To be really cross about the proposed cuts?

As an aside : The inability to chop veg does not mean people have to go to the extra expense of buying prechopped. Frozen food is just ( if not more than given recent research ) healthy and cheaper.

A person whose hands can’t chop veg isn’t going to be able to break apart frozen veg into single meal portions either. Too often disability means you need the more expensive option.

It is very hypocritical as the government has said giving the disabled less money means they will get a job but giving the abled more money means they will get a job,

So the disabled get the stick
while the abled get the carrot

But we are expected to not notice this discriminatory ableist treatment of the most vulnerable?

I am listing examples where people currently on PIP are scoring less than 4pts in daily living activities and as a result will lose their PIP. These examples are also linked to extra costs. Your assertion that the way they are raising the threshold of PIP will not exclude anyone that has extra costs is entirely incorrect.

you said “So making it harder to get means those that have those expenses will still get them..”

There will be many disabled who have extra costs caused by their disabilities that will lose PIP. All it takes is looking at what gets you 1-3pts for each activity and the costs associated with the extra help to do each activity as a result.

Why there is such massive increase in PIP claims? Because it pays much more than UC only.
No, PIP is lower than the combination of regular UC elements (unemployment and housing). There is an increase in PIP claims mostly due to the fact our NHS has been and is being relentlessly defunded resulting in worsening health at the population level. The second largest factor in the increase in PIP claims is the increase in pension age from 60 to 67 so you have these older people now considered working age who are developing disabilities. The #1 risk factor for disability is age.

UC increase partially removes this incentive.
Incentive for what? To amputate a body part? Get cancer? Get an head injury? Have heart failure? Invent a Time Machine and make sure you are born with autism? blind/deaf? cerebral palsy? ADHD? Downs?

The rhetoric acts like people can just choose or say I have this or that medical condition and BAM! Here’s your PIP, here’s a higher UC for you. That isn’t the reality of applying for ESAto qualify for the health element of UC or for PIP.

I don't think that poster explained very well. It's not simply thinking "this is boring, I don't want to do it". My own experience of this is that either my brain won't work, or I end up melting down in tears with urges to self-harm in a stimming kind of way (eg. head banging).

For example, someone could offer me a million pounds to sit and read something really boring for eight hours. I want that million so much! Huge motivation! And boy, I'd try. But at some point I'd realise I was sitting there in a daze. Even if I could force my eyes to keep looking at the words and "reading" I'd not be taking anything in, my thoughts would wander elsewhere. (Like reading without listening to yourself!)

Or the boredom leading to meltdown thing - this actually happened to me in the past. It's really hard to explain the feeling of being trapped that no matter how you talk to yourself, gradually feels like you're going to burst, and all your abilities seep away. This used to happen to me in a previous job - there was a really boring bit with nothing to do. I used to be breaking down, then as soon as there was actual work to do again I'd be so relieved and capable again. This also happened to me in previous jobs that had no interest to me whatsoever, years ago when I didn't know about extra disability benefits and even became homeless as a result (in an area where I wasn't entitled to so much as a hostel place) so even with real concrete motivation to keep the job. I think this is made worse by trauma (which a lot of ND people struggle with) as your brain can't distract itself by being engaged with something so the traumatic memories and feelings seep in.

I'm not saying the answer is not to work, but it's important to find something that engages one slightly, and/or techniques around this problem. Personally, I've found it a lot easier since recovering from trauma. Using your cleaning toilets example, it could be slightly engaging as you could see it as a little challenge, faced with a dirty loo there is some engagement and purpose in making it clean again, you could challenge yourself to do each one faster or develop the most effective technique or something. Actually an issue here is the sort of jobs where you have to be there regardless, rather than getting paid once the work is done (so my super efficient toilet cleaning would lead to horribly boring bits with nothing to do).

I’m guessing Labour are hoping if they give people more money to look for work then they’ll get a job.
We’ll wait and see

Yes that will really incentivize those that apparently really don't want to work, won't it?🤔

I appreciate that it seems the disabled and unable to work may be worse off. That’s not something I agree with as those are the ones we, as a country, should be looking after.

