We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Universal Credit for [merged]
Comments
-
Why would those in full time employment be compelled to work an additional job...?!
Many people routinely work a 45 hours week which is something you claim you are unable to do without sacrificing quality of life...That's the equivalent of working 8am or 9am to 6pm, 5 days a week.
It's hardly slavery.
Does that not depend on where you live/work? Someone could live 2hrs away from their work, so they'd have to leave the house at 6am to get to work, and not get home till 8pm. Anyway we are getting off the point. It might not always be possible to work 2 part time jobs because of the hours of one of them. Apart from that, it leaves less jobs for everyone else! I don't think anyone could argue that something doesn't need to be done re the Welfare bill, but I just question if this is the right way to go about it.0 -
That depends on their employer, not you. If an employer wants you to work different hours, then how can you juggle your time, no matter how good you are at time management? For instance, one week you might have to work 4 hrs per day variable, the next 5 hours for 3 days etc, etc. How could you fit another job in, when you don't know if you'll get called to your "original" job or not? The only way it would work well would be if you had a 9 to 5 job, then got bar work from 7 to whenever.
Oh's daughter has a job like that, her hours vary from day to day, they add a couple of hours here and there, depending on business needs. I don't think they'd like it if she had to say, sorry cannot do it as I'm working at my other job. She gets hours dependant on the needs of the business, not for her convenience.
My granddaughter got offered a job, that she would have loved to take, but because she had to catch the bus at a certain time to get there, she had to turn it down. She wasn't able to get childcare at that time in the morning, the after school club started too late, and her mother leaves the house at 7am to get to her own work. She now does Avon to get some money in, and as she has "the gift of the gab" she is doing well, but still wants a full time job, but needs to find a more "child friendly" job. So yes, I think it might be a good idea to tailor it to peoples' individual circumstances, a "one size fits all" is never a good idea.
I agree that these type of working hours make it diifficult to get another job, unless it is something like a twilight shift.(AKA HRH_MUngo)
Member #10 of £2 savers club
Imagine someone holding forth on biology whose only knowledge of the subject is the Book of British Birds, and you have a rough idea of what it feels like to read Richard Dawkins on theology: Terry Eagleton0 -
If the conditions are as stringent as JSA (and I'm only going on what I have read on here re job searching, as it's donkeys since I claimed the dole) then quite a few people will be sanctioned! They have to prove they have tried for x number of jobs, willing to travel 90 mins each way etc, how can people with kids travel that amount of time for a second job? The cost of child care would be ridiculous, as maybe the partners work wouldn't "gel" with the other.
I used to leave the house at 8am and get home at 5.30 ish, would I be expected to then travel an hour and a half to go to another job? So when are people supposed to have some sort of life? Is that all there is to life, work? Thank god I'm retired! Maybe if employers paid living wages, there would be no need for all this juggling!!!
I claimed JSA for 3 weeks in the summer, I had to apply for 4 jobs a week, write 3 letters a week and visit the JCP online site daily. Hardly taxing, and about 30 mins worth a week, unless you had a big application form, but even then, that was about an hour.Moving onto a better place...Ciao :wave:0 -
Is universal credit only going to mean less money for those in work or wanting to go back to work? What about households with loads of kids where neither parent works (or intends to). Is universal credit going to do anything to get them into work?0
-
seven-day-weekend wrote: »They have not been eligible to apply for any.
Then they probably wouldn't be eligible for UC anyway.0 -
A lot of the sick that were on non means tested benefits are going to get nothing as they're supposed to be supported by their partner, putting even more pressure on one very basic wage in some cases.
Those that were young when they got sick and who have had jobs on and off depending on their health condition have been given a reprieve and they will get the contribution ESA for a year even though they don't have enough NI......
In my support group as one person said who's gong to employ a lot of us that have varying symptoms, one day they can go in and then be off for a few days and so on. You can exactly regulate a varying condition to time restrictions! No employer in their right mind would take a lot of people with my condition....
Even a few years the job centre gave up helping me find a job as no-one would employ me as I could only do up to 10 hours then, given the current recession I doubt there will be a queue of employers beating a path to the job-centre just waiting to sign everyone up!
UC isn't replacing any non-means tested or contributory benefits such as DLA or ESA(C), don't believe all the scare stories.
It will make it a lot easier and more beneficial financially for people who go into and out of work regularly due to health/disability issues. Now it's a complete nightmare and not worth it financially anyway.0 -
Is universal credit only going to mean less money for those in work or wanting to go back to work? What about households with loads of kids where neither parent works (or intends to). Is universal credit going to do anything to get them into work?
No, generally it'll make things better for those working low hours/on low pay. There are quite big disregards for earnings (compared to IS/JSA) and once above the disregard the taper rates are lower (65% as opposed to 100% in JSA/IS)0 -
No, generally it'll make things better for those working low hours/on low pay. There are quite big disregards for earnings (compared to IS/JSA) and once above the disregard the taper rates are lower (65% as opposed to 100% in JSA/IS)
I can't see how. From what's been said earlier on the thread it'll make life harder for anyone working less than 35 hours, unless they're getting a whopping hourly rate.Moving onto a better place...Ciao :wave:0 -
I can't see how. From what's been said earlier on the thread it'll make life harder for anyone working less than 35 hours, unless they're getting a whopping hourly rate.
If you're on JSA you're subject to conditionality now anyway, that won't change. If you're on IS/ESA then conditionality will probably be the same as now.
But what I meant was that if you're on IS/JSA/ESA (not working at all) and take a few hours work, you'll be much better off than now. The conditionality will stay the same.
It's when you work over 16 hours or earn too much for JSA/IS/ESA that the conditionaility rules bite where they didn't before.0 -
If you're on JSA you're subject to conditionality now anyway, that won't change. If you're on IS/ESA then conditionality will probably be the same as now.
But what I meant was that if you're on IS/JSA/ESA (not working at all) and take a few hours work, you'll be much better off than now. The conditionality will stay the same.
It's when you work over 16 hours or earn too much for JSA/IS/ESA that the conditionaility rules bite where they didn't before.
One of the main things they will do with UC is use it as a means to increase conditionality.
You can safely assume that conditionality on JSA will increase, and that conditionality on ESA also will increase (in fact, If I recall, they were mentioning plans to put conditionality on some people in the support group).
You have to remember, the government is being very very devious with the implementation of universal credit.
The bill going through parliament is basically a skeleton framework, little more, and the flesh of the bill is being left out.
The nitty gritty details can be added, and altered via additions once the bill is passed through parliament and enacted.
This is just a means to opening the door wide open so they can do as they please really.[greenhighlight]but it matters when the most senior politician in the land is happy to use language and examples that are simply not true.
[/greenhighlight][redtitle]
The impact of this is to stigmatise people on benefits,
and we should be deeply worried about that[/redtitle](house of lords debate, talking about Cameron)0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards