Work for benefits?

Neverland

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I fully agree that in order to receive benefits (let's consider job seekers allowance) that the recipient must have to do something to get that allowance.

I would suggest 50% of the time is spent in a government office applying for or atending job interviews. the remaining 50% of the time could be spent suplimenting government costs i.e. bin collection, park weeding, cleaning chewing gum / litter off streets etc.

Now I'm not condoning that the suppliment benefit seekers replace exisiting workforce, but that they are additional help i.e. a 4 man bin crew could become 5.

I'm sure there are lots of gealth and safety concenrns to consider, but surely there are many positions that this "additional support" could earn their benefits.

At least it would incentivise people to get proper jobs instead of government supplimented benefit work

I think if you were made redundant after thirty or forty years of working and paying taxes with little hope of getting another job you might feel differently

If I'd paid £000,000s in taxes in the past I wouldn't take too well to some troll on the internet saying I should be forced to go and be a bin collector just because I couldn't get a job after six months

Personally I think entitlement to benefits should depend on contribution to society, e.g. tax paying record

wotsthat

Neverland wrote: »

If I'd paid £000,000s in taxes in the past I wouldn't take too well to some troll on the internet saying I should be forced to go and be a bin collector just because I couldn't get a job after six months

The benefits of work are so great both to the individual, the taxpayer and society that it's worth a few of the 'entitled' finding themselves a little disgruntled.

If you've done really great then hopefully there would be enough savings in the bank to make benefit claiming an option rather than necessity.

mcculloch29

You'd be amazed at how many people find themselves out of work and DON'T claim benefits. The system is so demeaning that they rely on savings or redundancy payments rather than spend hours form-filling and waiting in job centres whilst they look for work.

My sister was out of work for a year and never claimed a penny, saving the Gov't thousands in unclaimed JSA, NI contribs, Council Tax benefit, dental/prescription charges etc. A year is extreme, but I know of many others who don't claim when another job is lining up.

Neverland

wotsthat wrote: »

The benefits of work are so great both to the individual, the taxpayer and society that it's worth a few of the 'entitled' finding themselves a little disgruntled.

If you've done really great then hopefully there would be enough savings in the bank to make benefit claiming an option rather than necessity.

I have some sympathy with means tested benefits generally, but I think if you have a record of contributions through taxes you should be treated like a grown-up

Neverland

mcculloch29 wrote: »

You'd be amazed at how many people find themselves out of work and DON'T claim benefits. The system is so demeaning that they rely on savings or redundancy payments rather than spend hours form-filling and waiting in job centres whilst they look for work.

Most people I know who have lost their jobs never went down a job centre because they got redundancy packages

BigAunty

On the benefits forum, people who have been on JSA long enough to qualify for the Work Programme enquire about signing off JSA just to avoid it, wanting to know how long they need to sign off for JSA so their original claim isn't linked and gets classed as a new one, if they can still receive housing benefit without receiving JSA and if they are eligible for rapid reclaim when they do sign on again.

DMFR

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I fully agree that in order to receive benefits (let's consider job seekers allowance) that the recipient must have to do something to get that allowance.

I would suggest 50% of the time is spent in a government office applying for or atending job interviews. the remaining 50% of the time could be spent suplimenting government costs i.e. bin collection, park weeding, cleaning chewing gum / litter off streets etc.

Now I'm not condoning that the suppliment benefit seekers replace exisiting workforce, but that they are additional help i.e. a 4 man bin crew could become 5.

I'm sure there are lots of gealth and safety concenrns to consider, but surely there are many positions that this "additional support" could earn their benefits.

At least it would incentivise people to get proper jobs instead of government supplimented benefit work

Do people who are "sentenced" to community service do that, and if not why not?

IveSeenTheLight

Neverland wrote: »

I think if you were made redundant after thirty or forty years of working and paying taxes with little hope of getting another job you might feel differently

Let's consider this..............
There are many opportunities for experienced people to get work rather than claim job seekers allowance.
Maybe the options are limited compared to opportunities in their youth, but there are still opportunities.

Regardless of whether I had worked 1, 20 or 40 years, I don't believe that there should be a "hand out" for doing nowt.
Indeed, I might enjoy the variance of weeding the local parks etc whilst considering my options

Neverland wrote: »

If I'd paid £000,000s in taxes in the past I wouldn't take too well to some troll on the internet saying I should be forced to go and be a bin collector just because I couldn't get a job after six months

Interesting argument point that you are inferring I'm a troll because I post my beliefs, nevertheless.....

"If I's paid £000.000's in tax" (I doubt you mean nothing so will assume you mean hundreds of thousands), we'll I have paid that in tax over my 22 year working life.

If my position in life changed that I didn't have gainful employment, I still would believe that I ought to earn my benefit rather than get it for nothing.

It's the society of today that believe that it's their entitlement that has the detrimental effect on the economy as it stands.

Neverland wrote: »

Personally I think entitlement to benefits should depend on contribution to society, e.g. tax paying record

I've said a similar thing before as an option with regards to pension.
Build up a pot during working life and if times fall hard you have to dip into that pot.
If upon retirement you have not used the pot, it's there for you to enjoy.

IveSeenTheLight

DMFR wrote: »

Do people who are "sentenced" to community service do that, and if not why not?

Not sure, but if not, I would agree why not.

I would not liken "earning your benefits" to community service.

i would simply state that if you want to receive something for receiving a "jobseekers allowance" you should have to earn that renumeration.

Arguably, If you can demonstrate 37.5 hours per week towards seeking a job, then you could say that you have "earned" the job seekers benefit, but realistically, how many job seekers effectively and efficiently spend the whole working week seeking a job?

To that end, is it unreasonable to ask job seekers to make up the time?

heathcote123

purch wrote: »

We have a minimum wage in this country.

If you are working, whether casual, temporary, permanent or on a work trial the least you should expect is minimum wage in return for your labour.

Expecting people to do a Job that under normal circumstances would be paid a proper wage, in return for far lesser amount in benefits is not what I would expect from a decent society.

By all means make it compulsory for benefit claimants to undertake work trials, but at the very least pay them a proper wage whilst they do so.

Unfortunately in the real world, some peoples labour simply isn't worth minimum wage. Do we write them off forever? or give them to opportunity to enhance their value?