There are plenty of jobs out there!

ILW

pompeyrich wrote: »

So presumably you are better off financially, on benefits than you would be on NMW. This is what frustrates me, no fit and able person should be better off not working.

Hit the nail on the head there.

Print_Screen

pompeyrich wrote: »

So presumably you are better off financially, on benefits than you would be on NMW. This is what frustrates me, no fit and able person should be better off not working.

Yes unfortunately you can be better off not working then a NMW job as you lose things such as Housing benefit, also if you have to commute you then have to pay for transport.

LadyMissA

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Surely only if you are not able to fulfill your jobseeking requirements with higher paid jobs?

For example if you have to apply for five jobs a week and you apply for five at £40k a year (:rotfl::rotfl:), you don't have to apply for minimum wage ones as well?

I agree that if only NMW jobs are advertised, then you should apply for them.

No it is that you have to be willing to apply for all jobs at all salaries and I am applying for over 11x my agreement so I am covered both ways

LadyMissA

ILW wrote: »

I am totally on your side here. My response was more to the other poster (Getting ready) who believes they should not have to even consider lower paid employment due to their qualifications and will not even apply. But is prepared to go on taking the state handouts in the meantime.

You still haven't answered the question though. IF you can't get interviews at minimum wage (even if you don't want to work for NMW or not) how are you meant to get a job?

LadyMissA

Print_Screen wrote: »

Yes unfortunately you can be better off not working then a NMW job as you lose things such as Housing benefit, also if you have to commute you then have to pay for transport.

I would be better off on NMW as I only get £67.50 , nothing more!

gettingready

transport, lunches, time for travel, clothes, haircut etc etc etc - the list goes on

and at the risk of some having a go at me AGAIN - cost of a dog walker

being at home I can have an egg s/w all day long, wear cheapest legging, not have my nails done and wear my hair in a ponytail with 5 inches roots showing

i am not "better off" but I manage - on NMW I simply could not manage

falko89

LadyMissA wrote: »

I would be better off on NMW as I only get £67.50 , nothing more!

I get £120 HB a week as well, so thats £187 pw I get, Can't be far of 40 hrs on min wage that, part time min wage really wouldn't be worth while.

LadyMissA

falko89 wrote: »

I get £120 HB a week as well, so thats £187 pw I get, Can't be far of 40 hrs on min wage that, part time min wage really wouldn't be worth while.

NMW @ £6.08 for 40 hours take home would be £913.44

So you take approx £210 per week after deductions.

If your rent is £120, that leaves you with £90.

So IF you had to pay to get to work say £50 a week here in London that leaves you with £40 a week to pay all bills and buy food, washing, houshold stuff etc and emergencies.

gettingready

Do not forget the CT....

falko89

I'm not really much worse of on benefits compared to NMW by the time you factor in tax credits, HB, free school meals, dental/health etc So I don't know what that says, benefits to high or NMW to low? Probably NMW to low, still rather be working though