Can you be forced to give up employment to get esa

rogerblack

woodbine wrote: »

as someone with severe epilepsy i hate the word "epileptic"

What's the preferred term?

NASA_2

rogerblack wrote: »

What's the preferred term?

Epiliptec defines someone bytheir disability.

'Someone who has epilepsy' is probably a better phrase.

sunnyone

woodbine wrote: »

as someone with severe epilepsy i hate the word "epileptic"

I hate the term wheelchair bound, Im not bound to my wheelchair, its a mobility aid.

My SM hates the term epileptic too, she has a few diffrent daft names for her problem and virtually no one knows that she has had epilepsy for 45 years.

Bootsalebargains

jetplane wrote: »

What is this sickness payment from his employer? If they have been paying it for 8 years it must be some sort of enhanced scheme. Do they pay it on the basis of him receiving Incapacity or on their own occ health or GP judging him unfit for work? Can they not retire him on this sickness payment?

You need to find this out as it is possible that even if he can't get ESA if he is found fit he may still get his employers payment.

There are some employer schemes which have generous clauses in them. eg. I remember many years ago a fireman who had an extra sickness enhancement which could only be paid if he was NOT entitled to Incapacity Benefit (although he had to try to qualify for any state scheme first). The employer scheme was more generous so he had to claim IB and fail the appeal.

It is called a phi (prolonged health insurance) it was a package built into his pension that if you are long long term sick they pay out a certain amount of your wages. They have said they will never finish him and he is able to stay on this benefit for the rest of his life as long as long their works doctor and our doctor says he cannot do the job he was trained for (chemical technician)

skintandscared_2

NASA wrote: »

Epiliptec defines someone bytheir disability.

'Someone who has epilepsy' is probably a better phrase.

They didn't refer to the person as "epileptic". They referred to an "epileptic attack". What's wrong with that?! It's not in any way derogatory, it's explaining what type of attack the person has/had. You wouldn't say that someone had an "epilepsy attack". Just ridiculous.

NASA_2

skintandscared wrote: »

They didn't refer to the person as "epileptic". They referred to an "epileptic attack". What's wrong with that?! It's not in any way derogatory, it's explaining what type of attack the person has/had. You wouldn't say that someone had an "epilepsy attack". Just ridiculous.

I never accused anyone of anything.

I was just pointing out what I thought could be offensive based on what (Woodbine?) said. I didnt even look at the post in question.

Just stating that defining people by a disability, if it was done, is usually offensive.

rogerblack

NASA wrote: »

I never accused anyone of anything.

I was just pointing out what I thought could be offensive based on what (Woodbine?) said. I didnt even look at the post in question.

Just stating that defining people by a disability, if it was done, is usually offensive.

Then you're gonna be really upset i you ever need to claim benefits.

I referred to 'a person that has an epileptic attack every 5 days' - because this frequency was important - if it was once every nine days, they wouldn't qualify (on this alone) for ESA.
I can't think of another way to phrase this.
I could have quoted my recent submission:
" [FONT=Arial, sans-serif]13. In R(IB)2/07, the Tribunal of Commissioners indicated at paragraph1 of their decision:[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif] “We hold that a person has an episode of “altered consciousness” when he or she is no longer properly aware of his surroundings or his condition, so as to be incapable of any deliberate act.”[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]14. In my respectful opinion, insofar as it creates a test of the degree of severity of an episode of altered consciousness, R(IB)2/07 is to be understood as a decision on the previous legislative regime of incapacity benefit and confined to that context. The introduction, for employment and support allowance purposes, of a yardstick of whether an episode “result in significantly disrupted awareness or concentration” provides a statutory measure of the severity of impact which renders inapplicable for ESA purposes the yardstick for incapacity benefit purposes created by R(IB)2/07 that a claimant be “incapable of any deliberate act”.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The descriptor is “At least once a week, has an involuntary episode of lost or altered consciousness, resulting in significantly disrupted awareness or concentration.”. In the absence of the old IB case-law test of 'incapable of any deliberate act' – what does this mean?[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The frequency is obvious, as is 'involuntary episode'. I suggest that it could reasonably be interpreted in the context of ESA as 'A change in the claimants conscious state so that significantly more descriptors apply during that episode'."[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]But the other form of words seemed shorter, though less accurate.
[/FONT]

NASA_2

Look. I really couldnt give a !!!!. I was trying to interpret what someone above me was trying to say.

Use whatever terminology you want.

jetplane

It is called a phi (prolonged health insurance) it was a package built into his pension that if you are long long term sick they pay out a certain amount of your wages. They have said they will never finish him and he is able to stay on this benefit for the rest of his life as long as long their works doctor and our doctor says he cannot do the job he was trained for (chemical technician)

Therefore even if ATOS find him fit for work he will still receive his employers insurance as it is down to his works Dr and his GP and they are independant of the DWP. He will then need to appeal the ESA and be paid while appealing. However in April 2012 ESA will no longer be paid indefinately it will be means tested after 12 months. So depending on your household income it may end anyway.

rogerblack

jetplane wrote: »

T However in April 2012 ESA will no longer be paid indefinately it will be means tested after 12 months. So depending on your household income it may end anyway.

For those in the support group, it's not time-limited.