Surely this cannot be right??

Krasnoludek

So how can they help you with training if they dont have any money to pay for it ?? Bizarre. Our benefits system is weighted to those who dont want to work frankly and those who work and then find themselves redundant are up the creek without a paddle

Is the New Deal payment £60.50 a week does anyone know

K x

SusieWinwood

It's the princely sum of £60.50 yes.

This is the link to their site http://www.jobcentreplus.gov.uk/JCP/Customers/outofworkhelplookingforwork/Getting_job_ready/Programmes_to_get_you_ready/New_Deal/

max2009

May i ask how old he is ?

Joannef_2

You have to have been out of work for at least 18 months though. So it looks like a year after they stop paying JSA that you are eligible for the New Deal.

max2009

New deal is after 6 months for 50+

Joannef_2

max2009 wrote: »

New deal is after 6 months actually.

Is this for all ages because on their website it says 18 months for over 25's?

SusieWinwood

He is 39

Susie

Judith_W

Just a thought, with the money for the New Deal training, its the end of the tax year in a couple of weeks so I can understand that the funds have run out. I reckon if you ask again early April they'll know where they stand a bit better?

ceridwen

O.P. - sorry to hear about this and I can quite understand why you are upset. I would think 6 months as a time limit for finding a job in in the current economic climate may well not be realistic. I'm sorry to hear you are in this position - but yes....it seriously really is true basically that there is in effect NO income at all for someone after 6 months unemployment if they are married or partnered-up (barring any chance at this "New Deal" scheme). Its wrong. I know that. You know that. But I cant see the Government treating people as individuals in their own right any time soon unfortunately - even though its clearly contributing to many "married couples" (IYSWIM) living apart - which doesnt exactly make for the stable family homes that children are entitled to expect that they will be brought up in.

Unfortunately - the whole basic ethos behind unemployment money was thought out at a time when marriage was the default option for the vast majority of people and married couples were deemed to have entered an economic (as well as a romantic) arrangement. It isnt standing up very well to the different way that things are in the 21st Century - where many people live together rather than getting married and a large proportion of people who decide to get married/live together have started this on the present-day basis of marriage/living together being purely a personal decision and done for "romantic" reasons and they dont expect the State to regard them as an "economic entity" just because of whatever relationship decisions they make.

Unfortunately - the State still does regard a couple as being an "economic entity" (and you'll still find many people agreeing with this at present and lambasting you for thinking otherwise) - hence the DWP expects you to support another adult once they have been unemployed for 6 months - because you are married to/living with them.

(I remember reading an article recently about just how many couples are "living apart together" and I'm sure this is largely for economic reasons - we were talking a huge number of couples....think it was somewhere around 1 million or more people that are doing this and I would think this is a large part of the reason why...)

SomeBozo

SusieWinwood wrote: »

Somebozo - quite an apt usename I feel!

Susie

Thanks for reading my sig! Appreciated.

Bozo