To be furious that Osborne wants to remove the right to request flexible working?(130 Posts)
I am so so angry about this. Have these b*stards any idea how hard it is to be a working mum, the exorbitant cost of childcare etc, constant rise in cost of living coupled with drop in income and lack of job security.
It has put me off my lunch
Will probably need later
THIS IS WHAT SAVE THE CHILDREN HAVE TO SAY ABOUT UC AND LONE PARENTS:www.savethechildren.org.uk/node/2457
Poorer working mums trying to earn more for their children by working longer hours will be hit hard by the new Universal Credit, despite government pledges to make work pay, new research by Save the Children shows.
The charity has found that 150,000 of the UKs poorest single working mums could lose up to £68 a week under the new Universal Credit, pushing a quarter of a million children deeper into poverty. The flagship welfare reforms will also hurt "second earners" - most of whom are women - with some families losing up to £1800 per year.
There are 3.5 million children living in poverty in the UK, one of the highest figures in Europe. The majority of these children come from working households, while evidence from overseas shows that supporting mothers in work drives down child poverty.
Female unemployment has recently topped 1m, while mothers already struggling to support their children have suffered cuts to childcare support, child benefit and tax credits. A new poll by Save the Children and Netmums found that 56% of mums said the main thing stopping them from taking a job or making them consider giving up work is the cost of childcare.
Universal Credit will help some families, but mums working hard to stay above the breadline are its big blind spot. It's incredibly hard bringing up 3 kids on £370 a week - losing almost a fifth of that will push many families over the edge, said Save the Children CEO Justin Forsyth. "The government must make sure mums who want to work keep more of their incomes and get more support with childcare. Otherwise well see fewer women in the workplace and more children growing up in poverty.
Universal Credit, which begins to replace the current benefits and tax credit system from October 2013, will leave many families better off but will also make a total of 1.1 million families with children poorer.
Ahead of the budget on 21st March, Save the Children is launching its Mums United campaign in collaboration with Gingerbread, the Daycare Trust and Netmums to make work pay for mothers who want to work their way out of poverty. It makes three main calls to Chancellor George Osborne for his next Budget:
- Ensure single working mums keep more of their incomes before losing benefits, as they are the only earner in the family.
- Ensure second earners keep first £2000 of their earnings without losing any benefits, as main breadwinners do;
- Increase support for childcare costs for low income families from the current level of 70% to 80%, to make sure mums are not priced out of work.
Too many children in this country are going without basics like hot meals or proper clothes because their parents cant earn enough. We know from other countries that supporting mums who want to work takes children out of poverty, so we need a system which offers mothers that choice. Unless we see movement on childcare and benefits for struggling working mums in this budget, it could be too late for hundreds of thousands of children, said Mr Forsyth.
The main findings of the Save the Children research are:
- Lack of funding means that many poor parents trying to work more will lose out under Universal Credit, pushing more children into poverty. The majority of children in poverty live in working households;
- A typical single parent with three children, working full time on or around the minimum wage, could be as much as £3500 per year (£68 per week) worse off;
- A single parent with two children, working full time on or around the minimum wage, could be as much as £2500 per year (£48 per week) worse off;
- As well as hitting single parents working longer hours, the new system will support single earner couple families at the expense of couples where both parents work part-time on a low income. A typical low income couple with three children where one parent works 24 hours a week and the other works a few hours on low pay could lose as much as £1800 a year (£35 per week) under the new system;
- The number of people having to work part-time but wanting full-time work has recently reached a record 1.3 million;
To join Save the Childrens Mums United campaign or find out more, please go to www.savethechildren.org.uk/mums-united and sign your name. To watch mums joining the campaign, follow #MumsUnited on Twitter.
For further information, including interviews with case studies and spokespeople, please contact: Oliver Courtney on 0207 012 6469 or out of hours on 07831 650409.
Notes to editors:
- Universal Credit will streamline the current benefits and tax credit systems into one system. Its impact on family incomes will be complex and vary by family type and size, and by housing and childcare costs. Many low income working families will see increased incomes and improved work incentives, which is very welcome news for those in poverty. However under this top line picture there are worrying exceptions, with some hard-working parents - especially mums - being hit hard. Overall, 2.8 million households will have higher entitlements, 2.7 million households will see no change and 2 million households including 1.1 million households with children will have lower entitlements, according to the Department for Work and Pensions impact assessment of November 2011.
- A single mum who is £68 a week worse off has three children and has earnings from work of around £242 a week (equivalent to working 35 hours a week just above the minimum wage). Her gross income after housing costs is £370 under the current system and £302 under Universal Credit. The calculations are based on a family with average local authority rent and average pre school childcare costs.
- Across the country there are now over one million women unemployed, up from 700,000 in September 2008, with a further 1.3million women classed as economically inactive (as opposed to counted as being unemployed) but wanting a job. 2011 was the first year since 1996 that the Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) claimant count for women was consistently over half a million.
- Amongst couple families only 5% of children in families where both parents work full time and 8% of children where one parent works full-time and one parent works part-time are in poverty. This compares with 29% of children in households where one parent works full-time and the other parent doesnt work. In spite of this the Government is prioritising support for single earner households at the expense of second earners, at a time when full-time work isnt obtainable for many households.