However
Not everyone falls into that category and not everyone who currently gets PIP needs the care you describe.

As an aside : The inability to chop veg does not mean people have to go to the extra expense of buying prechopped. Frozen food is just ( if not more than given recent research ) healthy and cheaper. Hence the increase in this industry given the cost of living crisis

The government is increasing the out of work UC benefits for the completely healthy. So that is the exact opposite of “welfare should only go to those in the most need & unable to work”.

If you pause for a moment and think this makes complete sense.
Why there is such massive increase in PIP claims? Because it pays much more than UC only. UC increase partially removes this incentive. By simultaneously making PIP more difficult to get this will push more people to claim UC only. UC increase is still lower than UC+PIP so some savings here. For those who were made redundant increased UC gives a little bit of breathing space to find a suitable job or retrain. But - UC is time limited (I believe so, please correct me if I'm wrong) and people will be actively pushed from UC to find a job. I hope the next step is to make UC stop no matter what after certain, generous, period of time, so lifetime on benefits can't be an option for anyone, ever, apart from truly severely disabled.

Yes, quite it’s civilised child poverty. 🫣

You have had loads of jobs, past tense, I don’t think you realise how prevalent they are today. Especially for ND graduates seeking a job relevant to their first class degree.

No, making it harder in the way that is being proposed doesn’t mean that only those with extra expenses will get PIP.

You really don’t understand the activities, the pts system or the costs linked to each.

As it is someone who can’t wash themselves above the waist is going to lose PIP. They are still going to have a pay for a carer to wash their upper body and hair,

As it is those who can’t use their hands to do things like chop vegetables , or grip cleaning tools, or handle a hoover is going to lose PIP. They will still need to pay for bags of pre-cut veg and a regular cleaner.

Anyone who needs aids for any of the activities is going to lose PIP, so the costs of getting, maintaining, or replacing physical aids and/or paying for any subscription based aids they are still going to have to pay for.

Someone who is incontinent and requires incontinence pads (these are an aid) or a stoma bag but can change them their self is going to lose PIP because that’s only 2pts. Remember how much nappies cost for your baby? Now make them adult size. It’s not cheap. Nor is having a stoma bag.

So apply for jobs without personality tests? I’ve had loads of jobs, and I’ve never needed to take one. This ‘McDonalds won’t employ me, so nobody will’ is a bit silly.

It’s a bit like the child benefit cap on two children. The families with more than two children still have the costs of the rest of their children, they still have need for extra child benefit money. The government simply made a decision to push hundreds of thousands of families below the poverty line and then spaffed away any savings.

Incorrect. The government tried to make sure that people have to think before popping out yet another child. That the ones on benefits have to make the same choices as people who pay for their own. And this was done in a very civilised way - only children born well after cap was introduced were affected, twins out of scope etc. Don't have more kids than you can support. Simples

Your gut feeling is meaningless.
A big reason why ND people can’t find work is they fail all the personality tests that even McDonalds and Costas require to apply for entry level jobs. These personality tests are designed to weed out the ND applicants. So their application is rejected by the computer even if their qualifications match the job.

https://theweek.com/business/jobs/how-personality-tests-are-locking-autistic-people-out-of-jobs

https://www.bigissue.com/news/employment/work-jobs-autistic-people-personality-tests/

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/business/jodie-hill-are-personality-tests-a-barrier-or-a-benefit-for-neurodivergent-candidates-4993545

This problem has been known for a decade, but employers don’t seem to want to be inclusive when it comes to ND employees
https://hbr.org/2014/08/the-problem-with-using-personality-tests-for-hiring

How will taking away PIP from ND people force employers to offer them jobs when employers are brazenly weeding them out as undesirable?

The point is.
Some people don’t use their PIP for extra expenses, because they don’t have any
We’ve read examples on MN and I’m sure many of us know of cases such as this.
You’re assuming everyone uses it for the purpose intended. That’s not the case.

