To be very scared at the details of the Universal tax credit?

[Feminine]

I had no idea.

I've been away from the UK, and just saw the actual proposals/rules on another thread.

Its bad right?

I imagine there is another thread on this so if there is, sorry ...I can't find it! :)

Dilly, this was on the other thread. It is the best I can find but I still don't understand it:

If you are a Lone parent_

And your youngest child is UNDER 5yo - You will have no conditions placed on you.

And your youngest child is OVER 5yo - You will need to work 24 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

And your youngest child is OVER 12yo - You will need to work 35 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

If you are a Couple

And your youngest child is UNDER 5yo - ONE parent will need to work 35 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

And your youngest child is OVER 5yo - ONE parent will need to work 35 hrs/wk @ NMW AND the other parent will need to work 24 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

And your youngest child is OVER 12yo - BOTH parents will need to work 35 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

If you refuse to do Workfare - they will stop your UC. If YOU don't meet the hour requirements, they will make YOU do the Workfare. If your Partner doesn't meet HIS hour requirements, HE will be made to the Workfare. If NEITHER of you meet the hour requirements, then BOTH of you will be made to do Workfare.

However - if ONE partner is working 35hrs and the other is a SAHM, where the youngest child is OVER 5yo, then she will be allowed to continue being a SAHM ONLY if her partner earns the equivalent of 59 hrs/wk @ NMW. Anything less than that - not allowed to be a SAHM.

I'm really worried about how this is going to affect me. I am a single parent, and am planning on going to college in September. So will I have to work 24 hours per week as well as being at college?

Thanks to Huntycat for this from another thread

For UC purposes, it will be 24 hrs/wk for all. To start with.

BUT if you are on NMW, and you want to avoid being put onto Workfare (read any of the numerous threads if you aren't sure what is so bad about it), then there are other conditions you have to meet in order to be able to receive your Universal Credit.

If you are claiming Universal Credit and you want to avoid being put on Workfare, you need to pay close attention to these additional rules:

To avoid Workfare:

If you are a Lone parent

And your youngest child is UNDER 5yo - You will have no conditions placed on you.

And your youngest child is OVER 5yo - You will need to work 24 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

And your youngest child is OVER 12yo - You will need to work 35 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

If you are a Couple

And your youngest child is UNDER 5yo - ONE parent will need to work 35 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

And your youngest child is OVER 5yo - ONE parent will need to work 35 hrs/wk @ NMW AND the other parent will need to work 24 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

And your youngest child is OVER 12yo - BOTH parents will need to work 35 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

If you refuse to do Workfare - they will stop your UC. If YOU don't meet the hour requirements, they will make YOU do the Workfare. If your Partner doesn't meet HIS hour requirements, HE will be made to the Workfare. If NEITHER of you meet the hour requirements, then BOTH of you will be made to do Workfare.

However - if ONE partner is working 35hrs and the other is a SAHM, where the youngest child is OVER 5yo, then she will be allowed to continue being a SAHM ONLY if her partner earns the equivalent of 59 hrs/wk @ NMW. Anything less than that - not allowed to be a SAHM.

dilly sorry can't link here.

But on the last page of the council house /flat thread there it is!

Almost last post :)

Forget my last post: This explains it all

HuntyCat Sat 18-Feb-12 13:01:42
For UC purposes, it will be 24 hrs/wk for all. To start with.

BUT if you are on NMW, and you want to avoid being put onto Workfare (read any of the numerous threads if you aren't sure what is so bad about it), then there are other conditions you have to meet in order to be able to receive your Universal Credit.

If you are claiming Universal Credit and you want to avoid being put on Workfare, you need to pay close attention to these additional rules:

To avoid Workfare:

If you are a Lone parent

And your youngest child is UNDER 5yo - You will have no conditions placed on you.

And your youngest child is OVER 5yo - You will need to work 24 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

And your youngest child is OVER 12yo - You will need to work 35 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

If you are a Couple

And your youngest child is UNDER 5yo - ONE parent will need to work 35 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

And your youngest child is OVER 5yo - ONE parent will need to work 35 hrs/wk @ NMW AND the other parent will need to work 24 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

And your youngest child is OVER 12yo - BOTH parents will need to work 35 hrs/wk @ NMW to avoid Workfare.

If you refuse to do Workfare - they will stop your UC. If YOU don't meet the hour requirements, they will make YOU do the Workfare. If your Partner doesn't meet HIS hour requirements, HE will be made to the Workfare. If NEITHER of you meet the hour requirements, then BOTH of you will be made to do Workfare.

However - if ONE partner is working 35hrs and the other is a SAHM, where the youngest child is OVER 5yo, then she will be allowed to continue being a SAHM ONLY if her partner earns the equivalent of 59 hrs/wk @ NMW. Anything less than that - not allowed to be a SAHM.

HTH.

Zelda cross posts!

Every case is individual. That's the problem? My case is my case. alistron1 wrtoe this; Luckily I got a part time night/weekend job in a call centre earning £600 a month so we didn't need to claim which is an individual case.

The fact is, I could not possibly get a part-time overnight or weekend shift job, though I would love to have 600 quid a month.

I have no family.

Exhusband's family have blanked us since the day he got on the plane. They can keep their sizeable fortunes doing this I suppose.

