To think very few carers will benefit from the “ increase “ in carers

Also the government still thinks carers are only worth, or will be happy with a couple of short days a week at minimum wage. Plenty of us were earning above that before becoming a carer, but no matter. Leave your aspirations at the door, along with your pension and any hope of ever getting out of poverty.

It helps carers who are able to care and also work. They can earn more.

However, some caring responsibility is so huge that there are no free hours to work as well. Those carers care for the most disabled and need more help than £81 per week.

I care for my mum but it's around a couple of hours a day, 7 days a week so I don't claim. Not enough caring hours but I realise some do claim and work alongside.

Some carers spent most of their time caring and have no free time for anything else. I really feel for those carers.

But the thing about all of that is, of the 60,000 people who can now access Carers Allowance, how many will also be claiming Universal Credit - thereby rendering it utterly pointless?

I imagine many of the 60,000 carers who now fall under the limit will also rely on Universal Credit….which means they won’t actually benefit.

To be clear about exactly how many people benefit we’d need far more detailed information. Just looking at who falls within the scope of Carers Allowance doesn’t tell the full story.

Of course, it will help a minority of carers - and that’s great for those that get any benefit from this.

I just think we’re so used to getting precisely fuck all from the Tories that we’re getting excited over breadcrumbs. It’s a very small sticking plaster which leaves many of us still bleeding copiously.

Helen Walker, Chief Executive at Carers UK, said:
“It’s fantastic to hear that the Government will increase the earnings threshold for Carer’s Allowance allowing 60,000 more carers juggling work and care to access this benefit. It’s the largest increase in the earnings limit for Carer’s Allowance since it was introduced in 1976.
“Carers working and claiming Carer’s Allowance can now take on additional hours to earn up to £196 per week from April 2025, or over £10,000 a year. This is a vital poverty prevention measure helping many carers, particularly women, stay in the labour market. It will make a noticeable difference for many, and for the first time in decades, carers will not lose out as the National Living Wage rises. It will help to put much needed cash into the pockets of working carers who do so much to look after their disabled, ill and older relatives.
“Many carers are still struggling with their finances whilst providing so much for society. In addition to today’s announcement, we need to see a full review of Carer’s Allowance as the lowest benefit of its kind at only £81.90 per week for providing a minimum of 35 hours of care. 45% of carers receiving Carer’s Allowance are struggling to make ends meet and urgent steps must be taken to further tackle poverty for carers and their families.”

It is a rise in the earnings limit only.

This is what Carers UK have to say:

'Today the Chancellor, Rt Hon Rachel Reeves MP, delivered Labour’s first budget for 14 years.
Carer’s Allowance earnings limit rise
This is an unprecedented rise in the earnings limit on Carer's Allowance, the main carers' benefit, to the equivalent of 16 hours at the National Living Wage. The National Living Wage will go up from £11.44 to £12.21 an hour from April 2025, resulting in one of the biggest increases in the earnings limit since the benefit was first created in 1976. Working carers will now be able to earn £196 per week and claim Carer’s Allowance – an increase of around £45 per week in comparison to the previous earnings threshold of £151. 60,000 more carers will be able to access Carer’s Allowance as a result.
This change is unprecedented, helping thousands of carers to keep a toe in the labour market. It means that carers would be able to earn up to £2,340 per year more, providing much needed cash in the pockets of those who rely on it most. For the first time in decades, carers won’t lose out as the National Living Wage rises. Pegging the earnings threshold to the National Living Wage will end the guessing game for carers – putting an end to the anxiety of reducing working hours to compensate for minimum wage increases.
Carers in poverty
Support via Carer’s Allowance is vital for those who are unable to combine work and care, but it remains the lowest benefit of its kind at just £81.90 per week. Many are struggling with high living costs as a result of high levels of inflation. There are 1.2 million carers living in poverty across the UK who need urgent help. The Government should take urgent steps, including a full review of Carer’s Allowance and other social security benefits available to carers, to tackle the root causes of poverty.'

30 October 2024

The way that this is being reported by some of the media makes it sound like Carers Allowance has gone up with the Budget! Just to be clear, it has not gone up! It remains at £81.90 per week for between 35 and 168 hours caring - that is £2.34 to 48p per hour. It will only go up In April together with other work age benefits by 1.7%, which is a whopping increase of £1.39, making it £83.29 a week - that is £2.37 to 49p an hour.

For those thinking 'whatever shall I spend my extra £1.39 on from April?', remember that for those having to rely on Universal Credit, such as many of the 24/7 carers, every single penny of that very slightly increased Carers Allowance will still be taken off.

I care for my mum full time. So only getting £81 a week. No pension, no savings. It's a disgusting amount

Yes your right.

As I said, there’s a lot more that could be done. I just don’t think the change, which is the biggest increase in the earnings limit since the introduction of CA, is only lip service or will only benefit those claimants pp mentioned (which was the point of my post). You obviously disagree, which is, of course, perfectly fine.

I think that while 60,000 - assuming that's an accurate estimate - sounds like a lot, it's a drop in the ocean when compared to the actual number of carers.

There are 1.4 million people receiving Carer's Allowance, and there are an estimated 10.6 million carers in the UK. 60,000 people out of those figures is pretty poor, in my opinion.

