JSA And Funeral Attendance

dookar

sniggings wrote: »

I said go to the funeral, get evidence and worry about the rest later, you said go to the funeral tell the jobcentre (they already know it's on his file, that why I didn't suggest he do it again) prove you were still looking for a job, which is what I aid but for some reason when you say it it's the rules but when I say it it's to b ignored:rotfl:

Read it again.

Nothing to do with 'prove you were still looking for a job'

Didn't say tell the job centre, said say where you're going and give them your mobile number

Whilst you went crazy

sniggings

dookar wrote: »

I don't know how to respond to this. It has nothing to do with my opinion or what paper I read, it's the law. It has nothing to do with looking for work, it has to do with the definition of availability for work as per the law.

I don't we should continue this because I'm posting with authorative knowledge and you're, well, I dunno

to make it simple for you, you said it isn't about a 5 min interview, and I said yes it is but they wish to make life hard for people on the dole, so say this time his appointment can not be changed and what reason have they gave!! errr ....none just becaus ethe person he asked said no, he could have asked a different person and they could have said yes, hope you get it now but somehow I feel you will say you don't even though we both know you do. edit on second thoughts I don't think he does.

sniggings

dookar wrote: »

Read it again.

Nothing to do with 'prove you were still looking for a job'

Didn't say tell the job centre, said say where you're going and give them your mobile number

Whilst you went crazy

OMG "didnt say tell the job centre" but then you go on to say I instead said "tell them where you were going":rotfl:

Sorry mate I will leave this here with you as clearly your not playing with a full deck.

Edit shame on those in this thread that argue the OP should not be allowed to go to a Funeral of a friend.

dookar

Right, so I'm talking about the law and you're picking up cheap points on my wording?

The funny thing is, I think we're on the same side here but you're too stupid to realise.

Not going to the appointment will not (should not) mean the OP doesn't get paid. Not being available for work will.

sniggings

dookar wrote: »

Right, so I'm talking about the law and you're picking up cheap points on my wording?

The funny thing is, I think we're on the same side here but you're too stupid to realise.

Not going to the appointment will not (should not) mean the OP doesn't get paid. Not being available for work will.

you started it by saying ignore my post, why was that, what did I say that was different to what you went on to say?

Missing a sign on is enough to stop payment no matter if he sat in the jobcentre that day from openning to closing, so it's not just about looking for a job but signing the contract to say you have been looking and didn't do any work, you know that and I know that but you are the one playing semantics not me.

Where in the rules does it say the jobcentre has to be given the OP's mobile number? how does that help him find a job or sign to say he hasn't worked? you then went on to say that that was correct ? it can only be correct if in the rules but it's not it was therefore only advice, same near enough word for word what I said but you posted rudely to ignore my advice. for some unknown reason you picked an argument with me when you now claim we are both agreeing, mate you really do need to choose your arguments better.

missapril75

Dunroamin wrote: »

I can't remember whether I posted on that but there seems to me to be a big difference between a childcare problem and going to the funeral of someone who isn't a relative.

I agree. I also think there's a difference in wanting to change a signing time permanently (perhaps indicating inflexibility) and wanting to to do it once.


On a different note...and I wasn't going to come back on this until I saw all the other comments since......I found this earlier.

I've compressed it to leave out irrelevant bits.

DMG 20939 Claimants have good cause...if they
...were dealing with...a domestic emergency affecting them or a close relative or close friend or a funeral of a close relative or close friend

There are a whole load of different events relating to realatives and close friends.

The funeral does not have to be a relative according to this. Given the "death bed" mention, it would not be impossible to argue a close friend. Remember this is "just" a forum and the closeness might have been understated (or even under realised) by the OP. Who are we to judge?

It could certainly be argued domestic emergency if the OP's friend "needed" her there out of emotional necessity. Again. who are we to judge that?

Either way, If the funeral was on a different day to the signing day, she could still go to it and still sign on and still satisfy her JSAG and it wouldn't be an issue.

Anubis_2

dookar wrote: »

Four hours for a 400 hundred mile trip plus a funeral?

My fault. I didn't know it was a 400 mile round trip. TBH that seems a bit far considering it's not the funeral of an actual relative.

Though I guess it depends how close they were. I have a close bond with a couple of young people in their early 20's who consider me a "mother" figure in their life. One of them more so as they have little to no contact with their real mother.

You don't have to be blood related to be close or feel the pain of loss of someone. However, I can see that travelling that far and wanting a day should only be allowed if a deduction is made.

sniggings

a deduction! wow someone dies the guy wants to go to the funeral he said he will still visit a jobcentre to look for work and yet you talk of a deduction! shame on you.

Anubis_2

sniggings wrote: »

a deduction! wow someone dies the guy wants to go to the funeral he said he will still visit a jobcentre to look for work and yet you talk of a deduction! shame on you.

But surely a days deduction is what would happen if he was working?

No, no shame on me. The funeral is 200 miles away. He is clearly not going to be available for work. What happens if, like it does with my son, he gets called at 1pm and asked to go for an interview locally within the next hour?

How is he feasibly going to manage to go to a local interview 200 miles away?

A days deduction is fair given the distance he will be away from his local area, even a 50 mile radius within his area leaves him 150 miles away.

I cannot see an employer agreeing to a days pay for the funeral of a friend on a 400 mile round trip. What is different here? What is this "shame" you put on me?

Dunroamin

sniggings wrote: »

Dunroamin wrote: »

I can't remember whether I posted on that but there seems to me to be a big difference between a childcare problem and going to the funeral of someone who isn't a relative. I think that the OP would have received different answers, both on here and from the JCP, if the funeral had been that of her own mother rather than that of a friend's.[/QUOTE)

It's a funeral he wants to go to not a rave, to sign a form is hardly a good enough reason to stop the OP from showing his respects.

Do people not realise that they too could be in the same boat one day, too many people think themselves untouchable on this forum, but how many of those that give rude and hurtful advice are not getting any help from the tax payer because they cant support themselves, most I bet on here are getting some help but remember you or one of your family will be treated the same, I just hope you will remember your posts on here!

It's those of us who are in a different boat (ie. working) who know that precious few employers would give anyone the day off to go to the funeral of a friend's relative and wouldn't even allow them a day's leave to go if it wasn't convenient for the organisation.

Some people who live on benefits are so remote from the real world that they feel hard done by when the ordinary rules of life apply to them.