universal credit

langold

ive been told when your youngest is 5 you have tyo find work part time and your other half has to work full time on at least national minimum wage, but if your other half is earning the equilivant of nwm plus nwm for part time i.e: about £8 a hour will that mean i will not have to find work till my 5 year old is 13?

Sixer

The proposals (and they are only proposals at the moment) are for a cash threshold.

For a couple with children aged 5 and over and under 12, this will be 1 x 35 (full time hours) x NMW plus 1 x "number of hours compatible with school" x NMW.

They haven't specifically defined "hours compatible with school" but some documentation suggests 20 hours would be the ball park.

So, roughly £334 per week.

For couples whose children are all aged 12 and over, it would be 35 x NMW x 2 (2 full-time workers). Or £425 a week.

It doesn't matter who earns what. One person can earn it all. Or both people can earn some of it each.

You can still get UC if you earn less. But if you earn less you have a choice:

Conditionality (prove you're seeking more/better paid work as JSA claimants do now) and get UC on what you earn.

No conditionality, but get UC on your threshold sum, not on what you earn.

Toomuchdebt

What about for single parents?I have 6 children oldest is 17 youngest is almost 2 and I currently work 16 3/4 hours a week.I would find it difficult to do more hours as I work evenings when the older kids are home and already finish late at night, and have to be up at 7am.If I had to do more hours I would not get enough sleep.Or does this not apply when kids are under 5?

Sixer

Toomuchdebt wrote: »

What about for single parents?I have 6 children oldest is 17 youngest is almost 2 and I currently work 16 3/4 hours a week.I would find it difficult to do more hours as I work evenings when the older kids are home and already finish late at night, and have to be up at 7am.If I had to do more hours I would not get enough sleep.Or does this not apply when kids are under 5?

Proposals - and please note they're only proposals so far - say that claimants with children under 5 will have no conditionality set. And no cash threshold.

Single parents:

Under 5: no conditionality, no cash threshold.
5-11: cash threshold "compatible with school hours" x NMW (probably 20ish hours)
12+ cash threshold of NMW x 35

[Deleted User]

I have to admit I haven't read anything about these threshold, but what with reading the white paper for RTI as well I think I may have nodded off part way through! Lol!
So I am a single Mum to a boy of 12 I work 17.5 hours and my wage is approx £11.25 at the moment as I haven't had a rise for 3 years due to NJC payfreeze :-( so under Universal credit I would be slightly under?

Sixer

Deleted_User wrote: »

I have to admit I haven't read anything about these threshold, but what with reading the white paper for RTI as well I think I may have nodded off part way through! Lol!
So I am a single Mum to a boy of 12 I work 17.5 hours and my wage is approx £11.25 at the moment as I haven't had a rise for 3 years due to NJC payfreeze :-( so under Universal credit I would be slightly under?

Looks like about £16 under, yes (£196 for threshold of £212).

Not sure what they'd do in these borderline cases though.

The more you look into this, the more complicated (and not simplifying) it gets!

You'd need to look for a mini-job, which seems to be the government flavour of the month. Avon, mystery shopping, whatever to get you to £212. Or face jobseeking conditionality.

Mind you, we don't know how strict the conditionality is yet. It might be just a meeting every quarter or somesuch.

[Deleted User]

Thanks for that Sixer. Hopefully by the time this kicks in I shall get a pay increase, though we are also considering all the extra work RTI will cause for us so there may be opportunity to increase my hours, which I shall be more inclined to take.

dseventy

Deleted_User wrote: »

So I am a single Mum to a boy of 12 I work 17.5 hours ?

When you read comments like that though I see why (at least the premise) of UC is a good idea.

People with an older child (ie not a baby) should be looking to work more than 17.5 hours!

Bring it on I say!

D70

Anubis_2

Sixer, what does the earnings conditionality mean?

Sorry not read much and brain is fogged so not grasping the meaning of earnings conditionality, (and forgetting as soon as I think I remember.)

ie - if someone is "under" the amount does that mean they can't receive UC until they reach the proposed amount, or that they have to reach the amount to be entitled?

[Deleted User]

dseventy wrote: »

When you read comments like that though I see why (at least the premise) of UC is a good idea.

People with an older child (ie not a baby) should be looking to work more than 17.5 hours!

Bring it on I say!

D70

Yes I agree too, but not necessarily full time. I work 3 days flexi which means I can just about fit my hours in and still be there for my Son before and after School. If I had to work 9 till 5 that would increase my travel time to 2 hours a day due to traveling on peak. I would not be happy leaving at 8am and not getting home until 6pm as I don't want my child turning into some wildchild cause he's left to his own devices 3 hours a day. Then I would need to pay for childcare in holidays.... So what is the happy medium? At least working Mum's like myself are trying to support ourselves, we could choose to sit at home and not actually be much worse off financially.

[Deleted User]

Anubis wrote: »

Sixer, what does the earnings conditionality mean?

Sorry not read much and brain is fogged so not grasping the meaning of earnings conditionality, (and forgetting as soon as I think I remember.)

ie - if someone is "under" the amount does that mean they can't receive UC until they reach the proposed amount, or that they have to reach the amount to be entitled?

I THINK if I'm understanding it correctly, you are assessed as if you are earning that threshold, regardless to if you are or not. Universal Credit Calcs will assume you are.