Home care underpaid

tomtontom

Laz123 wrote: »

My Kenyan wife is a home carer and she had to pay for her own CRB check, uniform and travel on buses. She gets £7 ph and most of her time is spent travelling between clients. Most of the time, as mentioned above, the time given on the rota is the same time for two clients who could be 15+ minutes away, so she spends most of her time running on catch-up time. People like her are usually African who do the job because their culture tends to care more for people in a nursing capacity than us Westerners and they enjoy their underpaid jobs.

I'm not sure about them setting up their own agencies. Competition is stiff and most have connections with Social Services so it would be pretty difficult. Her agency bosses are Asian and are quite well off. I do know about overheads because I once ran my own company and you are correct that salaries are the major overhead, but when staff are lowly paid this is greatly reduced because even the office staff who are usually East European are on low pay.

How many stereotypes can you fit in one post? :rotfl:

duchy

dzug1 wrote: »

Laz123 wrote: »

Therefore the costs incurred and prices charged are not unreasonable. No old rope necessary.

Can you please be careful when quoting......... I never said competition was stiff. Laz said it.

wealdroam

duchy wrote: »

Can you please be careful when quoting.........

Excellent idea.

geerex

Oh boo hoo.

Don't like it? Get some qualifications and get a better job.
Market forces dictate pay levels. There are many, many people with similar (read: none) qualifications. You are replaceable. They don't even really have to "train" the next minimum wage slave.

That's capitalism. No one owes you a living I'm afraid.

geerex

The_mangler wrote: »

I care for my husband at home. I get £61.35 a week for a minimum of 35 hours a week caring. Most days it is round the clock, no days off or holidays. Out of that amount, £20 is taken off as my husband receives Income Related ESA. That works out at £1.18 p/h for 35 hours. Still think you're hard done by? I can't change jobs either. This one is for life.

That's not a "job" though, is it? You're getting paid to stay in your house and do what any husband/wife should do.
Up next, unemployed people claiming that their "job" pays less than minimum wage for sitting watching TV and eating crisps all day :rotfl:

Timalay

geerex wrote: »

That's not a "job" though, is it? You're getting paid to stay in your house and do what any husband/wife should do.
Up next, unemployed people claiming that their "job" pays less than minimum wage for sitting watching TV and eating crisps all day :rotfl:

That's huge assumption to make. You don't even know their partner. They could require around the clock care. I hope you never find yourself in that situation.

piglet25

geerex seems to have a bee in their bonnet don't they? What rude and presumptous posts.

geerex

Timalay wrote: »

That's huge assumption to make. You don't even know their partner. They could require around the clock care. I hope you never find yourself in that situation.

I replied to the poster who classed their situation as a "job". Like it or not, it isn't a job. They have chosen to be a full time carer for their husband. That is a choice, regardless of your arguments about availability of respite care/suitability of work with flexibility etc.
They could very well work full time and pay someone to look after their husband whilst they went to work.
The sums may not work once you factor in rent/council tax etc, but the fact remains that the government provide an allowance to supplement a carers' income, what it is not (rightly or wrongly) is a government-funded post to provide one-to-one individual care.

Oh, and I find it slightly distasteful to moan about not getting enough money for caring for a loved one.

piglet25 wrote: »

geerex seems to have a bee in their bonnet don't they? What rude and presumptous posts.

"Presumptous" is something you need to be on forums as people typically do not provide all relevant information, blanks need to be filled in. "Rude" is your opinion, I prefer to be forthright and honest, if you find that rude then I'd suggest the internet isn't the best place for you.

The_mangler

geerex wrote: »

I replied to the poster who classed their situation as a "job". Like it or not, it isn't a job. They have chosen to be a full time carer for their husband. That is a choice, regardless of your arguments about availability of respite care/suitability of work with flexibility etc.
They could very well work full time and pay someone to look after their husband whilst they went to work.
The sums may not work once you factor in rent/council tax etc, but the fact remains that the government provide an allowance to supplement a carers' income, what it is not (rightly or wrongly) is a government-funded post to provide one-to-one individual care.

Oh, and I find it slightly distasteful to moan about not getting enough money for caring for a loved one.



"Presumptous" is something you need to be on forums as people typically do not provide all relevant information, blanks need to be filled in. "Rude" is your opinion, I prefer to be forthright and honest, if you find that rude then I'd suggest the internet isn't the best place for you.

Wow. Just wow.
I cannot go out to work, my husband has severe mental health issues as well as physical disabilities which mean he is not happy with anyone else looking after him. I gave up a career in Accountancy when he had to leave his job as an Engineer. believe me, I would jump at the chance to work, any work but there simply is no choice. And the government's supplement to paid work only comes into play if you care for someone for 35 hours minimum a week. And earn less than £100 a week.

Walk a mile in my shoes, my friend. It's not easy to watch my husband disintegrate before my eyes, as his partner I consider it my duty. But duty does not pay the bills.

geerex

The_mangler wrote: »

Wow. Just wow.
I cannot go out to work, my husband has severe mental health issues as well as physical disabilities which mean he is not happy with anyone else looking after him. I gave up a career in Accountancy when he had to leave his job as an Engineer. believe me, I would jump at the chance to work, any work but there simply is no choice. And the government's supplement to paid work only comes into play if you care for someone for 35 hours minimum a week. And earn less than £100 a week.

Walk a mile in my shoes, my friend. It's not easy to watch my husband disintegrate before my eyes, as his partner I consider it my duty. But duty does not pay the bills.

The point I am making is that you class your income as "earnings" when that's not the case. It's an allowance. It's in the title. It's a bit rich moaning about your allowance and comparing it to min. wage on a public forum when it's simply not the same thing. I'm not saying it's easy for you, and I do not envy you but it irks me somewhat when I hear people refer to their benefits income as their "pay". Pay is remuneration for productive work, there is a distinction.