So making it harder to get means those that have those expenses will still get them and those who can work are required to do so.

I’m guessing Labour are hoping if they give people more money to look for work then they’ll get a job.
We’ll wait and see

Raising the threshold for PIP, isn’t a determination that they don’t need the money. Those who lose PIP will still have extra costs from being disabled, those costs and the need for financial assistance isn’t going to go away. They’ve already raised the threshold on DLA/PIP several times since austerity started so we know this to be true.

It’s a bit like the child benefit cap on two children. The families with more than two children still have the costs of the rest of their children, they still have need for extra child benefit money. The government simply made a decision to push hundreds of thousands of families below the poverty line and then spaffed away any savings.

It’s the same here but with disabled people, the government is choosing to push yet more families with a disabled person below the poverty line. In a country where being disabled already makes you far and away the most likely demographic to be under the poverty line.

I agree. It’s all very well saying there needs to be more job coaches, employment laws etc but my gut feeling is many people who are out of work due to ND will reject virtually any job that they could realistically apply for. It would be money wasted as in their heads they’re written off all jobs that are a bit dull, too pressured, not well paying enough, that require regular attendance, human interaction… the list goes on. I can see how the only thing that will change this is to effectively force people’s hands by withdrawing the money.

These cuts are needed as we simply cannot continue to fund so many people out of work. Welfare should only go to those most in need - those whose illness or disability is so severe, they're unable to function.

Yes, but what the government say they are doing is the opposite of what they are actually doing.

The government is increasing the out of work UC benefits for the completely healthy. So that is the exact opposite of “welfare should only go to those in the most need & unable to work”.

The government is slashing PIP benefits by £5bn. PIP is not an out of work benefit, in fact it is necessary for many disabled recipients to stay in work. Its purpose is to partially cover the extra costs of disabilities. So again, cutting this benefit goes completely against the maxim that welfare should only be for those in the most need.

Giving every fit person on the dole an “inflation busting” benefits increase is somehow not an incentive to choose benefits as a lifestyle and avoid going back to work.

If they lose their PIP though the reassessment means they are deemed to not need the money.
That would include for carers. If they are disabled enough to need careers they are hardly going to lose PIP.

If they lose their PIP payments it means they are deemed to not require them and as such fit to work.

Except PIP isn’t an out of work benefit and, at the moment, is independent of a capacity for work assessment. You can be fit to work and need significant support, you can also be unfit for work and there be no support that will change that situation. Assuming PIP eligibility means fit/not fit is too simple a binary.

Is that what we have devolved to? Telling disabled women to take in sewing or piece making so they don’t starve? I have several history books on the Victorian era that show how this doesn’t result in a livelihood or pride, but exacerbates disabling conditions, causes new ones and is a shortcut to an early grave.

Agree
The 18 month wait seems too long when other new taxes were brought in almost immediately

although appreciate assessors may need to update their training etc

If you are ND then pushing through something you are not interested in is very difficult

Gosh, some people are for real 🙄

I'm sure people who clean public toilets at train stations don't find it too exciting, yet they do their job. And whatever little tax they pay still go to support those who "can't do something they are not interested in".

Everyone pushed through something they are not interested in / hate doing find it very hard. Yet 73% of working age adults in this country have to do it. To support remaining 20% who find it too hard.

I put 20% on purpose, assuming 7% or so are truly disabled and really cannot work. For this group and mainly their carers benefits possibly should even increase.
Really, this change can't come soon enough

This article is making assumptions
Its pure guesswork hence the use of the word ‘could’

It states 1.2million people approx may lose their PIP payments after new assessment.
If they lose their PIP payments it means they are deemed to not require them and as such fit to work. It also states they will lose their carers allowance but if they lose their PIP then it follows that they have been assessed as not requiring a carer ie going hand in hand with the assessment as fit to work. So there will be no need for carers in the home.

Labours policy of Making Work Pay does not make this country uncivilised and does not mean people who agree that if you can you should need to in any way check their privilege. It’s just common sense