Chain store in towns christmas workers are all unpaid? Whatever next!

richardc1983

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

it's not just £65.70 for some though is it. It's £65.70 a week, plus their housing benefits and council tax benefits and any other benefits they get. So should they get minimum wage, plus their other benefits? or have their other benefits stopped and paid minimum wage for the duration?
If they get the rest of their benefits and rent etc paid, and still have £65.70 in their pocket at the end of the week then they're not doing too badly are they

Hit the nail on the head there! They WILL get all other beneifts and rent/council tax probably even food parcels so £65.70 a week is more than I have left for my self!!!! I am lucky to have £10 sometimes.

richardc1983

topsales wrote: »

That's all very well but if it is a workscheme shouldn't it be in charity shops etc not making profits for Poundland?

Since when have you seen a charity shop with 50 places over xmas?

dekaspace

richardc1983 wrote: »

Many do yes as its too easy to live on benefits for some.

I am the type of person who works hard... i try to get overtime in whenever I can so I can afford to go on holidays or buy nice things for my self.

The type of work I do is irrelevant because if I wasnt in this job I would be doing some other job (whether it be cleaning or call centre work) to make an honest living and have some pride in myself. Its how I was brought up.

The way you worded that is that people on benefits dont have a honest living or pride in themselves, also it comes across from the part about working in cleaning or call centre that you assume that people signing on arent willing to work those sort of jobs.

To say its easy to live on benefits is too huge to correctly answer, if someone can barely buy food and lives off tins of beans on benefits and then a job comes up that means they are worse off and works over 40 hours then by being on benefits it is "easier" than working that doesnt really mean the person is lazy or whatever for not taking the job but being sensible, but if someone had the chance to work for a job that wasnt too hard and paid above minimum wage with good hours and easy to get to and decides to stay on benefits then often that is easy for them but in a totally different way.

richardc1983

LadyMissA wrote: »

yeah I watch tv all day

Dont take offence so easily... I assume these schemes are to get the downright lazy who have been on JSA for over two years! Thats where they should be starting rather than the recent unemployed!

LadyMissA

richardc1983 wrote: »

Dont take offence so easily... I assume these schemes are to get the downright lazy who have been on JSA for over two years! Thats where they should be starting rather than the recent unemployed!

It was sarcasm. MY TV doesnt go on till the afternoon as can't afford the electric as I need that for the laptop and my job searches.

No the schemes are for people on the WP who have been out of work a year or more like me - but I haven't been sent on any said scheme.

dekaspace

richardc1983 wrote: »

Hit the nail on the head there! They WILL get all other beneifts and rent/council tax probably even food parcels so £65.70 a week is more than I have left for my self!!!! I am lucky to have £10 sometimes.

Food parcels dont exist anymore I was told, when I had a giro stolen and just a few tins of tuna in cupboard and some pasta and wasnt paid for over 10 days I was told I could get no help from anywhere.

And you do realise that bills have to come off the £65(or £53) a week and CT benefit doesnt cover the entire amount? And that many times housing benefit doesnt cover the whole amount(at one point I was topping up £25 a week!)

When I worked before, I was refused housing benefit so after paying rent and electric and before buying food I was lucky to have about £3 a week for travel to work or anything, I stuck at the job but would of been incredibly better off on benefits, that didnt mean I was lazy for not wanting to work it just means I wasnt getting paid much so a person shouldnt get judged the same for that situation then being far better off working.

richardc1983

dekaspace wrote: »

The way you worded that is that people on benefits dont have a honest living or pride in themselves, also it comes across from the part about working in cleaning or call centre that you assume that people signing on arent willing to work those sort of jobs.

To say its easy to live on benefits is too huge to correctly answer, if someone can barely buy food and lives off tins of beans on benefits and then a job comes up that means they are worse off and works over 40 hours then by being on benefits it is "easier" than working that doesnt really mean the person is lazy or whatever for not taking the job but being sensible, but if someone had the chance to work for a job that wasnt too hard and paid above minimum wage with good hours and easy to get to and decides to stay on benefits then often that is easy for them but in a totally different way.

For god sake why do people take offence, people on benefits that annoy me are the ones who dont have any intention of working. If its genuine then I have no problemsw ith that as would be the same if it happened to me however there is the lazy folk who dont want to work and spend most of their time on here defending their reasons to stay at home or turn down a job.

If you turn down a job cos it is minimum wage you are choosing to stay on benefits because it pays more no doubt! This is the wrong way of thinking and the government need to change that... If it was easier to stay on benefits then I would prob do the same but this doesnt get people back into work it just makes people fussy and more follow suit.

I know people whoi have turned down cleaning jobs because they "wont be a cleaner" they want to something specific in retail! You can not be like this you must take what you can... minimum wage so what its an honest living without relying on state handouts. It really infuriates me and if anyone takes offence then so be it I think I have made it clear the type I am talking about.

richardc1983

LadyMissA wrote: »

It was sarcasm. MY TV doesnt go on till the afternoon as can't afford the electric as I need that for the laptop and my job searches.

No the schemes are for people on the WP who have been out of work a year or more like me - but I haven't been sent on any said scheme.

Ok well good on you for looking but can I just ask, what is the reason for not taking a job? there are plenty out there? Is it because you are better off financially on benefits?

The longer you are out of work the harder it is to get a job.

LadyMissA

richardc1983 wrote: »

If you turn down a job cos it is minimum wage you are choosing to stay on benefits because it pays more no doubt! This is the wrong way of thinking and the government need to change that... If it was easier to stay on benefits then I would prob do the same but this doesnt get people back into work it just makes people fussy and more follow suit.

I can't get an interview at minimum wage as over qualified! I do not chose to be out of work!

richardc1983

dekaspace wrote: »

Food parcels dont exist anymore I was told, when I had a giro stolen and just a few tins of tuna in cupboard and some pasta and wasnt paid for over 10 days I was told I could get no help from anywhere.

And you do realise that bills have to come off the £65(or £53) a week and CT benefit doesnt cover the entire amount? And that many times housing benefit doesnt cover the whole amount(at one point I was topping up £25 a week!)

When I worked before, I was refused housing benefit so after paying rent and electric and before buying food I was lucky to have about £3 a week for travel to work or anything, I stuck at the job but would of been incredibly better off on benefits, that didnt mean I was lazy for not wanting to work it just means I wasnt getting paid much so a person shouldnt get judged the same for that situation then being far better off working.

I was watching the one show last night on bbc1 and it had some woman on benefits and she had food parcels to help them eat: What a lazy woman she was. This woman didnt work cos she doesn't want to be doing a job she will be unhappy in! Has big tv though so her kids "can have the things they want" she said. Sorry love but you have it all wrong. She even had a pedigree dog that cost £15 a week in tv and large 50" tv cos her kids wanted it.