reduction in hours issue!

princessdon

banner188 wrote: »

I understand where you and other posters are coming from with these views but I am only trying to find a solution within the rules of the system. I am surrounded by non working families and people on ESA and DLA who seem to just sit pretty with the same lifestyle as us, it is very frustrating.

I just need a practical solution for the time being until I can get another job or OH gets a job.

It says on HMRC site that I can include regular overtime as my weekly hours, but these wouldn't be contracted so I'm confused as to how many I can say to HMRC.

You have to tell the TC people your contractual hours. Ring them and ask Re Overtime and how it will be considered - you may hit lucky, they *may* allow it.

Why can't your boss contract to 24?

BTW - My annoyance wasn't at you (anyone can be put in a position where their hours change), it was the ancient view that women shouldn't work until their child is 5 that I had an issue with.

smileytiger

banner188 wrote: »

I understand where you and other posters are coming from with these views but I am only trying to find a solution within the rules of the system. I am surrounded by non working families and people on ESA and DLA who seem to just sit pretty with the same lifestyle as us, it is very frustrating.

I just need a practical solution for the time being until I can get another job or OH gets a job.

It says on HMRC site that I can include regular overtime as my weekly hours, but these wouldn't be contracted so I'm confused as to how many I can say to HMRC.

This is not personal - just a statement of fact in response to above.

I'm the polar opposite to you - i work FT my OH is disabled & we have no children ( grown up, left home) - he cannot claim any means tested benefits ( he gets DLA ) as i earn too much. However - if it were just me and OH wasn't an adult but a child - i'd be entitled to tax credits.
So yeah the system is daft as how can it cost more to support a child than it does to support as adult?
So from my side of the fence i see all the families with tax credits and think i'm a mug for working. - and we live a very basic lifestyle - with no frills.

zagfles

princessdon wrote: »

You have to tell the TC people your contractual hours. Ring them and ask Re Overtime and how it will be considered - you may hit lucky, they *may* allow it.

It's the actual hours you work which are relevant, not your contracted hours. See http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/tctmanual/TCTM02452.htm

princessdon

zagfles wrote: »

It's the actual hours you work which are relevant, not your contracted hours. See http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/tctmanual/TCTM02452.htm

But at the moment they don't KNOW that OT will be availble or the hours it entails etc. It could take them well over the 30 hours or it may not happen.

I personally would want my boss to set my hours to 24 if OT is so guaranteed! or at the least inform TC of the change in circumstances as I know it. Ie 23 and should be OT. At least that way he is covered in case the hours don't materialise. He doesn't have 12 weeks to base an average hours on at this point.

As an aside I'd also be seeking advice on lowering of the hours because if business is this tough then redundancy could be something that follows (hopefully not, but logical to assume the business is stuggling) and that his redundancy and notice pay will now be based on 23 hours not 35.

loopy136

If you feel so strongly about your partner staying at home, then you need to be bringing in enough money. Have you been looking for a second job or maybe your partner would like a part time job now while you are at home, gives her a break and maybe some adult company.

grummps

Mara69 wrote: »

In an ideal world, yes. However, if Dad cannot provide for Mum and baby, then Mum should go to work as well as opposed to expecting the taxpayer to top up their income.

There is nothing ideal about it - the child needs mum. Taxpayers have been subsidising mum's with children since I can remember and I go back to 1965 when I started working for the government.

Why all of a sudden are you objecting to family financial support in 2012?

grummps

antrobus wrote: »

Old fashioned? You're positively prehistoric.:)

Maybe, but my children had a fantastic upbringing courtesy of my wife who stopped work 6 months before they were born in 1981 - has never worked since.

The tax allowances compensated for the loss of her income.
Society has a responsibility to provide families with financial support always has done - always should.

dseventy

grummps wrote: »

I'm not disputing what the legal position is, but come on, and I'm a guy, the idea of making a woman go out to work with a baby of that tender age is nothing more than disgusting. .

If you can provide for your family and require no state intervention, then thats fine.

If you can't provide for youer family and need the state to help you, then its not "disgusting", its real life.

grummps wrote: »

Were on earth are we heading for in this country?.

Hopefully towards people supporting themselves.

grummps wrote: »

No mum with a child under 5 should even be thought of as being ready for work unless she actually wants to.
?.

And right there is whats wrong with the country.

grummps wrote: »

Call me old fashioned, but a child, before they go to school, needs their mum to be around and not some childminder or faceless nursery.

Most people don't have a choice. Thats the way it has to be for people to afford the choices they made how about they live. If you were to remove state intervention, thats how you would be too.

You are in a position with a household with 2 adults. Only one adult works. That adult is being dropped hours.

Your emphasis seems to be how can the state make it up? Rather than you get a second job, or holy smoke, mum get a job.

Can you see it yet?

grummps wrote: »

Me personally, I would register as self employed with HMRC, and work doing anything in order to make up the 24/30 hours a week.

Just make sure you register with HMRC and can show your hours worked vs income and have a paper trail of it. Thats what TC will expect, see other posts on the forum to see what the consquences are if you fudge it.

D70

abby1234519

I wouldn't say my son has lead an awful first year of his life being at nursery whilst I study/work.

He started nursery at 2 months old when I went back to university. They are kind and caring staff and a relatively small nursery. Joshua is 11 months old now, he loves the staff and has a special connection with his key worker.

In what way have I done him wrong? Hes been at nursery for 3 days a week initially and now is in 4 days. On Wednesday he spends the day being looked after his daddy whilst I work.

I would hope one day I can earn enough that Liam can work part time and look after Joshua/other kids for half the week. I would actually say he is more capable than me in some ways. He has the patience to deal with Joshua...I don't.

xylophone

He has the patience to deal with Joshua...I don't.

But you chose to be a mother? Would you find the patience if for some reason Liam couldn't care for the child?