Cases are individual. I have nobody to leave my 4 yr old with for any chunks of time.I just don't.

He already has no father. He has no relations. Why should I be penalised when I have worked so hard humiliating myself after a successful media career, cleaning houses, while 'fathers' like this can just disappear?

I really don't get it. It's a crime. Isn't it?

Oh no, silly silly me it's not a crime.

This government are the criminals. Labour were criminally negligent too. Clegg? what a tosser. I would have beaten him at rounders when I was 7.

Omg I am really sorry for the mess I have just made of this, thank you clothes, zelda and feminine for the quick replies

Can I ask what workfare is? And what is so horrendous about it?

Personal clown- I clearly stated single parents so it clearly doesnt apply to you.

The childcare issue is by the by- in an ideal world there would be much better childcare provision for- special needs/disabled children and shift workers.

I just still find it a bit much when single parents of school age children can sit at home being fully supported by benefits whilst their child is out of the home for a large chunk of the day. If you are supported by a husband/partner to do so then thats your choice- but if the taxpayer is funding it then I dont agree with it at all.

And my old job was paying £600 a month part time in 1999, and I don't think that wages 9for that type of job) have risen much in the past 13 years. However housing/fuel/food costs have.

The thing is people mainly 'dont like' their kids being in the care of someone else while they pay for it out of their wages. But thats the way benefits are generated. If everyone decided they 'didnt want to' do this then who would support people then?

There are loads of threads about workfare.

Basically, your benefits will be stopped unless you do a work placement. A lot of the work placements will be with places like Tesco. You don't get paid to do the placement, other than your benefits. You may have to work nights. If you are not on disability benefits, the placement will be 8 weeks. If you are disabled, the placement has no time limit so can be permanent. You will do the same job as people employed by Tesco but will not receive pay. Some people have lost their paid jobs and have then been put on workfare doing their old job for London Transport.

I feel that the main issue, which has been touched on in this thread, is minimum wage not being a high enough wage to meet basic living costs.

Threads like this always make me feel quite sad; I really feel for lots of you, suddenly being expected to magic up an extra 8 hours per week at work or suddenly find childcare for a disabled child. The system bloody sucks in this country :(

'Workfare' sounds like 'Poorhouse'. same number of syllables. same way of making people feel like shit.

What a piss-poor name, when you consider how much the thatcher govenrment paid the satchis etc. for a slogan. it must have cost em fifty pee.

I can just imagine it: picture the scedne: posh indian restaurant somewhere in the cotswolds.

One tory tosser (country's leader) says 'Workfare'!! (pissed over a bottle of fine lafitte) that'll do it orders limo. staggers back to country pad. Feels put-upon as he eats his jamie oliver cheeky chipolatas next morning.

Clear-blue-sky-pile-of-shit-thinking.

Song:
*Andy Coulson
you stupid bag of poo,
I wish that I was you,
you got off scott free didn't you
and your cronies,
Must be nice going on holiday
and still drinking lattes around the place
bloody man you"

ok but just to play devils advocate: They are being paid, they are receiving benefits.

I can see how this could be taken advantage of by employers though, and that example by London transport is disgusting.

phew for me..... i think as dh works long hours.... (which is why I can't work atm)

can kind of see why in some ways, because you could be like dh's boss and claim to earn very little, so be eligible for wtc and ctc and get free dental treatment etc, but be very well off. He is a farmer, so has no housing costs, farm pays for vehicle, elec,oil,water,phone etc and so he can afford to pay himself very little and so be eligible atm, even though his wife spends most of her week shopping, and they have 3 holidays abroad a year

at least this will put a stop to that......

but for the average honest person who just wants to do their best for their families it is very harsh.

Where are the jobs going to come from?

and if everyone is forced to do workfare, then there will presumable be even fewer jobs anyway!

EDLP, come June I am prepared to work full time to pay for people with young children to work part time or not at all if they are young. I don't want people who don't want a job because they have kids to be pushed into taking a job that I do actually want.

Lots of people do really want jobs. Why push people who don't want them into taking them from people who do? Why push people into workfare so that companies take on fewer paid employees and less jobs are available? Why should my past and future taxes be used to be pay benefits to Tesco's unpaid employees? Tesco should pay them.

Dilly, in that case we should get rid of the minimum wage and people should simply be paid by Tesco to work for under £2 an hour.

Because nobody should be paid to sit at home funded by the taxpayer when they could be working. With that attitude why should anyone be pushed into working Monday morning when they fancy a duvet day? People who can work really should make the effort to generate some revenue especially after they have taken from the pot themselves to fund their lifestyle while they COULD NOT work.

and so we should subsidise tesco instead of the people directly?

They screw over enough people already!

is it right that the gov will pay tesco to do this too? ?

I could almost stomach 'workfare' if it involved keeping our public services going eg working in schools/hospitals and if people were paid at the appropriate rate for their labour. What I can't stomach is tax dodgers like tesco benefiting from free labour.

EDLP, everybody isn't going to suddenly be working though, are they? Somebody has to sit at home, or more likely like most SAHM they will volunteer at something that suits their available hours. There aren't enough paid jobs. They're just going to take jobs off somebody like me. What is the point of that?

massive lol at clothesofsand.