'Should we starve the jobless back to work?' poll discussion
Comments
-
What i would like to see is a JSA that matches your last income minus 30% (with a cap within reason) for the first 6 months of looking for work. Then every 6 months it drops a further 30% until it reaches the same level as those who haven't worked for over 2 years.
For example, my basic wage is £13,600pa but with working every other weekend i get £16,750pa. After tax, NI, and pension funds, i come out with £1100 on average per month.
If i lost my job then using my example i would roughly see a JSA of 161.70 per week for the first 6 months. the next 6 months it would be £113.19. Then after that i would be down the the basic JSA as 30% less would put me to £79.23
So for me on my wage i would be looking to get a job within 12 months to get back to what i used to earn.0 -
Interesting that 85% of votes are for less than current £5,746 JSA + housing benefit level, which requires a vote of £7,500 a year to at least match given the choices. Minimum wage for a 40 hour week is £12,064 a year if paid for 52 weeks, plus £484.85 in Working Tax Credits for a single person. That's a fair bit more than the JSA+HB.0
-
My gut feeling is £120pw. I voted the closest to this, which is £100, but I don't think that this is enough, really.
All gets very difficult.
What if there aren't any jobs around?
What if someone has children that need childcare?
How quickly will someone being "starved back to work" become ill and go onto incapacity benefit?0 -
I had a thought the other day.
How about if the government offered everyone (working or not working) employment for 15 hours a week earning £10 per hour. Parents taking this option could have free childcare during these hours.
It doesn't matter if these jobs are not worth £10 a hour, as this would replace benefits.
Appropriate work could be found for all - for instance all but the most seriously incapacitated could do something - e.g. listen to school children practicing reading, be a "friend" at an old people's home, etc.
Other people doing this work could transport those unable to get to their jobs. Others could provide the free childcare mentioned earlier.
The key thing about this plan is that it is open to everybody and is self-regulating.
You could do your 15 hours a week and nothing else. Or you could do your 15 hours a week and 10 hours more at Tescos. Then you would be better off than if you didn't work at Tescos.
You'd then have a reference to find other work. If you found better work (e.g. earning more than £10 an hour) than this government scheme then you wouldn't have to do the scheme.
If you were in debt, or saving for something, you could work full time plus this 15 hour a week job.
Would it work? I don't know! But I think it's the best solution I can come up with.0 -
My girlfriend left the Navy due to ill health last year in May.
She signed on and was told by the job centre that there were no suitable vacancies, but that she must apply because if not her measly benefit which didnt even cover food, rent, utilities, etc would be stopped. They told her her ailment which had caused her to leave the Navy (complete loss of hearing in one ear, partial loss in the other) did not mean she was entitled to any help with interviews i.e. hearing loop for her hearing aids and they also told her that there was no point going back in to education as she would not be entitled to any help with her studying.
So they put her forward for everything, including jobs with only 5 hours a week. They 'found' her an interview which was for a cleaning job at 15 hours per week in a hospice an hours journey away; again, if she wasn't willing to travel up to an hour, her benefit would stop. She didn't even have the bus fare to the interview I had to put a days holiday in to work and take her. She even squeezed in to my clothes and I'm two dress sizes smaller (apparently the fund in her area for help towards interview costs was closed for applications that week).
She got the job, I mean she'd been in the Royal Navy 6 years and had qualifications coming out of her ears. Anyway, she started working and signed off benefit. We worked it out that after bus fares she earned £1.50 per hour.
After 6 weeks the cleaning job 'let her go' as they'd over-recruited. Back on job seekers and my girlfriend told them that she would like to train to be a nurse and she'd seen a recruitment event she'd like to attend. They said the recruitment event would class as a days work, so she would have to sign off job seekers if she wanted to attend.
She did, as I told her my wages would see us both through while she went after her career and we moved in with my Mam to save money on rent and bills. She got the Nurse Cadet position and is on a one day a week college course. So far she is the top performing Cadet in her group (150 cadets). She works really hard and earns £600pm - we still struggle she used to pick up £1500 a month in the Navy, but at least she has a career and potential to speak of and isnt using her qualifications to empty bins in a hospice.
I had a terrible experience with the Job Centre myself when I left Uni. They all seemed to look down their nose, despite the fact I have worked hard since I was 13!
In my opinion, I would say that if the job centre people did their jobs, everyone should be given £100-150 per week which would cover reasonable living expenses for 6 months. At the end of the 6 months if they didn't find a job within a reasonable radius to their home, with a reasonable number of hours with the HELP of the job centre; then they don't get any more money.
Just my opinion
) 0 -
JimmyTheWig wrote: »I had a thought the other day.
