universal credit

Anubis_2

Deleted_User wrote: »

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.

So, if someone is not working is assessed as though they are, they will get no help with housing or food?

nannytone_2

of course not ...
but they will have to be seeking employment in the same way that someone on JSA is. *( unless excused for being ill/disabled or for having a child under 5)

Anubis_2

nannytone wrote: »

of course not ...
but they will have to be seeking employment in the same way that someone on JSA is. *( unless excused for being ill/disabled or for having a child under 5)

So they won't get help or will?

I am presuming you mean "of course not" in that they will get help?

All these changes are confusing.... I am unsure why they changed benefits (IB to ESA) for example recently, only to have to spend millions again. It would have been better to focus on UC.

Spendless

Deleted_User wrote: »

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.

Wouldn't you be subject to 35 x NMW when he turns 13, in the same way 2 parent households would be subject to 2 x 35hrs @ NMW when youngest turns 13? I've a 12 yo boy and have no reservations about leaving him for a few hours per day term-time, school hols though are a bit of an issue, not with paying childcare costs which are just a reality of life and should be budgeted for but in what is available. Here, school holiday clubs stop at end of yr 6/12th birthday. The sports clubs which take to an older age don't have start and finish times compatable with f-time working and 12 is a bit young to leave all day every day.

Sixer

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?

If a claimant is under the cash threshold they have a choice:

Get UC calculated on the cash threshold not what they actually earn

Get UC on what they actually earn and accept jobseeking conditionality similar to the conditionality JSA claimants have (prove you're looking for more/better paid work on a regular basis)

Sixer

Spendless wrote: »

Wouldn't you be subject to 35 x NMW when he turns 13, in the same way 2 parent households would be subject to 2 x 35hrs @ NMW when youngest turns 13?

She'd be subject to 35 x NMW with a child of 12. It's 12 and up. She knows that. It's not the HOURS; it's the CASH. Joanne earns significantly more than NMW. She's trying to make a cash threshold of £212 (NMW x 35) and actually earns £196. She doesn't need to make up her hours to 35; she needs to make up her cash to £212.

And, as I say, we don't know what UC conditionality will look like. They can hardly make people who are actually working sign on once a fortnight, can they? So it'll probably be something more akin to a monthly or a quarterly appointment, where you'll be required to prove you're looking for more/better paid work,.

delain

So I have two under 5 (nearly 2 year old, and 3 month baby) I am intending to start OU to be able to have a term time job when baby goes to school, until baby is 5 is OHs job (37 hours I think, about £3 ph over NMW) enough to satisfy them? Or should I start looking for an evening job now? That does restrict me to evenings as childcare for 5 is just not available here and would cost more than I could earn anyway!

Sixer

delain wrote: »

So I have two under 5 (nearly 2 year old, and 3 month baby) I am intending to start OU to be able to have a term time job when baby goes to school, until baby is 5 is OHs job (37 hours I think, about £3 ph over NMW) enough to satisfy them? Or should I start looking for an evening job now? That does restrict me to evenings as childcare for 5 is just not available here and would cost more than I could earn anyway!

Yes, you'd be fine. It's CASH not HOURS.

For couples:

Children under 5 = 35 x NMW
Children 5-11 = 35 x NMW + 20ish x NMW
Children 12+ = 35 x NMW + 35 x NMW

Spendless

Sixer wrote: »

She'd be subject to 35 x NMW with a child of 12. It's 12 and up. She knows that. It's not the HOURS; it's the CASH. Joanne earns significantly more than NMW. She's trying to make a cash threshold of £212 (NMW x 35) and actually earns £196. She doesn't need to make up her hours to 35; she needs to make up her cash to £212.

And, as I say, we don't know what UC conditionality will look like. They can hardly make people who are actually working sign on once a fortnight, can they? So it'll probably be something more akin to a monthly or a quarterly appointment, where you'll be required to prove you're looking for more/better paid work,.

Yes I realise it's to do with the cash but for a single parent with an older child, what I'm asking is if they will be subject to earning the cash equivalent of 35 x NMW rather than 'part-time' hours @ NMW? I hadn't done the maths so hadn't realised 35 x nmw worked out at £212. I'm pretty sure all the threads on here I've seen on the subject mention a 13 year old rather than a 12 year old. It stuck in my mind as something sensible cos of the issues surrounding childcare of 12 year olds that I posted above about.

Sixer

Spendless wrote: »

Yes I realise it's to do with the cash but for a single parent with an older child, what I'm asking is if they will be subject to earning the cash equivalent of 35 x NMW rather than 'part-time' hours @ NMW? I hadn't done the maths so hadn't realised 35 x nmw worked out at £212. I'm pretty sure all the threads on here I've seen on the subject mention a 13 year old rather than a 12 year old. It stuck in my mind as something sensible cos of the issues surrounding childcare of 12 year olds that I posted above about.

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/policy/welfare-reform/legislation-and-key-documents/welfare-reform-bill-2011/universal-credit-briefing/

It's 12. The year they begin secondary school.

I've posted this on dozens of threads but I'll do it yet again:

Single parent:

Under 5: no threshold
5-11: 20ish hours x NMW (compatible with school hours)
12+: 35 hours x NMW

Couples:

As above but in all cases add in 35 hours x NMW for the parent who isn't tasked with childcare responsibilities