement needed to rent out a property - which was not obtained - so she acted illegally in letting out their london property. The perception is that she had indeed lied - and her background is dodgy. As for Under 14 chess champion - that’s also another little fibbie on her part. So the monicker ‘rachel from accounts’ - because that is where she worked - is used as a reminder that that was her real job - not the one she put on her ‘fudged’ cv.
Hi Concorde, not dealing with the incorrectnesses you are claiming as I don’t have time right now.
Bur right from when she was appointed, she was being referred to as Rachel.from Accounts and that would have been before such as you mention, came up for discussion.
I’m sure you are correct Karen. That being the case, I’m sorry that some UK companies are still maintaining archaic and parochial 1970s (at best) terminology. Luckily we weren’t exposed to it professionally, because I would I would have found it almost irresistible not to take the piss out them 
I’m sitting here with my wife and I read out your post and she once again said, “don’t they see that this is their (British) sexist problem, not ours”. In other words if Rachel popped over from Finance in our Firm we wouldn’t have assumed she was junior or in a menial role. She could (as I know you know ) be head of Internal Audit 
or Treasury, or Tax , or Strategic Planning Etc. Etc.
We think that the person that assumes the “Rachel from accounts” is junior says more about them than Rachel. After all, this “Rachel from accounts” has, for better or worse, produced a budget for a £2.78 trillion economy.
And I don’t accept that at all. The scope of a CFO is far, far wider than a traditional chief accountant.
This, I don’t understand. No one has said it’s “your problem” we merely pointed out how it’s being used and it’s only really funny if want to snigger at reactionary insults.
Or, you are not tainted by British sexism Remember John, I said it wouldn’t matter to me which gender the person thundering up the stairs from “accounts” in the basement clutching the budget was.
I’m just trying to explain where we are coming from, I respect your and @KarenLot views. We are just looking a comment from different perspectives. In the UK it may well work as an insult (as I mentioned above), that is refection on the UK 
How is it funny?
I would have thought the only people who would have laughed at it are exactly those who are sexist and who find it impossible to believe that a woman would be capable of being anything other than some mousy minion in an accounts department who would spend her life getting tea for her male bosses.
The slur was started by Tory MP’s in late 2024 following suggestions that her CV had been exaggerated somewhat and unfortunately it’s stuck.
Indeed Sue. I’ve never met, seen or heard of the concept of a “mousy minion in an accounts department who would spend her life getting tea for her male bosses.” in any of the many, many European Headquarters I’ve visited or worked in. (including our HQ on Southbank, which I spent a lot of time in). I don’t think the stereotype would have been comprehensible to my European (or UK) colleagues.
Thus I’ve come to the conclusion this is a UK problem. I guess it takes a certain life experience to recognise this put down. And it is true some UK companies do have a “laddish” culture that wouldn’t be tolerated in other northern European countries.
Since neither my wife nor I have had the misfortune to work in such an environment we don’t recognise the slur. But the joke about the garbled budget being prepared in a now largely defunct department and rushed upstairs was funny. But if you guys say it’s a slur sobeit. Who knows better than you? In that case the UK has a lot of work to do.
Though I suppose watching all those episodes of the Office sitcom years ago should have prepared us
Ahhhh, that’s interesting. Maybe now I understand better.
Yes, that makes sense and it is a slur, thanks Tim
Correct. But not exclusively British. Quite a few other cultures where there is still a problem.
I wish. “Rachel from Accounts” is similar in vibe to “Jenny from the typing pool”. As you say, they were both real people, at a time not so long ago.
As I ssid. The same, until the highest levels Of courae computers have helped with that Making data into information, and accounts into info that can be used for finance. But it’s the same department responsible for that area, as it always was.
@SuePJ, I think you’ll agree with me that John Scully is simply too young. John : I was there, and I’ll bet Sue was too .