Lied to Jobseekers

Bogof_Babe

Jomo wrote: »

I don't know anyone who would choose to spend much time in Calais tbh.

So yes, still very flawed!!

We went to Calais once. It was closed .

donnajunkie

skintandscared wrote: »

Maybe it's quality not quantity that actually secures interviews/jobs?

Personally I don't have an issue with anyone unemployed taking a break and getting away if they can afford it. What I do have an issue with is an unemployed person being paid JSA during that break. If you can afford flights/hotel/spending money, you can afford to buy some food on your week back while you sign on again.

My OH is self employed and he doesn't get paid when we go on holiday, so we have to save enough to cover the loss of a week's earnings as well as everything else. Why shouldn't you?

the holiday could have been paid for and saved up for before they lost their job.
if you want to bring working people into it then ok lets do that. employed people usually get paid holidays. their employer has to pay them as normal and get no work in return. they also get more than 2 weeks a year. an employee who takes holidays is a bigger burden than an unemployed person who goes away.

Sam____2

donnajunkie wrote: »

the holiday could have been paid for and saved up for before they lost their job.
if you want to bring working people into it then ok lets do that. employed people usually get paid holidays. their employer has to pay them as normal and get no work in return. they also get more than 2 weeks a year. an employee who takes holidays is a bigger burden than an unemployed person who goes away.

OMG, I've heard it all now, your bonkers!! :rotfl:

donnajunkie

Jomo wrote: »

I don't know anyone who would choose to spend much time in Calais tbh.

So yes, still very flawed!!

the worthiness of the destination is not relevant.

donnajunkie

Jomo wrote: »

You benefit frauder you...

not really. just pointing out the obvious.

soothyerboots

donnajunkie wrote: »

the holiday could have been paid for and saved up for before they lost their job.
if you want to bring working people into it then ok lets do that. employed people usually get paid holidays. their employer has to pay them as normal and get no work in return. they also get more than 2 weeks a year. an employee who takes holidays is a bigger burden than an unemployed person who goes away.

A bigger burden?!!!! :eek:

AN EMPLOYEE PAYS TAXES AND THEREFORE EARNS THEIR HOLIDAYS YOU STUPID MOO

Bogof_Babe

donnajunkie wrote: »

the holiday could have been paid for and saved up for before they lost their job.
if you want to bring working people into it then ok lets do that. employed people usually get paid holidays. their employer has to pay them as normal and get no work in return. they also get more than 2 weeks a year. an employee who takes holidays is a bigger burden than an unemployed person who goes away.

But for the other 48 weeks of the year the employee is being extremely valuable to his employer and helping him generate profit, or in the case of public sector, helping keep the wheels of the system in motion.

Now, for the other 50 weeks of a JSA claimant's year, can the same be said? How is the taxpayer benefitting?

donnajunkie

Sam___ wrote: »

OMG, I've heard it all now, your bonkers!! :rotfl:

do you want to expand on that? instead of calling someone a name why dont you point out why you disagree?

looby75

Bogof_Babe wrote: »

We went to Calais once. It was closed .

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:my daughter went on the tall ships recently, they spent 3 and a half days sailing to scheveningen in Holland. They got there late Sunday afternoon and everything was closed lol

Bogof_Babe

donnajunkie wrote: »

do you want to expand on that? instead of calling someone a name why dont you point out why you disagree?

See posts #178 & #179.