on my own on a low wage

mouseymousey99

Hi Jen, Your hours ammount to part-time work and I think thats your basic problem. Could you use some of your time and try a course or some sort of further education to further your chances of a good job? Just thinking, do you have an illness or a disability that prevents you working more hours?
Would your employers sponsor you if you did a course of some kind?

[Deleted User]

jen666 wrote: »

It seems that maybe if I went out, Got myself pregnant a few times, then I would get a house paid for, half my bills paid for and still get child benefit. If the government want to stop young single parents, the best thing to do would be to give young single people starting their career, a bit of help, rather than letting us that are working and paying tax, pay for those who delibratley get themselves pregnant just to get all these benefits.

I never feel that being jealous of other peoples situations is a big help when dealing with your own problems,you seem to think that if you had a few kids youd get half your bills paid,sadly thats not quite how it works.
TBH if i were young free and single and still had my health i`d be looking for better paid work,or a job that offered a full weeks work,by the time i was 23 i was married with a mortgage,and a baby(the interest rate then was 15%)and although i was a manager i still had a bar job as well so we could eat and pay the bills,we got nothing except family allowance,no tax credits then.and there were almost 4 million people who wanted work that had non.

Contains_Mild_Peril

dmg24 wrote: »

I'm going to ignore your comments about single mums. They're not welcome here.

What, single mums? Sorry, couldn't resist:o
Jen, have you tried applying for housing and council tax benefits? You might be able to get something towards your rent, even if it's only a few £s - every little helps. Is there any sort of work you could do from home to fit in around your main job? I make a bit of money selling stuff on eBay and there's a moneysaver I know of on these boards who makes good money ironing... not very glamorous, but lucrative enough to be worthwhile.

bestpud

The problem here is not that you are under 25, or not a single mother :rolleyes: , but that you are young, free and soon to be single, but are only working part time!

There is a reason single parents are given benefits - they are looking after children! Whether anyone agrees with this, or believes there are loads of teens out there getting pregnant so they can milk the state is largely irrelevant.

The point is you are able to work full time and yet choose not to, and expect the state to subsidise that decision. Morally, I'd say that places you in the same realm as the people you describe.

Yes, there are all sorts of arguments about paying tax, or not, and your future contribution to the state etc etc, but when we get down to the bottom line, you are choosing to work part time and the consequence of that is a lower income. Likewise there are long term and life changing consequences to having a baby.

tghe-retford

bestpud wrote: »

The point is you are able to work full time and yet choose not to, and expect the state to subsidise that decision. Morally, I'd say that places you in the same realm as the people you describe.

Well, if the Government gets its way, from articles I have read, low paid workers and part time workers may be required to retrain and take up skilled jobs which are in demand (ie. electricians, plumbing). They're taking the carrot approach at the moment (think of all the "Our Future - it's in our hands" advertisements at the moment) but this will change to a stick approach if people don't work themselves up the career ladder, and when the Government has done getting benefit claimants into work, they will be turning their attention to low paid workers like the original poster and myself. I'm looking for a new job in my home town as soon as I can, I daren't be around when the Government force me into college in my own time (at my own expense I bet, as I work) to train for a career I don't want to do.

It's part of Gordon Brown's 10 year plan on Social Mobility as well as hints made in a speech to the CBI:

http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page13851.asp

They even setup a new department to tackle the skills shortage: The Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills.

For the original poster, this may be a good incentive to try and find some better paid work. It is for me!

bellett

jen666 wrote: »

It seems that maybe if I went out, Got myself pregnant a few times, then I would get a house paid for, half my bills paid for and still get child benefit. If the government want to stop young single parents, the best thing to do would be to give young single people starting their career, a bit of help, rather than letting us that are working and paying tax, pay for those who delibratley get themselves pregnant just to get all these benefits.

Oh I do so agree! My sister is a single parent, has worked perhaps 18 months in the last 18 years (when IS said she had to because her son was old enough). Now she's on IB, her son is a single parent with a 4 year old child. He has never kept a job for more than 5 minutes either. They have a council house, massive TV, every known games machine under the sun (he bought a WII the minute they came on the market). He has TWO laptops and a PC. He and my sister go out drinking every weekend when the 4 year old stays with his mum and have enough money to get drunk every time. They pay no rent or council tax and seem to have money available at all times.

Until we start to stop letting unemployment be a choice, stop pampering to those who COULD work but WON'T and start helping those like yourself who are trying hard to stand on their own 2 feet nothing will improve.

Now I feel better!

galvanizersbaby

woodbine wrote: »

I never feel that being jealous of other peoples situations is a big help when dealing with your own problems,you seem to think that if you had a few kids youd get half your bills paid,sadly thats not quite how it works.
TBH if i were young free and single and still had my health i`d be looking for better paid work,or a job that offered a full weeks work,by the time i was 23 i was married with a mortgage,and a baby(the interest rate then was 15%)and although i was a manager i still had a bar job as well so we could eat and pay the bills,we got nothing except family allowance,no tax credits then.and there were almost 4 million people who wanted work that had non.

Woodbine I totally agree!