- Female employment and child poverty are inextricably linked. In countries where child poverty is lower there tend to be more women in work
- The Government has said it will ensure no one is worse off under the new system in cash terms by making extra payments to those whose entitlement under Universal Credit is lower than under the current system. However, this protection will only be provided to current claimants and for a time limited period. Details of cash protection have yet to be fully set out. If the circumstances of the claimants change (what this means has not been defined) then they may lose this protection. New claimants will not be protected.
- Some working poor single parents will be better off under the new system because Universal Credit is likely to boost the incomes of single parents working less than 16 hours a week on low pay. However, there will be less of an incentive for this group to increase the number of hours they work to more than 16 compared to the current system.
I think George and Dave are secret Scottish nationalists. The campaigns going well so far.......
An intelligent employer would realise that they'd have a better pool of skilled workers to choose from if they didn't exclude those who would have to work non-standard hours.
And happy employees are loyal employees.
If you only require unskilled work then maybe you think there are plenty of fish in the sea. If the job you want doing requires skills or qualifications or takes time to learn, that's not so true even now.
I think everyone should have the right to request flexible working. Not just mothers or parents but everyone. If everyone could and DID request flexible working then there would be slightly less of a feeling of I don't want to employ that woman because she might go off and have children and then not be around as much
Lots of companies seem to be stuck in the dark ages and think that you have to actually be there at the same time as everyone else to get anything done.
No it's not the scrapping of the minimum wage or EPA but it is an erosion of the rights that have been hard won to allow many women to remain in the workplace.
I don't think many employers will take any of these stupid ideas up (those that are small enough not to have to be competing for the best graduate recruits won't have £2k of shares to give away per head) but I'm appalled that Osborne can put them forward as a serious suggestion in the first place.
There is no right flexible working.
The possible removal in some companies (btw: anyone assessed how many want to do this, and do you have to be a plc?) to whether you can request flexible working isn't that important. It was a "smoke and mirrors" measure in the first place, as there was never any obligation on an employer to grant it and very little policing to ensure requests were being taken seriously.
Look I think this plan is totally pants but it doesnt mean scrapping of the minimum wage or the Equal Pay Act.
Employees would give up their rights to:
Request flexible working
Time off for training
Stricter maternity rights - giving 16 weeks' notice of early return, not 8.
I know what a fascist is, thank you very much.
Will it be worth women working anyway if they earn less than min wage and work less than 35 hours a week. They will get no benefit at all.
Yes they have, the rights that give you protection under equality and employment law.
So they haven't yet decided which rights should be traded for shares then?
Novack, you are simply wrong m'dear. We had the old age pension act 1908,
Free school meals act 1909,The National Insurance Act 1911 which set up the first national insurance for health and unemployment payments.
First rule of fight club is know wtf your talking about! As for starving people in Iraq, I presume your point is that if Blaire did it to them we can do it to our own people. That sounds like a civilised attitude....not.
They are being mis-reported and spun in a bad light on here as people want to deflect from Elitist Ed's jingoistic one nation comedy speech last week.
I am a bit confused by this.
People don't have a right to work flexibly. They have a right to put forward a case to work flexibly without being sacked. Companies can refuse to let employees work flexibly. Do the Conservatives honestly think this right should be removed or has a mistake been made/they have been misreported?
There wasn't any welfare state in the UK either when we were fighting fascism across europe so comparing the tories to racist, genocidal biggots is a long stretch of the imagination.
Of course you could turn a blind eye to the actual real poverty inflicted on millions and starving to death through economic sanctions hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children under Tony Blair and Labour policies.
The fascist bastards are so bloody out of touch thay don't know what its like have to work when you've got kids.
I had to explain to DS what a fascist was today while I was watching the news and
screeching talking at the TV.
He said 'I already know what a bastard is thanks' (!!!)
It was only Hunt and some of the loony Christians who thinks 12 weeks is sensible.
NOBODY in the government has put forward a paper to lower the abortion limit in any serious way.
Berlusconni, Blairs mate brought tons of woman into politics too. They are just showmen.
Personally I don't care about the sex or colour of the politician i care about the policies.
novack I am female and vote labour and yes I think the abortion limit needs lowering however 12 weeks is very low. What about severe abnormality picked up on 20 week scans? or something that puts the woman and babys life at risk?
I am not anti abortion or pro life btw.
This government do seem very anti women though! Not like good old Tony Blair who brought lots of females into politics during his time as mp.
Hmm it is Labour female voters how are more likely to vote for a reduction in the abortion time limit.
The lie that people are better off on benefits than in work exposed.
So, the Tories are coming up with their usual woman bashing policies.
Ignore Novak - he's a Tory plant.
What do we DO about it? Individual action changes lives. Do we join labour? Even tho Ed is rubbish? Do we support 38 degrees?
What can we do to oppose this women hating, poor hating polices?
The Tory cabinet mainly went to Eton. They are mostly men. Of course they don't care about us.
Do how do we counter act their toxic policies?
Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.
The blind hatred for the tories by the minority on here is lame.
The correct spelling is majority.
Apparently last year 10600 people cured by Atos died not long after being found fit for work. IDS could be quoted as saying "well, it's a start". But then he's a despicable twat. Or tory. Take your pick.
He said "there are no plans to cut it"
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.