Daughter rant feeling quite raw

Money_maker

OP has a habit of not returning to comment on her threads. Hope she changes her habits on this one.

julie8314dave

To MONEY MAKER, YOU OBVIOUSLY havn't read my posts properly because i have stated that i am short staffed at present, i wrote this thread early this morning and have just come home now, i am not sitting at my computer all day>

paulineb_2

You can do part time work and claim ESA but it need to be declared to the DWP
Working and claiming ESA

Usually your ESA isn’t affected if you:

• work and earn up to £20 a week
• work and earn up to £99.50 a week doing work supervised by someone from a local council or voluntary organisation
• work less than 16 hours a week, earn up to £99.50 a week for up to 52 weeks

This is called ‘permitted work’.
You can also do ‘supported permitted work’ for less than 16 hours a week and earn up to £99.50 a week if your illness or disability very severely limits your ability to work.
Supported permitted work is supervised by someone from a local council or a voluntary organisation whose job it is to arrange work for disabled people.
You must tell the Department of Work and Pension (DWP) if you start doing permitted work. They will send you form PW1 to fill in and send back to them.
Any volunteer work you do needs to be reported and can affect your ESA.

heartbreak_star

julie8314dave wrote: »

To MONEY MAKER, YOU OBVIOUSLY havn't read my posts properly because i have stated that i am short staffed at present, i wrote this thread early this morning and have just come home now, i am not sitting at my computer all day>

Have you lost your other two workers?

Just out of interest, you can be really sharp with people - shouty capitals are not nice.

HBS x

zzzLazyDaisy

paulineb wrote: »

You can do part time work and claim ESA but it need to be declared to the DWP

This may be the way forward, as she can do permitted work for up to 52 weeks which would get her back into the routine of working.

It would have to be agreed with her adviser, and ATOS would be notified.

OP would also have to put her DD on the payroll and pay her NMW (for a 22yr old, currently £6.19 rising to £6.31 in October). Given that OP currently pays her DD £50 a week, this would mean that she could lawfully employ her for 8hrs a week. OP says she comes in for a few hrs a day, 3/4 days a week, so it should be possible to work the 8 hours around that.

This would enable OP to issue a proper written statement of terms and conditions to DD, and everyone would know where they stand.

Given that OP is short staffed and needs her DD in work, it might be that she may need her for more than 8 hrs a week. In that case DD can work more hours as long as she stays below 16 hrs a week, and as long as OP pays her NMW for the job. It seems to me that everyone wins in that situation.

EDIT - there is quite a good advice sheet here

http://www.uki.net/php/files/welfarepages.uki.net/pb64.pdf

julie8314dave

First of all i have not lost my other 2 workers, i am not shouting my keyboard has a habit of playing up some times.

My daughter does a few hours a week, away from other people, just washing up to help me out, she comes into work with me because if she didn't she would not see a soul all day, we thought that it would gain her some self confidence, but it has back fired on us in a way.

The no nail varnish is a rule with all staff, my daughter knows this, and i do not talk down to my staff or daughter i just basically told her that it was wrong, as the other staff abide by the rules.

I do not pay my daughter for working as she is not really working just helping me at the back she sees nobody really its just trying to get her into a routine of getting up and getting out everyday.

I do know that she suffers really badly with her nerves and the only other person she sees is her sister that does not live with us, she took her away on holiday a while ago and my other daughter said it was awful she sat in there room the whole holiday.

zzzLazyDaisy

julie8314dave wrote: »

I do not pay my daughter for working as she is not really working just helping me at the back

julie8314dave wrote: »

To cut a long story short, when i ask her in work to do something she sometimes says i cant be bothered.

I have staff on holiday in the next couple of weeks and could really do with an extra pair of hands. but on saying that it would be better for me to struggle on then put up with her abuse.

OP, you can't have it all ways.

Either she is working for you, or she is not.

If she is not working for you and she sometimes says she can't be bothered to come into work, that's her choice isn't it?

You refer in your posts to what 'the other members of staff' do, but that isn't relevant, is it? Since she is not a member of staff.

It seems from what you say that she is expected to come into work, but that she is not on the payroll because you don't consider her to be a 'proper' worker, although you do expect her to comply with the same rules as your paid staff. If that is right, then what you are doing is illegal. You could both be prosecuted and she could lose her benefits.

You need either to formalise it by registering the work with DWP as permitted work and putting her on the payroll, or stop doing it.

Unpaid 'voluntary' work for a close relative is expressly forbidden by the DWP rules.

barba

Its clear that the OP is just looking to do the best for her family.

Why are others so scathing calling her a benefit cheat, using her daughter as slave labour and has helped to cause the problems in the first people. Some people are downright nasty

Good luck OP sounds like you're doing all the right things to me

zzzLazyDaisy

barba wrote: »

Its clear that the OP is just looking to do the best for her family.

Why are others so scathing calling her a benefit cheat, using her daughter as slave labour and has helped to cause the problems in the first people. Some people are downright nasty

Good luck OP sounds like you're doing all the right things to me

Because she is breaking the law, and she has been given the links to explain why this is. Maybe she is trying to do the best for her family, but that is not the issue. The issue is that what she is doing is expressly prohibited by the legislation.

paulineb_2

barba wrote: »

Its clear that the OP is just looking to do the best for her family.

Why are others so scathing calling her a benefit cheat, using her daughter as slave labour and has helped to cause the problems in the first people. Some people are downright nasty

Good luck OP sounds like you're doing all the right things to me

Actually no, people are just trying to point out that if she employs her daughter, even as a volunteer, the DWP need to know, thats not nasty, thats actually trying to make sure that the girl doesnt end up under investigation

Because it only takes one person who works in the benefit office to walk in and see her, Ive seen that happen to people I know who were working in cafes and signing on on the side.