Jobcentres send you 90 miles for job?

skintandscared_2

I travel 60 mins each way to work every day, but I do that to earn a better salary than I would in my home town. I reckon the difference in salary is about £15k, which makes the £3.5k a year on a train ticket worthwhile. There is no way I could afford those fares on minimum wage AND pay my bills. Travelling that sort of distance is only bearable/viable if you can earn MORE than the difference in salary of working near home.

Mind you, with jobs a lot more scarce these days, I'm afraid it makes more sense to move where the jobs are if you can't afford to travel. Just waiting for a job on your doorstep isn't really an option any more.

I count myself incredibly fortunate that I have never been unemployed and I think it's particularly hard at the moment for people looking for full time jobs.

HappyMJ

skintandscared wrote: »

Mind you, with jobs a lot more scarce these days, I'm afraid it makes more sense to move where the jobs are if you can't afford to travel. Just waiting for a job on your doorstep isn't really an option any more.

It's very difficult moving. First you need a job to rent somewhere to pay the rent and the wage has to be high enough to not require any housing benefit at all. Which comes back to the £7.50 that I need hourly to earn enough to be able to move and rent somewhere at one third of my income without the need to claim. I do look for those jobs out of area but I'll only accept NMW if the job is around the corner (walking distance) in my local area. I did used to travel 1hr 45mins to a job 30 miles away by train and costing me £21 per day (now it's £23 per day) but I was on £17.50 per hour. It was worth it.

Fiddlestick

2sides2everystory wrote: »

You haven't a clue what it is like for people who have to visit Job Centres in 2011. Not a flaming clue.

Yes I do - I spent several months unemployed after a redundancy late last year.

robus

Marisco wrote: »

How the hell is someone with a couple of kids supposed to do that?? Yes, fine if it's the husband with a wife at home looking after the kids, or vice versa, but it's not realistic for most people is it?? And I presume they are not on NMW then?

ETA, Why don't they just live in Manchester and save all the travelling?

Wife at home, husband at work - normal life isn't it?

His job in Manchester was NNM +20%. That's why he couldn't afford travel home - cheaper to stay in digs.

Wife didn't want to leave her family in Somerset.

robus

bestpud wrote: »

Soo, 25% of income on travelling...

And if rent and bills etc makes up 80% of your income...?

Don't be silly - you cut back to make sure that the household expenditure didn't exceed 75%!!!

Does everybody think it so wrong to work and take home less than what they would get on benefit?

robus

DCFC79 wrote: »

I was told i had to look for work up to an hours travelling time or driving time in my case.

In which case living in and around Manchester and working in and around Birmingham.

I agree with you entirely. You go to where the work is, and certainly don't expect the work to come to you.

I have a family member who can't find a job in the UK that pays much more than £10 ph. He's a skilled and specialised welder of 40 years. So he goes to where the work is. In the last 6 months he's worked in Indonesia - once and Nigeria - twice.

For all of that he is bringing home after all expenses, no more than he was earning in the UK in the petro-chemical industry 10 years ago!

rogerblack

HappyMJ wrote: »

It's very difficult moving.

In addition - for those on benefits, and possibly in and out of work - moving has other costs.

If you move away from your home area, in a couple of years, when childcare is needed due to a growing family, relations can't help out, meaning getting or keeping in work is harder.

Close friends and relatives can't help you find work.

The list goes on and on.

robus

HappyMJ wrote: »

There is nothing to worry about. If you declare the car is not available you can turn down any job in the city that is offered to you without fear of sanction. If one was offered that paid well you are welcome to take it if you wanted it then drive there if you wished.

So you would lie to avoid having to take the job.

Where is the determination to do whatever, wherever to get off benefits.

In 5 pages of this thread I have seen every excuse possible as to why people think that they should not work where they are told to go.

God help us if there is another World War!!

Oldernotwiser

rogerblack wrote: »

In addition - for those on benefits, and possibly in and out of work - moving has other costs.

If you move away from your home area, in a couple of years, when childcare is needed due to a growing family, relations can't help out, meaning getting or keeping in work is harder.

Close friends and relatives can't help you find work.

The list goes on and on.

The days when people lived round the corner from all their family are long gone - even Coronation Street isn't like that any more.

Marisco

robus wrote: »

Don't be silly - you cut back to make sure that the household expenditure didn't exceed 75%!!!

Does everybody think it so wrong to work and take home less than what they would get on benefit?

If you are struggling to manage on benefits, how does it make sense to work for even less money????