JSA Sanction issue.

Barkingmad64

Hey everyone.

Ok bear in mind this maybe a bit of an awkward subject but I'll put it the best way I can.

I claim JSA and I do everything I'm asked (even when it is something stupid I will do as they tell me till I find work).
I'm never sanctioned once and actively seek work multiple times every day of the week.

I signed on today again as usual, and I seen a few people getting told they were being sanctioned and benefits would stop.

Now I thought to myself what must be going through their minds, how would they even survive without money?
I know of various things like Crisis Loans and Hardship payments.
But I also know there's a lot of times that people can apply for these an be denied them, even though are clearly entitled to these things.

I wouldn't suggest this if things like Hardship and Crisis Loans were guaranteed almost instantly if you are completely eligible, but some of the look on peoples faces is a bit heartbreaking at times, I know there will be a few cheats out there but there's also genuine people like myself looking for work.

So it's come to my mind then.
Should JSA Sanctions be stopped and made "illegal" in some way?

They are progressively making it worse for some people.
Forget the benefit cheats for now let's think of the genuine people in this situation, when you get one of the letters it states what "the law" says you need to live on, JSA is a bare minimum sum of money to be used to simply barely live on, sanctioning someone is like ripping out someones life support.

So why should people accept sanctions as law?
Shouldn't taking away the necessity of living be made pretty much illegal?
If a decent person is sanctioned and can prove they have actively searched for work, should it not become more common they take action against JCP.

I want to know a variety of opinions first as I was considering starting a petition to have it stopped.

princessdon

tina_malteser wrote: »

i was sanctioned for leaving a job where employer paid only £5.00 in overtime and giving 3 weeks holiday, and by 3wks i mean 15 days not 21??? apparently is not "Just cause" to leave or whatever it is they call it, even though i bought it up with my employer that it wasn't correct..and also Employments Rights chap sent him a letter saying so as well but to no avail

What did the tribunal say?

nannytone_2

MissPiggy50 wrote: »

It is terrable what is goin on, it is a privalige to work but people should have the rite not to work if they like, why shuld they be slaves and do wot other people say.?> People bang on that they are payin for it but that is a crock, anyone workin is beter off by workin, wot they complainin about, people that choose not to work are potless but maybe they happier??
Peopple that wont more money can work and let those that dont wanna just have the basic money to live on

people do have the right not to work. plenty of people don't work, but they arent receiving JSA, which as the title suggests ... is an allowabce for JOB SEEKERS.

im not aware of any benefit called 'chosen not to work allowance'

McKneff

3 weeks holiday is 15 days...... it always has been when I was working.

andrewbrookes

nannytone wrote: »

people do have the right not to work. plenty of people don't work, but they arent receiving JSA, which as the title suggests ... is an allowabce for JOB SEEKERS.

im not aware of any benefit called 'chosen not to work allowance'

Hit the nail on the head. It makes me sick how some people just choose not to work and just sit around doing nothing all day. Its called job seekers which means you should only get it if you are actually looking for work. If you're trying to get a job then yes you deserve help. If you are not looking for work and just sitting around doing nothing, expecting a handout then you deserve nothing.

WeakHeart

MissPiggy50 often writes provocative posts. Don't bite!

Mara69

MissPiggy50 wrote: »

It is terrable what is goin on, it is a privalige to work but people should have the rite not to work if they like, why shuld they be slaves and do wot other people say.?> People bang on that they are payin for it but that is a crock, anyone workin is beter off by workin, wot they complainin about, people that choose not to work are potless but maybe they happier??
Peopple that wont more money can work and let those that dont wanna just have the basic money to live on

You must be a troll, surely to goodness. In all the years I've been posting on MSE I've never come across such illiteracy - it MUST be put on. Oh and I have to say, those unemployed on here don't appear to be too happy.

samsmoot

The Appeals system is a travesty; often a complete and utter Kafka novel. Guilty until proven innocent and meanwhile you could starve for all they could care. At least in India you wouldn't get moved on for begging on the streets.

I've no beef with this 'great' country of ours, just old enough to have seen plenty.

evenasus

MissPiggy50 wrote: »

people should have the rite not to work if they like, why shuld they be slaves and do wot other people say.?>

Yes, people have the RIGHT not to work SHOULD they so choose.

However, they do not have a right to expect money to be given to them, if they choose not to work when they are fully capable of working.

ILW

Surely of you follow the rules you do not get sanctioned. What is the problem?

skintandscared_2

MissPiggy50 wrote: »

It is terrable what is goin on, it is a privalige to work but people should have the rite not to work if they like, why shuld they be slaves and do wot other people say.?> People bang on that they are payin for it but that is a crock, anyone workin is beter off by workin, wot they complainin about, people that choose not to work are potless but maybe they happier??
Peopple that wont more money can work and let those that dont wanna just have the basic money to live on

But what if there really was some magic payment for people who made a conscious decision that they didn't want to work. Obviously it would be enough to just pay their rent/bills and food I suppose. If that option was available to every person in the country, what would happen if, say, 80% of the population chose to take it? There will always be those people who want more out of life and choose to work hard and earn more for themselves, but those people would then have to support the other 80% of the population who took the choice not to work. How much tax do you think that 20% would then have to pay? And of those 20% paying ridiculous tax, there may then be some who realise the pittance they are left with is no better than the "stay at home" benefit, so they quit work and sign up for it too. Then you have an entire country sitting at home, doing nothing. Where does the money come from then, to pay them all...?