Pip and the government decisions

[Differentstarts]

I don't understand why the government are going for an all or nothing approach with getting disabled people back into work. I think there is a significant amount of disabled people who could work part time but if they lose pip and lcwra then this won't be an option as nobody can live on a part time wage. I think expecting people to suddenly be able to work 50/60 hour weeks just isn't realistic. I work part time and claim pip and lcwra and it works when I worked full time in the past i actually worked less as I was always ill and in hospital. I should be still able to claim pip and lcwra with the changes but I don't have a lot of trust in the system that this will definitely be the case and if I lost that money then what as I wouldn't be able to pay my bills, get to hospital appointments pay for aids etc. I would lose my home, my job everything. I just don't understand why there isn't a middle ground and part time work isn't being encouraged as surely the aim is to get more people working. I just don't get it.

They government always manages to find money for other things no issue

Then it is best to work out why this is and offer solutions. Making disabled people poorer is not the way.
There are not enough jobs out there for people that are actively looking for work.

Cos a lot of people are on NHS waiting lists for things like knee replacements.

That too.

But that's the problem. Lwcra should be for people who can't work while lcw stay for those who can work part time while not being pressured. That's how it used to be but no one wants lcw anymore because the government stopped the payment for that group. This has then increased the number of people claiming for lcwra or wanting to be put on lwcra while they can still work.

Also, they'd be able to see the actual number of those who can work full time, part time and those who can't work at all if things were separate. Why call lcwra an out of work benefit if people can still work? It may as well be PIP which is what I think the government is trying to do by linking them.

But i can't work consistently and spend a lot of time in hospital or recovering from surgeries so It's the only way to pay bills as working part time will not cover them and then pip covers the extra cost of being disabled. When I was given it the person I spoke to said you don't need to worry now when your sick pay runs out or the cost of not being paid the first 3 days. I'm not exactly rolling in money I'm just trying to survive. I think most people are impressed I work at all considering my circumstances

Pip is purely to cover the extra costs of being disabled. Lcrwa is to cover the costs of everything else when your at a significant disadvantage to non disabled people an can only do what you can do. So do you think I should just give up and quit my job or do you think I should keep trying my best to do what I can do when I can.

I understand and i dont mean your situation in particular but i mean this was the group of people on LCW - those who can work as and when or consistently but part time and still got payment but now most people don't even know lcw exists because of the cut to payment and most going for lcwra.

It's in their names even. LCW and LCWRA. One for limited capability for work and the other limited capability for both work and any work related activity. So nothing to do with work at all. Nowadays, it used differently.

What I'm saying isn't your situation itself but in general. I can see why they're trying to link the two even though it shouldn't be that way. LCWRA has gone from a completely unemployment benefit to both can't work and limited work. PIP is for both too so of course they want to slowly merge them together.

Can anyone tell me what the next stage is in this and when it will be happening?

Trouble is there are lots of people who claim LCWRA now who could not get PIP as they do not meet the criteria. And people who claim PIP who do not meet the criteria to get LCWRA.
LCWRA is an income replacement benefit. It is so that someone who is not working can still eat and pay their bills. PIP is a payment given to disabled people that meet the criteria so that their disability does not cost them money. It is not means tested whereas UC is.
Linking them makes no sense.
The government also want to reduce the amount of money people in LCWRA get. And if only people getting PIP will get LCWRA then I can guarantee that their PIP will be used for bills and not their disability.

I'm also agreeing with your OP that it shouldn't be all or nothing with either work full time or be too disabled to work. If they bring back payments for lcw, that should be the middle category where people can do limited work and still get some payment to help them insteas of losing it altogether.

I think it is consultation stage at the moment.

I knew absolutely nothing about either until I was migrated from wtc and they started on me why I wasn't working more hours and I said because I'm disabled. So they set up a telephone call and I wasn't even a quarter of the way through my medical conditions before they said we've got enough then I asked if they would make me quit my job as I didn't realise you could work with it and she said absolutely not we encourage you to work as much as you can but will take the pressure of when you can't. All this benefit stuff is confusing to me and iv only ever gone along with what people have told me to do. It was my cardiologist who encouraged me to go for pip. I wasn't claiming anything up to a few years ago

I though those who are severely disabled and unable to work won’t need to.
I wasn’t aware of people being forced to work 50/60 hours a week OP.
Where does it say that?

@WeylandYutani I agree it shouldn't be that way. The government have messed up their own system with it all.

@Differentstarts I agree it can be very confusing and frustrating not knowing where you fall at any given time when they switch and change rules, names and policies often for essentially the same things.

Well can you afford to live on a part time minimum wage job with the extra costs of being disabled

Maybe given your comments combining the two makes
both means tested or/ and
cuts down on red tape and admin costs for dwp
makes the system less confusing to applicants.

One benefit for those who are disabled and completely unable to work
and One out of work benefit for everyone else. ( perhaps with a top up for those with costly medical etc requirements.)

I have no idea btw….just a thought / guess

But out of work disabled people and out of work non disabled are not the same non disabled people will be able to work full time with help. Disabled people won't but should be helped to work what they can

I don't think he'll lose his PIP but he's under 22 so I'm so worried for him he'll lose his LCWRA until he's 22 when I think he'd get it again. Care leavers get treated really badly by this government and the Tories before them.

I’m not aware all disability benefits are being taken away though. In fact they aren’t according to the green paper.
The method to determine who gets the benefit is changing.
Yes, so less get it and more get less

If people who are severely disabled and completely incapable of work have all their benefits taken away then that would be an absolute disgrace. I think those people are worrying needlessly.

I did say those who are out of work but deemed capable of work would get top ups in my pp.
Im not aware it says anywhere in the green paper that those deemed disabled loose all their benefits linked to disabilities.

It just doesn’t say that

The proposals say that to keep PIP you need to score 4 points on at least one descriptor for daily living. And to keep LCWRA you need to have PIP.
So someone who is right now on PIP but does not have 4 points on one descriptor, and is on LCWRA as not fit to work, is going to find their money will be severely reduced plus they will be expected to look for full time work.

I think you have a lot more faith in the random podiatrist or nurse who works for the dwp to understand the complexity of rare conditions and who have the nerve to lie and go against consultants and specialists. I went from nothing to full rate on both in mandatory reconsideration the only difference was it was a different person and it was recorded all the evidence stayed the same.