Question on claiming UC whilst working on a low income.

AdamPD

The assessment went ok, nerve-wracking to be sure, but didn't go on for as long as it normally did.
Found it easier than an in-home visit.
Received a text from the DWP to say "We still have your PIP form and will be progressing your review as soon as we can."
So I'm not sure if it was for PIP or ESA
But today when I received my ESA payment, I got two payments, one was what seems to be a higher payment for being in the support group (£235.20) vs the usual £154 that I normally get and the other was just over £1000?
I assume the last payment was a backdated payment from when I originally applied or due to the delay in getting assessed?

calcotti

AdamPD said:

I assume the last payment was a backdated payment from when I originally applied or due to the delay in getting assessed?

Sounds likely. The extra Support Group would be payable from the 14th week.

tifo

poppy12345 said:

If you receive earnings of more than £335 during your assessment period then you won't be expected to look for work. See link. https://www.turn2us.org.uk/Benefit-guides/Universal-Credit/Claimant-Commitment-Conditionality

This is what turn2us say "As long as you are employed and have household earnings of more than £355 per month (if you are single) or £567 per month joint income (if you are a member of a couple), you won’t be expected to look for work or be available for work".

I didn't know this.

I thought a working claimant had to earn at least the minimum wage at 35 hours a week (approx £1,330 a month) otherwise they'd be expected to look for work to make up the hours?

This matches the minimum income floor for self employed.

Does this mean employed claimants are treated differently to self employed?

poppy12345

tifo said:

poppy12345 said:

If you receive earnings of more than £335 during your assessment period then you won't be expected to look for work. See link. https://www.turn2us.org.uk/Benefit-guides/Universal-Credit/Claimant-Commitment-Conditionality

Does this mean employed claimants are treated differently to self employed?

Yes because if you're employed as PAYE then the minimum Icnome floor can't apply to you.

tifo

poppy12345 said:

tifo said:

poppy12345 said:

If you receive earnings of more than £335 during your assessment period then you won't be expected to look for work. See link. https://www.turn2us.org.uk/Benefit-guides/Universal-Credit/Claimant-Commitment-Conditionality

Does this mean employed claimants are treated differently to self employed?

Yes because if you're employed as PAYE then the minimum Icnome floor can't apply to you.

I understand that.

My query was that an employed person can earn £355 a month (part time job) and not be expected to look for more work and they would receive UC based on that amount of £355 but a self employed person is assumed to earn £1,330 (full time job) even if they earn £355 so they get UC based on £1,3330.

Doesn't seem fair?

NedS

tifo said:

poppy12345 said:

tifo said:

poppy12345 said:

If you receive earnings of more than £335 during your assessment period then you won't be expected to look for work. See link. https://www.turn2us.org.uk/Benefit-guides/Universal-Credit/Claimant-Commitment-Conditionality

Does this mean employed claimants are treated differently to self employed?

Yes because if you're employed as PAYE then the minimum Icnome floor can't apply to you.

I understand that.

My query was that an employed person can earn £355 a month (part time job) and not be expected to look for more work and they would receive UC based on that amount of £355 but a self employed person is assumed to earn £1,330 (full time job) even if they earn £355 so they get UC based on £1,3330.

Doesn't seem fair?

The figure of needing to earn £355/month is based off the old entitlement to JobSeekers Allowance (JSA) and to make things equivalent on UC. If you were claiming JSA and earning £355 you'd no longer have an entitlement to JSA (your claim would close) and therefore you would no longer be expected to look for more work, but you would still have been able to claim help with housing (housing benefit) and with children (Child Tax Credits) as someone on low income. They have simply replicated that on UC to ensure people in the same situation are treated similarly whether claiming legacy benefits or UC.

calcotti

I do wonder if these rules will change once income based JSA has ended following managed migration.

NedS

calcotti said:

I do wonder if these rules will change once income based JSA has ended following managed migration.

Maybe. DWP previously conducted in-work progression trials between 2015-2018 on UC Live Service:

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmworpen/955/95507.htm

Given the inconclusive outcomes, I'm not convinced they would reintroduce conditionality for those in light touch. I suspect more likely is that they would fiddle with the AET boundary moving more (or less) people into the Intensive Work Search regime if it is no longer 'tied' to legacy benefits, although even that may be difficult as long as nsJSA exists.

calcotti

Haven’t they just announced a return to a form of in work progression with the appointment of ‘Progression Champions’.

I think a different between requirements between UC conditionality and nsJSA could be justified given that the latter is a contributory benefit.

tifo

NedS said:

The figure of needing to earn £355/month is based off the old entitlement to JobSeekers Allowance (JSA) and to make things equivalent on UC. If you were claiming JSA and earning £355 you'd no longer have an entitlement to JSA (your claim would close) and therefore you would no longer be expected to look for more work, but you would still have been able to claim help with housing (housing benefit) and with children (Child Tax Credits) as someone on low income. They have simply replicated that on UC to ensure people in the same situation are treated similarly whether claiming legacy benefits or UC.

 But an employed person can earn more than £355 and get more UC than a self employed person earning the same.
 
 I suppose that's because UC then becomes the equivalent of WTC so the person doesn't lose out, but self employed do as there is no such rule in WTC