How about if the government offered everyone (working or not working) employment for 15 hours a week earning £10 per hour. Parents taking this option could have free childcare during these hours.
It doesn't matter if these jobs are not worth £10 a hour, as this would replace benefits.
Appropriate work could be found for all - for instance all but the most seriously incapacitated could do something - e.g. listen to school children practicing reading, be a "friend" at an old people's home, etc.
Other people doing this work could transport those unable to get to their jobs. Others could provide the free childcare mentioned earlier.
The key thing about this plan is that it is open to everybody and is self-regulating.
You could do your 15 hours a week and nothing else. Or you could do your 15 hours a week and 10 hours more at Tescos. Then you would be better off than if you didn't work at Tescos.
You'd then have a reference to find other work. If you found better work (e.g. earning more than £10 an hour) than this government scheme then you wouldn't have to do the scheme.
If you were in debt, or saving for something, you could work full time plus this 15 hour a week job.
Would it work? I don't know! But I think it's the best solution I can come up with.
Superb idea, I would love to work another 15 hours a week to get myself out of the small amount of debt I am in - brilliant thought!
Jimmythewig for PM!) 0 -
Chef1980uk wrote: »What i would like to see is a JSA that matches your last income minus 30% (with a cap within reason) for the first 6 months of looking for work. Then every 6 months it drops a further 30% until it reaches the same level as those who haven't worked for over 2 years.
For example, my basic wage is £13,600pa but with working every other weekend i get £16,750pa. After tax, NI, and pension funds, i come out with £1100 on average per month.
If i lost my job then using my example i would roughly see a JSA of 161.70 per week for the first 6 months. the next 6 months it would be £113.19. Then after that i would be down the the basic JSA as 30% less would put me to £79.23
So for me on my wage i would be looking to get a job within 12 months to get back to what i used to earn.
A great idea, but I think if you didn't find work within a certain timescale, that's it it stops - a little like maternity pay? xx0 -
Flickering_Ember wrote: »As someone currently in receipt of jobseekers' allowance who struggles to find the money to eat, let alone have any luxuries (I am a teetotal, non smoker who hates fast food by the way), please do not tar us all with the same brush.
I have been applying for anything and everything I can to get some self respect back as I hate walking down the street knowing that every working person I pass is paying for me.
There are not many jobs available in my region, and so I am looking as far as the next big city althoughI admit that in order to work there, I could not accept a minimum wage job as it would cost about £30 a day to commute.
However, I know someone who has been unemployed for 9 years and is proud of it; she does nothing to find work and has turned down jobs the jobcentre has offered her and to be honest I think her benefits should be stopped.
In answer to your question:
My rent of a single room in a shared flat is £52.50 a week.
I receive £50.95 a week JSA and it's not enough.
I'd say £150 (to include rent) would be more manageable.
The fact that the poor are marginalised and penalised by being forced to use meters for utilities pushes the cost of living still further upwards...
Great answer. It's hard being on JSA, I couldn't agree more that it is the hardest thing in the world unless you have a brill support network like my parents who would allow you to reside there xx0 -
I think there should be reductions on JSA as time goes on. If people are not finding work then imo they are not looking hard enough.
The is nothing unfair about motivating people with lack of money to get back to work
there isnt enough jobs to go round so thats such a sweeping statementReplies to posts are always welcome, If I have made a mistake in the post, I am human, tell me nicely and it will be corrected. If your reply cannot be nice, has an underlying issue, or you believe that you are God, please post in another forum. Thank you0 -
JimmyTheWig wrote: »I had a thought the other day.
How about if the government offered everyone (working or not working) employment for 15 hours a week earning £10 per hour. Parents taking this option could have free childcare during these hours.
It doesn't matter if these jobs are not worth £10 a hour, as this would replace benefits.
Appropriate work could be found for all - for instance all but the most seriously incapacitated could do something - e.g. listen to school children practicing reading, be a "friend" at an old people's home, etc.
Other people doing this work could transport those unable to get to their jobs. Others could provide the free childcare mentioned earlier.
The key thing about this plan is that it is open to everybody and is self-regulating.
You could do your 15 hours a week and nothing else. Or you could do your 15 hours a week and 10 hours more at Tescos. Then you would be better off than if you didn't work at Tescos.
You'd then have a reference to find other work. If you found better work (e.g. earning more than £10 an hour) than this government scheme then you wouldn't have to do the scheme.
If you were in debt, or saving for something, you could work full time plus this 15 hour a week job.
Would it work? I don't know! But I think it's the best solution I can come up with.
I have a degree in my profession and am still not on £10 an hour. :cool:0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343K Banking & Borrowing
- 250K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.6K Spending & Discounts
- 235.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 607.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173K Life & Family
- 247.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards