To think every SAHM, low hour PT worker and carer should read this?

[Peachy]

Well i am not but it matters to you so you must

here

Changes to system WRT worker hours

have a thread in chat and don;t want a debate, or at least won't participate iun one as petrified as we will now certianly lose our home and not up to taking flak. But if it affects you, you need to know.

How is the country better off? The destruction of the family unit for the lower paid makes this a better country?

Lookatheears - Labour are cunts too, you know! The fact is - while it doesn't say that carers or the disabled will be subject to this - a lot of people that are REGISTERED DISABLED no longer qualify for DLA or incapacity benefits like ESA since ATOSsers took it over.

Take epilepsy, for example (my disability). It used to be that ONE seizure a WEEK qualified you automatically for DLA - because who the heck wants to employ someone who will probably be off sick for one day EVERY WEEK??!! I qualified for DLA and the protections that offered under those criteria.

Since ATOSsers took over - the criteria for an adult with epilepsy to qualify for DLA is now TWO seizures a DAY before they qualify. That is over 700 seizures a year before they qualify as disabled enough not to work...so you could have 50 seizures a year, or 500, and STILL be classed as fit to work FT by the DWP, even if the medical advice you are given is to either work PT or not at all...

So PLEASE don't patronise me by saying that the disabled will be protected from this, nor will people who care for dc with asd - most people with ASD easily 'pass' the ATOSsers fit to work test, even if they are non-verbal. So even carers of dc with asd will be expected to work, unless they are currently getting carers allowance - which I am not, despite two out of my 4 dc having asd. NO-ONE is going to be exempt from this, it will just get worse and worse, and it truly IS Dickensian IMO.

Latchkey teens?

Oh give over.

Thousands of mothers of teens have to work to pay the bills.

"A couple with children over 12 will both be expected to work 35 hours."

is not "The destruction of the family unit".

So the 12yr old will look after themselves every school holiday but that's not detrimental to the family unit or the tween involved.

How is the country better off? The destruction of the family unit for the lower paid makes this a better country?

But it's perfectly okay for my DH to work 80 hours a week to pay for others not to have to work, yes? And it's perfectly okay for the better off to work full time so the less well off don't have to?
And it's perfectly okay for millions of middle income families to both work full time and lose their CB and TC just so lower income families ( like the ones I see) can both walk their kids to and from school every day?

bytheMoonlight childcare for children where the youngest is 13years old?

Of course the disabled will be protected, Hunty.

They are just changing the system so that practically nobody is disabled according to the criteria.

It's very well planned, I'll give them that. [cynical]

And I ask again (of those saying that it's about time this happened). Where will all the jobs come from?

I am not arguing that people who are able to work should choose not to. People have a responsibility to provide for themselves, whenever possible. And the truly vulnerable should be supported. Always.

It is the mark of a truly savage society to turn on its most vulnerable in difficult times.

My problem is the idea that, with unemployment running at what? 2.5 million? people will be told that they have to find work or their benefits will be reduced (2.5 million jobs currently going begging then? where exactly are they all?) and if they ARE in work, but they don't earn enough, they must earn more - (HOW? How do you do that?) or get a second job. (erm. 2.5 million people don't have a FIRST one! Where the hell are the second ones going to come from?)

So we have to magic 2.5 million first jobs out of nowhere. AND then magic however many second jobs out of nowhere.

And has anyone considered the impact on employers, particularly small companies? If they have to pay a higher wage, how are they going to do that? By employing fewer people. So again - where will all these jobs come from? Or they'll have to cover their massively increased costs by charging more, making the uk even more expensive.

So, fine. People should work, unless they are genuinely unable to. Of course they should.

Show me the jobs. Show me 2.5 million jobs in the UK. Show me five hundred thousand second jobs going begging also.

Where are they?

So the 12yr old will look after themselves every school holiday but that's not detrimental to the family unit or the tween involved.

Are you for real? WTF do you think the children of the millions of families where BOTH parents have to work, do? Hmm?? What do you think they do? Or do they not count because their parents aren't poor?

"That other thread has been deleted. I don't really understand what it's all about but it sounds scary. Does anyone know how it will affect me? I'm a sahm/carer. DH earns £16.5k, I get carers allowance. We get no WTC but a lot of CTC. We have ds1 aged 5, ds2, aged 3.5, ds3 aged 9 months and I'm newly pg with dc4. DS2 and DS3 have SN (ds2 gets middle rate care dla) and dc4 likely to as well."

well, exactly. Can't come soon enough, if you ask me.

Oh, and before I get written off as a scrounger seeking to justify carrying on scrounging - I have a business. As does my husband.

These proposals suck.

hecate the goal is not full employment - it is to get the vancant jobs filled & so reduce the welfare bill

Lookattheears - Carers and the disabled will NOT be exempt from these cuts - ATOSsers have been tasked with cutting the amount of claimants on DLA even though they KNOW that a lot of genuine claimants will not get the financial help they need. The government have set a budget that does not allow everyone in need to claim in future. They have changed the qualifying criteria for lots of things that used to automatically qualify for DLA.

Disability rights groups are very concerned about this, and are mounting a legal challenge Here is more info

So, Lookattheears - Would you employ someone FT who may require between 52 and 365 days off every year? Because if you have a seizure, you need time to recover from it, and I would be asleep after a seizure, while I am post-ictal - it's a bit hard to work when I am asleep! If someone has 700 seizures a year - they are NOT going to be able to work, or even live any semblance of a normal life - yet they will be classed as fit for FT work by ATOS...

Tillymint - I am unable to work FT due to my disability. There is a good reason why somebody is unable to work FT - Yet according to ATOS, I am fit to work FT - even though it would be illegal as my Neurologist will not sign a fit-to-work form for me that LETS me work FT. I will be directly affected by these sanctions.

These proposals suck.

In your opinion.

Some of us think they are long overdue, especially after reading some posts on this thread.

but tilly - they say that people will lose a portion of their benefits if they don't work.

How can that be allowed to happen when the jobs are not there?

Fine. Reduce unemployment. No problem. But they are saying that they will take money away from people who don't work or do work but don't earn enough.

You CANNOT do that unless you live in a country where there is a job for every single person in that country. Can you?

No, they will lose some benefits if they do not take a reasonable job when offered it.

lookatthe YAY!!!!!

Lookattheears are you for real?

HuntyCat i know people who will benefit from failing their ATOS test.

Lookattheears Fri 11-Nov-11 18:47:26
And why, why would anyone deliberately take the huge risk of bringing a child they think will be disabled, into the world? I'm pretty gobsmacked by that. Why would you do that?

because the parents want them?
because they love them?
because a person who is disabled has the right to life?
Because most disabilities are not life threatening?
because people with disabilities are human beings?

next step compulsary abortions for disabled foetuses.

and gas chambers for those whose disabilities only become apparent after birth.

My children are both disabled.

I shall of course, log off at once and go smother them.

Heaven forbid they be a burden to decent people.

usualsuspect indeed, why do you ask?
In fact, my opinions are probably in the majority.
Which is why we no longer have a Labour Govt.

We won't have a Tory one for much longer

Your opinions are the the majority ?

Hecate is right - the disabled will be protected - but there will be no-one LEFT that fits the new description of 'disabled'.

I reiterate - who the hell will want to employ me - someone who has been caring for two dc with disabilities for years (I have worked in that time, but it is now impossible for me to currently - I took a job and had to leave within 3 weeks only a few months ago, because my DD's SN childminder gave me notice on the FIRST DAY - she was used to 3yo's with SN, that she could physically manage - not 13yo's with SN that are taller than she is...), AND has the added problem of their own disability that may require up to a day off sick EVERY WEEK.

Of course, I am the ideal candidate for any job I apply for, aren't I?

Even the disability advisor at the jobcentreplus told me he would find it easier to place someone with Downs in employment than he would someone with uncontrolled epilepsy AND caring responsibilities to boot...