Benefits if quitting job

Marisco

mattcanary wrote: »

Alternatively find ways of making your current job more enjoyable, rather than just moaning about hating your job.

Would that not equally apply to the op then?

mattcanary

skintmacflint wrote: »

What would the OPs wife do if such generous benefits weren't available, and she was entitled to zilch. That's how it was when welfare policy was first set up. It was to cover emergencies not life choices.

And in quoting scenarios where people play the system with min work hours to gain max benefits , all I can say is 2 wrongs don't make a right.

It's your sort of attitude which will eventually result in the welfare system being reduced to what it was when first started thereby destroying a safety net for everyone. Because an increasing amount seem to think its perfectly fine to hand the responsibility for providing for the family they have created to someone else.

And in case you think it could never happen, no one thought manufacturing and traditional industries could all but disappear in the UK, the unions would be crushed, nor a bank could collapse.

Your post has got nothing to do with the current situation.....


However:
The price of housing was nowhere near as high in those days. You didn't need to be earning that much to be able to afford somewhere to live then. Tax credits are important in order to help many people pay for a roof over their head.


In those days in the majority of households only one of the parents worked. Which is what would happen here if OP's other half gave up their job. Are you saying that households in the past were lazy because only one partner worked?
Whilst perhaps irrelevant to this situation, there are the costs of childcare to take into account too, if both parents work (part-time or fulltime).


Are you saying that people should stay in their job regardless? Even if the job directly causes an emotional breakdown?
Just because they may have to claim some benefits temporarily if they leave.


PS: What has your second paragraph got to do with what I have said on this thread?
People would earn more in work (all other things being equal) than if they didn;t work (even if they do have the assistance of tax credits to boost their income when in work).
If you are so against tax credits (I am not particularly in favour of them by the way, also), then why are you not saying the living wage should become legal - to replace the minimum wage?

mattcanary

harz99 wrote: »

Given that you posted this:





Then you posted this:




Maybe people should steer clear of your advice as you don't seem too sure of the accuracy of what you are saying; and "blackmail" really!

Sometimes, suggestions about things to consider can be very helpful.
Unlike many of the other posts on this thread.

mattcanary

Marisco wrote: »

Would that not equally apply to the op then?

Yes, it could possibly do so.
But then it wasn't the OP that stated someone wasn;t trying hard enough to like their work and their colleagues - yet then stated she hates her current job. Whilst launching into a totally irrelevant tirade against people claiming benefits of any form.

somethingcorporate

Have you considered seeing a doctor? Could your partner be depressed? Coming home in tears being an adult working around teens I wouldn't consider a normal response and may indicate there are underlying issues (PND?).

Takeaway_Addict

matilda.cs wrote: »

Thanks - it's actually trickier than that.
I have 4 children, 2 are from a previous partner, and we have them both for 1 whole week in every two. There is already sharing.

My partner has been with her current employer for 10 years but when she had our 3 year old, she dropped hours to 30 pw which it appears they now dislike, and they're being really awkward about being flexible with her lunch breaks. Which they previously said wasn't a problem and allowed her to collect the kids from nursery on the nights that I work late.... This isn't a decision we're taking lightly, and we intend it to only be a stepping stone.

Blackmail won't work. She's tried! She's also constantly overlooked for promotion, and in fact, now has to get approval for things from people that she trained last year. It's a very young environment, and the management look after the young slutty girls, rather than the ones who actually do the work.

And I believe that maternity leave must be taken in one go.

Of course they do, they of course wouldn't promote on skills, work ethic, capability of doing the job.....nope, its purely on sluttyness.

SnooksNJ

Blackmail, promotions only for "slutty teenaged girls"? I would love to know what business the OP's wife works for.

skintmacflint

mattcanary wrote: »

Your post has got nothing to do with the current situation.....


However:
The price of housing was nowhere near as high in those days. You didn't need to be earning that much to be able to afford somewhere to live then. Tax credits are important in order to help many people pay for a roof over their head.


In those days in the majority of households only one of the parents worked. Which is what would happen here if OP's other half gave up their job. Are you saying that households in the past were lazy because only one partner worked?
Whilst perhaps irrelevant to this situation, there are the costs of childcare to take into account too, if both parents work (part-time or fulltime).


Are you saying that people should stay in their job regardless? Even if the job directly causes an emotional breakdown?
Just because they may have to claim some benefits temporarily if they leave.


PS: What has your second paragraph got to do with what I have said on this thread?
People would earn more in work (all other things being equal) than if they didn;t work (even if they do have the assistance of tax credits to boost their income when in work).
If you are so against tax credits (I am not particularly in favour of them by the way, also), then why are you not saying the living wage should become legal - to replace the minimum wage?

Total rubbish, in the times I'm talking about few people owned housing, and rents weren't cheap in relation to earnings. Nor were there many in supply. Both my parents worked and still all we could afford was an overcrowded 1 bed flat with living room/scullery between 5 of us. No bathroom, but did have a W.C, but not everyone had an one of these.

Another difference was expectations. And very few people were lazy back then either, mainly because they couldn't afford to be out of work as the alternative was pretty dire.

People knew if they had kids then their lifestyles would reduce accordingly, so sacrifices were made on many household things including food. The contraceptive pill wasn't available back then, but it is now.

What I'm saying is that if you choose to have 3 children be prepared to work hard, and make some sacrifices to support them , not rely on others . Particularly when all the problem seem to be is some young workmates won't talk to you.

mattcanary

When are you talking about?


Rents were cheap in the past. There were rent controls in place until relatively recently.


Conditions in rented accommodation were often bad, admittedly - but they weren't expensive (either in real terms or in simple monetary terms)


Your parents may have both worked but in the majority of households with children since World War II and until fairly recently, the income was obtained solely by one adult.


If you are talking about before World War 2, then it is pretty irrelevant - there was huge public support for the expansion in state help after it in the name of progress. Would you really want to go back to the situation before that? I thought the whole point of society is progress?
People nowadays seem to think that it is more important for Apple to introduce a new IPhone every year, than it is to try and ensure living conditions are bearable for the poorest people in the country.
Sums up the individualistic society we live in......


PS: The key point is OP's household income will go down if other half gives up her job (if only temporarily until she finds new work)
So there is a financial sacrifice being made.


Pity so many seem to overlook this basic truth when ranting about the system or people that are looking for help on this forum.


Rather than repeating his post, I will refer you to Wozzy's excellent comments on another thread on this board.

matilda.cs

SnooksNJ wrote: »

Blackmail, promotions only for "slutty teenaged girls"? I would love to know what business the OP's wife works for.

You don't think there are such companies?!

It's typically sales. Telemarketing/telesales are the worst