Angry re ESA

sportsarb

Lanzarote1938 wrote: »

If I ruled the world then if there was a job available then there would be no choice. Take the job or lose the benefits.

So an electrical engineer would be a Thoracic Surgeon?

I can see literally no downside to this :j:beer:

sangie595

dekaspace wrote: »

No its in favour of people who play the system to get things that genuine people lose out on (genuine could mean long term unemployed)

The system means that its not just about money, but things like I personally was on JSA for years not finding work due to disability reasons, if they helped me years ago and put me on ESA I would of been working by now, if DWP didn't make screw ups and act suspicious of changes I would of been working by now.

Yet I know people who are the type who never want to work, or long term claim JSA who work cash in hand and they know every trick in the book,

When I wanted to go back to education part time, they got suspicious and changed my sign on date and time to the time window every week when I wanted to study and changed it to weekly sign, my advisor admitted after I had to leave education because of that reason it was because they had me down as suspicious and assumed I was doing cash in hand work!

There used to be another system that was cut that meant you could work part time and still claim benefits and it was kept for you up to a year and £1000 limit, this meant when you found a job you didn't worry about rent and other bills till first paycheque.

When they change rules to make it harder to find useful work

So its not that it favours people who don't/won't work as much as punishes people who find work or have some savings, even when I worked for a few months I saved a few hundred knowing if/when Iost my job I would have a down period between final wage and getting benefits but each time I did this when I signed back on benefits treated me suspiciously to have "savings" when I was leaving work especially when I said I didn't earn much money in the job or me telling them I couldn't attend a job interview like 30 miles away as public transport takes 2-3 hours to get there to be told "oh but you have savings, use that to get a taxi"

And to go into your "won't" side of things thats a loaded term, if someone was living hand to mouth on benefits, and were told there was a job coming up that meant at best they were same level of income, but work long hours, lose entitlement to healthcare such as prescriptions, have to spend long time such as hours a day travelling but likely be worse off and if they have kids they would not have any time to see them then of course its better to see the reasons for not wanting to work.

Its never as simple as a benefit claimaint just being lazy, or refusing to work.

Sorry, but in the case you suggest it really is that simple! Why is it ok for someone else to work long hours, never see their kids, etc., to pay for someone else to sit around refusing to work on the same terms? Nobody has a right to expect others to fund their lifestyle choices, even if they are hand to mouth. If you want a better job, then there are the same options open to everyone. Work for it.

Glen_Clark

Mrshatch77 wrote: »

if I had stopped working four years ago when I was first off sick, which I could of rather than trying my best and carrying on part time I would of been eligible. .

Sounds very doubtful you would have got Support Group, especially since you only got Standard rate PIP.
Even if you got Work Group Contributory ESA, that would have finished after a year as Alice points out.

missbiggles1

Lanzarote1938 wrote: »

If I ruled the world then if there was a job available then there would be no choice. Take the job or lose the benefits.

And no question of needing to be better off either.

missbiggles1

sportsarb wrote: »

So an electrical engineer would be a Thoracic Surgeon?

I can see literally no downside to this :j:beer:

Don't be silly.

However, no reason why an unemployed electrical engineer or surgeon shouldn't take a job as a cleaner or shop assistant.

sportsarb

missbiggles1 wrote: »

Don't be silly.

However, no reason why an unemployed electrical engineer or surgeon shouldn't take a job as a cleaner or shop assistant.

I agree, but so starts the caveats into what people can and cannot do, what is reasonable etc.

Ames

sportsarb wrote: »

I agree, but so starts the caveats into what people can and cannot do, what is reasonable etc.

There are jobs which the Job centre can't sanction people for turning down - the armed forces and sex industry being the main ones unless things have changed recently.

Lanzarote1938

sportsarb wrote: »

So an electrical engineer would be a Thoracic Surgeon?

I can see literally no downside to this :j:beer:

OK I realise I left 'suitable' out. Or any job that a person is capable of doing.

Glen_Clark

sangie595 wrote: »

If you want a better job, then there are the same options open to everyone.

In that case I'd like a job as the Duke of York.
They can close night shelters etc etc but York will always need a Duke

Glen_Clark

Lanzarote1938 wrote: »

If I ruled the world then if there was a job available then there would be no choice. Take the job or lose the benefits.

How would that work in practice?
If they didn't want to be offered the job they could just talk about their limitations, quote their need for statutory time off for Trade Union work, maternity/paternity leaves, or whatever..
We need proper jobs so we can offer a carrot, because it works so much better than a stick