Oldernotwiser

tghe-retford wrote: »

Well, if the Government gets its way, from articles I have read, low paid workers and part time workers may be required to retrain and take up skilled jobs which are in demand (ie. electricians, plumbing). They're taking the carrot approach at the moment (think of all the "Our Future - it's in our hands" advertisements at the moment) but this will change to a stick approach if people don't work themselves up the career ladder, and when the Government has done getting benefit claimants into work, they will be turning their attention to low paid workers like the original poster and myself. I'm looking for a new job in my home town as soon as I can, I daren't be around when the Government force me into college in my own time (at my own expense I bet, as I work) to train for a career I don't want to do.

It's part of Gordon Brown's 10 year plan on Social Mobility as well as hints made in a speech to the CBI:

http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page13851.asp

They even setup a new department to tackle the skills shortage: The Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills.

For the original poster, this may be a good incentive to try and find some better paid work. It is for me!

I think that you've got the wrong end of the stick with the schemes you mention but even if you were completely accurate, how can you see it as a bad thing for low paid/low skilled workers to get better skills and earn more? Surely nobody wants to be stuck at the bottom of the heap doing crap jobs forever?

A_fiend_for_life

jen666 wrote: »

I am 22, living alone and on a low income.
I will shortley be living with 2 housemates, paying rent and bills, I earn around 10k befor tax, a year. However some weeks i only work 20 hours a week, other weeks i work around 30.
I have looked on the government site and have took the questionnaire as to do i qualify for working tax credits, however because I am under 25 I cannot claim.
Is there any form of tax credits for people younger than 25, living alone, with no dependants on a low income?

thanks
jen

Home front
Some pluses though: shared council tax and bills :j

Work front
Not sure about your job role but what is a bit 'unfair' is that you are getting:

short hours :eek:
variable hours :eek:
short notice of shifts :eek:

but if your employer is not providing decent shifts and hours its up to you to change it (more later).

To be honest I don't think you can be bothered second jobbing and, in part, I'm not surprised with those hours - but really its not that many hours either. In part it sounds like your looking for a quick fix :eek:(benefits) and are prepared to sit on your laurels:eek: (I will probley be better off in 3 years time.) again perhaps symptomatic of your hours. Maybe your not listening to yourself.

How much do you want to stay in your current career?
How much are you prepared to change career?
You need to take the view that the current situation is not an option.

You need to be asking some questions:

What are other employers offering - better rate, better hours, better conditions, better training, career progression?
How does your current role / experience compare for the above - reality check?
What are other employers asking for - experience, qualifications?
What training do you need - through work, self funding, distance learning, ILA?
Apply - you don't have to take the role but getting an interview is good for morale.
Are you prepared to move - for a year - two years?

Second jobbing - bars often need staff at short notice - you just need to let them know when you will be available. Any work from home?

Three years is a waste of time, money, savings, fun, career satisfaction and there is the opportunity to see other places.

tghe-retford

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I think that you've got the wrong end of the stick with the schemes you mention but even if you were completely accurate, how can you see it as a bad thing for low paid/low skilled workers to get better skills and earn more? Surely nobody wants to be stuck at the bottom of the heap doing crap jobs forever?

Sadly, in the same ways you see people in the media quoted as saying "benefit claimants are always sitting on their backside and won't do an honest day's work", regardless of the truth where many claimants do look hard for work, the Government will always react to the hype and push policies through to woo the middle and upper class voters. This is why James Purnell is pushing so hard on disabled claimants and why Caroline Flint is asking for council house tenants to get a job or lose their house. It sounds good to middle and upper class voters at a time where Labour really needs as much support as it can get.

Unfortunately, since the 10p tax rate abolition where attention turned to low paid workers who were most affected by this change (I know there other losers, but for the sake of this topic, I'll focus on low paid workers) we now have vox pops coming from the same middle and upper class voters shouting out, particularly on the BBC news website's most recommended comments how "the poor are subsidised by us", how "part timers are workshy and should get a proper skilled job", as well as a recognised lack of skilled workers for jobs such as electricians, joiners, plumbers. I'll not pick anyone out because this was a view picked up by a wide range of posters who said the same thing.

The Government will listen to the middle and upper class voters, and with Gordon Brown stating in his speech to the CBI that there are five million skilled workers needed, you won't realistically expect them to get that amount from benefit claimants forced into work, they'll have to look up the next step in the ladder, and that's the low paid and part time unskilled workers.

The Government cannot afford to not listen to voters, particularly at a time where they need every bit of support they can get. Believe me, the Government will come down on low paid workers to increase their skills, appease employers and investors as well as voters plus bring in more tax income and more money into the economy.

Sadly, for the original poster and myself, the Government tend to use the stick approach they already are with benefit claimants. Alongside claimants, the working classes are not as important as businesses and wealther voters. The only reason why there was a turnaround in the 10p tax rate abolition was because of the bad publicity in the press about the effects mostly on older people. I can see a lot of people being required to go into skilled work through no choice if the public reaction to the low paid as "workshy" "dossers" who "are young and fit and should get a better paid job" and "stop sponging off middle class taxpayers" doesn't change.