It's the amount you can earn. So if you qualify for carers you care fir someone minimum of 35 hours a week at an hourly rate of £2.34 an hour. But wait the government says you can work another 16 before they take anything off. So not only being a carer with overnight responsibility we can now work 50plus hours a week.

There is more that could be done, but, personally I think Carers UK estimate of 60,000 more carers being able to access CA is more than lip service.

I agree there are some who will benefit.

I just think compared to the total number of carers, it’s a very small number that will see any benefit at all. And yet, it’s being touted as some great policy change for carers which ignores the fact that a) it won’t help the majority, particularly not as a standalone tweak and b) those with the lowest incomes won’t benefit at all.

We can debate all day about what individuals in very specific circumstances might be able to benefit, assuming of course they can fit in longer working hours alongside their caring responsibilities. However the crux of it is that it’s not a policy that will help most/many carers and it feels like nothing more than lip service - from a party that’s supposed to be interested in helping those in the greatest need.

Similar situation but with additional needs kids. I cam work school hours now I have placements finally sorted so too much for carers but I can't extend my hours or work any school holidays

That's me!
I had to give up my well paid nhs job to care for my two disabled children.
It's impossible to get someone to care for a six foot strong 20 year old who can display challenging behaviour.
He's an angel for me though.
And can't claim uc as his dad works!

Both of my responses mentioning other groups who would benefit were in response to posters saying:

1. “This will benefit one small group of carers - those who work between 12 and 16 hours a week but also have a partner who earns too much for them to claim UC. Other than that, nearly all carers are also claiming UC!”
2. “The only people this change will help is those with too much savings to be able to claim UC.”

As I said in a pp, there is a lot wrong with carer’s allowance. I was just showing there are other claimants who will benefit.

That’s a very narrow group of people though, I doubt there are many that fall into such a very specific set of criteria.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting that no carers at all will benefit, just that a very large proportion won’t. And probably those with the greatest poverty - as a generalisation - will be those who miss out. Families with children on a low income, households with disabled people, single parents - all of these groups are likely to rely on UC which means this change will make precisely no difference.

Carers are often low income families, and many rely on UC. It’s the total obliteration of Carers Allowance by UC that is the issue. Even treating it as part of monthly “earnings” would help, surely that would be a good compromise?

I think the issue is that all of this is never looked at holistically - it’s a sticking plaster slapped on here and there, rather than really thinking properly about how everything hangs together and what would make a real difference.

There are many barriers that carers face in trying to work longer hours - upping the permitted work doesn’t address any of these. And by failing to consider how CA dovetails with other benefits, it’s a missed opportunity to provide genuine help.

This assumes all carer’s also claim UC though, which they don’t.

I didn’t say all single people aren’t entitled to the housing element, but some aren’t. Just like some couples and families are eligible and some are not. It is not just living rent free somewhere or having a mortgage paid off. Claimants with mortgages are not eligible for the housing element.

A single person who is a carer, over 25, without children or young people on the claim, not eligible for the housing element, caring for an adult outside the household e.g. a parent and earning, say, £190pw would have the following example.

At the moment, such a person is not eligible for CA because they are over the earnings limit for CA, so they have their earnings of £190pw plus UC with a UC calculation of:

Standard element £393.45
Carer element £198.31
Total = £591.71

Earnings of say £190 per week. £823.34 per month ((£190 x 52) / 12).

Earning deduction of £823.34 x 0.55 = £453.83 (before anyone comments, those without children/young people on their claim or LCW/LCWRA do not have a work allowance.)

Total of UC elements - earnings deduction = UC award
£591.71 - £453.83 = £137.81

So £137.81 in UC and £823.34 earnings per month. Total income = £961.15.

—

With the change, they will be eligible for CA so they have their earnings of £190pw plus CA but no UC because the CA deduction will wipe out the remaining UC award.

Earnings of £823.34 per month and £354.90 CA (made into the monthly amount for ease of comparison so (£81.90 x 52) / 12). Total income = £1,178.24.

I think pp means people who live rent free somewhere, like a relative, or have a mortgage paid off etc.

What do you mean? Single people aren't entitled to help with housing?

yanbu as those working part time (usually on minimum wage or close to it), are likely to see pay rises that take them over the earnings threshold. Not sure if the threshold has gone up in the budget.

The only people this change will help is those with too much savings to be able to claim UC.

That isn’t true. For example, as I explained in a previous post, single carers without children who aren’t/wouldn’t be eligible for the housing element of UC and are caring for someone outside their household e.g. a parent will benefit.

No-one is forced to claim CA if they don’t want to. If they want to just claim UC including the CE they are free to do so.

If the intention was to encourage carer’s to work, or to work more hours, then yes it does work for it’s intended purpose.

It doesn't, though, because they will just lose their UC. They won't be financially any better off than the current system.

If the intention was to enable more carer’s to be eligible by raising the earnings limit, then yes it does work and it well thought out and it means (by their figures) that 60,000 more people will now be able to claim it.

Except those people would probably be better off claiming UC with the Carers Element rather than Carer's Allowance. 16hrs a week is what? £190ish minimum wage. A carer would still get UC on that wage currently. But when this new thing comes in, they won't. Carer's Allowance is worth less than UC with Carer's Element.

The only people this change will help is those with too much savings to be able to claim UC.

No I agree, there are absolutely so many people that this doesn’t work for. But people who CAN work extra hours, but previously didn’t due to the earnings limit, can now increase their hours to the new limit without losing it.