Job Fears: I am about to become part of the working poor?

pawsies

Working poor?

Cheek of it. Some of us have no choice but to apply for NMW jobs due to our lack of experience in higher roles.

HappyMJ

bankhater_1965 wrote: »

give me a break , yes lets do that , just like your child beneifit you claimed for 16-18 years on top of child tax credits benifts
when will you accept the nmw is unlivable and benefit claiming is better

I think even you will agree that working locally (with no transport costs) at NMW is better than benefit claiming. Nobody wants to sit at home thinking about what would have been and answering every 2 weeks to the jobcentre having them ask what you have been up to then after 12 months being forced into work programmes doing work for much less than minimum wages for companies that can really afford to pay more.

I agree that NMW is far too low and needs to be increased much faster that it currently is but increasing NMW will increase inflation and it will increase unemployment marginally.

bankhater_1965

HappyMJ wrote: »

I think even you will agree that working locally (with no transport costs) at NMW is better than benefit claiming. Nobody wants to sit at home thinking about what would have been and answering every 2 weeks to the jobcentre having them ask what you have been up to then after 12 months being forced into work programmes doing work for much less than minimum wages for companies that can really afford to pay more.

I agree that NMW is far too low and needs to be increased much faster that it currently is but increasing NMW will increase inflation and it will increase unemployment marginally.

if the guy was living at home and stands to loose nothing because he wouldnt be claiming any benefits such as a guaranteed roof over his head perhaps opinion might be differant , but to give a lifeline up for alousy £40 per week is not worth it

Chai_2

This thread make me really sad and is part of the reason we have so many issues in this society.

First of all lets clear this up. The OP said he would be £30 BETTER OFF and given that he would have his benefits stopped which are currently being paid now it means he will be on similar money to everyone else who is struggling as the increase in earnings from the job will be taken up by the increase in expenditute and NOT because they will be paying th same as the benefits he currently gets. Have a look at some of the SOA's people post and you will see that most are lucky if they are £30 p/w better off.

Secondly, if you take the job you will be in a better position for so many more reasons. How are you going to explain a 2yr gap to your future "dream job" employer?? They will take one look and presume your not hard working enough. Also, you are a fitness instructor, do they not have in-house or some kind of upskill scheme?

Have you thought about doing some self employed work on the side? You may get leads from the gym or you maybe able to advertise in the free papers and on the net... gosh, even if you charged a group £2 for "fitness in the park" session you would get some interest. Link up with any slimming groups or mums groups and see if they'd be interested.

Can you dance?? What about Zumba? you just have to say the name and you can instantly charge £4 plus per session and its cheap to become an instructor.

Think long term and see this as a stepping stone. You say you want to hold off but think about it, if there is the dream job out there and a person who has a steady work history applies which means they are more upto date with their knowledge vs someone who once trained and has been on the dole for two yrs.... Who will they pick??

If you are on benefits then certain courses are free so why not use these opportunities to register for more specialist short fitness courses before you go for the job so you are i a strong position. It is far easier to find a job when you are in a job..

In life we have to make sacrifices to get to where we want to be and that often means coming out of out comfort and going without. My dad was a single father and in my life time we had been on two holidays and cars till they we only just safe enough to drive.. He will always be more honorable and more respectful man due to the values he displayed and not coz of the things he could or could not buy.

See this as temporary....Good luck

SandC

bankhater_1965 wrote: »

if the guy was living at home and stands to loose nothing because he wouldnt be claiming any benefits such as a guaranteed roof over his head perhaps opinion might be differant , but to give a lifeline up for alousy £40 per week is not worth it

£40 per week is £2080 over a year. Living the same lifestyle as on benefits but with a cracking good holiday and a wardrobe of clothes to wear on that holiday.

Plus, going out to work each day saves on household bills. Heck, working in a gym means free workouts for life and use their showers, their hairdriers and doubtless be provided with a uniform. So actually buy a second hand bike, cycle to work and when the OP works it all out - far better off than £40 per week!

nomadical

bankhater_1965 wrote: »

if the guy was living at home and stands to loose nothing because he wouldnt be claiming any benefits such as a guaranteed roof over his head perhaps opinion might be differant , but to give a lifeline up for alousy £40 per week is not worth it

£40 is not lousy! I wouldn't turn my nose up at an extra £40 a week, that's a fortnights worth of grocery shopping for me!

bankhater_1965

SandC wrote: »

£40 per week is £2080 over a year. Living the same lifestyle as on benefits but with a cracking good holiday and a wardrobe of clothes to wear on that holiday.

Plus, going out to work each day saves on household bills. Heck, working in a gym means free workouts for life and use their showers, their hairdriers and doubtless be provided with a uniform. So actually buy a second hand bike, cycle to work and when the OP works it all out - far better off than £40 per week!

recalculate after tax & ni plus cost of getting to work !

sniggings

princessdon wrote: »

No the joke is that he gets £71 ppw - plus £100 pw rent plus other benefits (ct, free dental, free prescriptions etc)

And if you are using the £71 pw as benefit figure - then he is £140 + a week better off

£140? you want to argue sensibly or just be daft?

Well unless your teeth are so bad you go to the dentist more than twice a year, the saving is hardly worth staying on benefits for, you keep throwing out the stand lines instead of looking at the facts.

As I said how much lower do you want his £72 to go to make £6.08 look good?

Instead of helping the government keep all the money at the top, why not argue that £6.08 is too low.

I feel sorry for people like you who instead of trying to see the problem and fix it, instead just want to put people down.

sniggings

SandC wrote: »

£40 per week is £2080 over a year. Living the same lifestyle as on benefits but with a cracking good holiday and a wardrobe of clothes to wear on that holiday.

Plus, going out to work each day saves on household bills. Heck, working in a gym means free workouts for life and use their showers, their hairdriers and doubtless be provided with a uniform. So actually buy a second hand bike, cycle to work and when the OP works it all out - far better off than £40 per week!

it's £30 not £40 and that is before travel costs, clothes fit for work and extra expenses working always brings. so the extra it would be earning would be £0 or in minus figures.

Man has evolved millions of years to do what is best for themselves, it is only the last maybe 50 years it is said to give you more self respect to work for the same or less that you can get on benefits, people need to wake up and see that telling people they are better of in work, no matter how little they are paid , has never worked and never will, the answer is easy, make work pay enough so benefits are not an option.

And for those thinking the Government will do this by reducing benefits to such a lvl work becomes an option, don't hold your breath as it took them all their time to set a £26k cap :rotfl: ,£36k you would have to earn to get that, which is around £500 a week, against the min wage of £220 net wage.

Maybe arguing for the impossible works for you but I prefer to argue for something that will fix the problem such as higher wages and rent controls.

nomadical

bankhater_1965 wrote: »

princessdom comments on low paid benefit claimers as being overpaid whilst herself enjoys her wage of £700 per week cannot possibly no whats it like , but will argue she has worked hard just like everyone else esp the people trying to get employment that pays less than benefits , and wants to no why such people refuse to take the work !
i myself is very comfertable financaily but have the common sence to see why turning work down is better and stay on the guaranteed benefits that pay more or slighty less

This is a disgusting comment. Pure jealousy because somebody is earning more than you. How childish.

Maybe if more of the country got off their backsides they could be in the same position. But oh no, why bother when you can get it all handed to you on a plate?!

Everybody has struggled at some point. Those who haven't, well they are very lucky but someone, somewhere down the line, has worked hard for what they have.

OP clearly wouldn't last 5 minutes in the job anyway, I'm starting to think he shouldn't even be wasting their time.

I thought this forum was about money saving, not money grabbing.