Jsa doubt about past job

neil9313

marybelle01 wrote: »

If you don't need JSA then why are you claiming it?

You were dismissed from your job for misconduct - that isn't "being flagged for a silly thing", it is something which people are sanctioned for. It was your own fault you lost your job, so they won't pay you JSA.

Incorrect information, they can sanction you but not always. Hope it never happens to you marybelle BTW

Evilm

daz_ep2 wrote: »

I do need jsa but if they gonna sanction me and not pay me for 26 week then whats the point off being on jsa I might as well come off it

I'm not sure but I think that sanction might stay there waiting for you to claim again - and they could hold it on file for a few years!

I know if you delay claiming for 6 months after a dismissal you still get a sanction when you do claim - as if you hadn't waited to sign on.

BrettMorganxD

Evilm wrote: »

I'm not sure but I think that sanction might stay there waiting for you to claim again - and they could hold it on file for a few years!

I know if you delay claiming for 6 months after a dismissal you still get a sanction when you do claim - as if you hadn't waited to sign on.

really? I have always wondered about this. So you would lose benefit for a year if you waited 6 month before the initial claim?

neil9313

BrettMorganxD wrote: »

really? I have always wondered about this. So you would lose benefit for a year if you waited 6 month before the initial claim?

I dont think this is true Brett, you have to apply right away ie first day of being out of work, I dont believe the lose benifet for a year bit.

marybelle01

neil9313 wrote: »

Incorrect information, they can sanction you but not always. Hope it never happens to you marybelle BTW

Allow me to correct the one very small error - 95% of my post being correct in actual fact. They may not always sanction. If someone has been dismissed through their own misconduct, I think they should sanction. Why should the rest of us, who have grasped the simple fact that you have to actually turn up to work to keep a job, pay for those who can't? Everyone has "personal stuff", but they keep it out of work because they realise that they will have a lot more problems if they don't turn up to work. I have no problem paying for those who can't find work, but those who can't be bothered to turn up for the work they have shouldn't be paid for by the rest of us.

marybelle01

neil9313 wrote: »

I dont think this is true Brett, you have to apply right away ie first day of being out of work, I dont believe the lose benifet for a year bit.

If you don't apply then you aren't losing benefit because you aren't entitled to any. But it is true that not applying doesn't suspend anyway sanction applied when you do.

Homeagain

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

O.P comes on here asking for advise and people start saying its their own fault for being sacked!. Very nice and very helpfull from those who have never put a foot wrong in their life!.

I was sacked last year for misconduct but got JSA straight away. If you do get your money stopped you can apply for hardship payments if you meet the criteria. If you do get sanctioned you can also appeal the decision.
If you have absolutley no money then you would also be able to get food parcels etc from a charity in your city/town. Ask at a homeless centre or social services- they will be able to point you in the right direction if needed.

Amazing, some good advice instead of insults and criticism!

BrettMorganxD

Btw according to my contract not turning up for work is not gross misconduct it is misconduct which results in warning process.

I didn't know it could be deemed gross misconduct

BrettMorganxD

marybelle01 wrote: »

I would remind you that your little clique have already been "sanctioned" - by MSE - for your erroneous harassment of me. That is your only warning - then I report you again. You want to conduct a vendetta against someone, conduct it with them and not with me. I'll be quite happy for you to join your friend in having a one month ban from posting.

And it may seem easier to you not to bother signing on. But as Evilm originally pointed out - not me actually - if you don't sign on for six months the sanction is applied when you do sign on. So there is nothing to gain.



And since nobody at all mentioned gross misconduct I am wondering which thread you are reading. People can be sacked for misconduct. It doesn't have to be gross misconduct. I thought you knew that?

I know but are they not supposed to follow a fair warning process if over a year before 6th april

BrettMorganxD

marybelle01 wrote: »

I would remind you that your little clique have already been "sanctioned" - by MSE - for your erroneous harassment of me. That is your only warning - then I report you again. You want to conduct a vendetta against someone, conduct it with them and not with me. I'll be quite happy for you to join your friend in having a one month ban from posting.

And it may seem easier to you not to bother signing on. But as Evilm originally pointed out - not me actually - if you don't sign on for six months the sanction is applied when you do sign on. So there is nothing to gain.



And since nobody at all mentioned gross misconduct I am wondering which thread you are reading. People can be sacked for misconduct. It doesn't have to be gross misconduct. I thought you knew that?

why who has been sanctioned from posting for a month n how do u no. I am not harassing you anyway. what part of that reply was harassment