to think its no wonder people stay on benefits?

[ruledbyheart]

My DP has started a new job getting the only job he has been offered after 1yr of trying, its only part time but we thought its better than nothing and at least he is willing to work.

He is working for a well known pizza franchise doing delivery and took the job on the basis he got a full 24hrs a week yet he is on week two and has only been given 16 so far.

He signed off job seekers to be told he won't receive anything other than the money leading up to sign off so we will have to survive for an entire month on my CTC and somehow live and pay billswith this.

He is eligible for WTC providing he gets the 24 hrs if not we aren't entitled to anything, without this we still have to pay extra on our rent and council tax out of his barely worth it wages.


However if we stayed on benefits we could afford to live no problems.

If his work doesn't give him the hours promised we will barely scrap by yet he couldn't leave and sign on again as he would be told he made himself unemployed.

So pissed off that we are worse off working.

There is no work locally and he struggled to get this.

I can't work at the moment as I'm pregnant and have 3dcs under 5yrs.

Aibu to think this is shit and we should have just saved the hassle and stayed on benefits?
No wonder people dont want to work.

[LadyApricot]

Can you just tell wtc that he's working 24 hours even if one week he only does 16? How would they know? You'd still get the tax credits. Also I'm sure it's all worked out on an average so if one week is more and ones less it doesn't matter?
My husband only works 24 hrs a week, we have two dc's but we're definitely better off than on benefits
Hope this helps

[gaelicsheep]

I don't see how you could do that really? It's fraudulent isn't it, and you can bet the one who really needs a break will be the one who gets randomly investigated and caught out. And to make the average 24 hours he'd have to be getting more hours than that some weeks, and it sounds like that really isn't going to happen sadly.

A few people have said (to paraphrase) that you need to suck up to your employer until they trust you enough to actually give you the work they employed you for. Well I'm sorry, but that might be OK for a school kid or someone on work experience, but the OP's DH is a grown adult and deserves to be treated like one.

[IneedAsockamnesty]

Lady after 17 hours ni kicks in so hmrc would expect to see that

[IneedAsockamnesty]

Wannabe HB does not work like that.

You have a upper earning bar and a personal income disregard and various circumstance related premiums. Someone who earns less than the bar then gets there disregard and premiums worked out that sum is deducted from the total income ( ex cb and maintainance) anything left is classed as available for rent.

[LadyApricot]

Hopefully there is something that can be done to the employer for not providing the hours advertised. Definitely a trip to citizens advice is called for.
Offering a zero hour contract despite advertising for 24 hrs a week is very sneaky. Maybe the job centre could understand this as a reason for leaving?

[wannabedomesticgoddess]

Well thats how it works in my area. Theres a calculator website that explains it all.

[IneedAsockamnesty]

Do you mean that in your area someone can earn that much and still get full HB?

[wannabedomesticgoddess]

Thats what the caculator said. Tbh I did think that was a bit much.

But I was checking what rent we would have to pay if I got a job I was applying for at the time. It was p/t and I wanted to see how it would work financially.

My income from the job (on the calculator) was 150, ctc was 110. So that was 250. Minus the 25 disregard. Total 225. Calculator said we were eligible to claim the same HB as we do now. Rent due £0.

[BertieBotts]

You have to do an average of 24, so doing 16 one week is fine as long as you do 34 the next week to make up for it, but not doing between 16 and 24 constantly because the average will be too low.

I'm on zero hours currently (I average between 16 and 24 but because I'm a lone parent my minimum is 16 anyway) and it's such a pain to juggle it all the time. And people at my workplace have been given no shifts when management wants to get rid of them - it's supposed to be hush-hush but everyone knows about it. If you're ill too much they just drop your shifts right down to the minimum.

[IneedAsockamnesty]

Wannabe. Its a bit like this ( not using actual figures using silly numbers for ease)

Say rent is £42 pw couple with 2 kids who earn £40 per week

Income disallowed £2 in work bonus
CB £2 as its not testable
£5 child care costs


This leaves £31
Premiums

Child £1 x 2 =£2
Family premium £0.50
Couple premium £0.60
Liking green socks premium £7

These add up to £10.10

Deduct £10.10 from £31

This leaves £20.90

Therefore this family has £20.90 they would be expected to use for rent and ct the rest would be made up from HB.

Obviously the names of the premiums are made up and these are not the correct numbers,I cannot be arsed to walk downstairs to my office and get the names and numbers but its just to show how its worked out.

The premiums are basicly circumstance and family relevant and are used to protect different amounts that the gov says needs to be protected because that's what each circumstance says you need to live on.

[IneedAsockamnesty]

Oh and HB or LHA do not work things out over a long time and average your hours its week by week Monday - Sunday so working 10 hours one week and you qualify that week if the next you do 50 hours then that week you would not qualify

[gaelicsheep]

Christ alive. I remember when DH was liable to pay child maintenance on the evil CSA1. He had a variable income and it pretty much bankrupted us as it only took one week of higher earnings to scupper us for the next 6 months, even if he had no work for several weeks. I do hope the HB people are more efficient, but I doubt it.

[wannabedomesticgoddess]

Well when I put all our details in it came back with that result.

It takes ages to go through but if I get a chance tomorrow I will do it again and C&P the explanation at the end that mentions the £238. Thats for a couple with 2 kids btw.

[IneedAsockamnesty]

No they are not.

I week of not qualifying and variable income each week will lead to about 6 weeks of over payments that get clawed back during each week if hours are still varied then each additional week award will be different unless you can provide a weekly payslip or employer letter if any differences go in your favour I.e result in more HB being awarded they will not backdate more than a month.

So effectively you end up in a constant over payment claw back cycle

[DrRanj]

I don't mean to be judgey, but pregnancy does not stop you working, and if your husband is only working 16 hrs why can you not work when he is at home? I know it is not ideal, but sometimes it is necessary. I worked right up until I gave birth, and had 3 different temporary jobs, and returned to study full time when dd was 8 months and now we both are full time (dp working) and manage childcare between us, with minimal help from a childminder. Although granted I realise this must be harder with 3 kids.

I do sympathise with your situation though, it is not fair that your dp was promised hours he didn't get.

[gaelicsheep]

ruledbyheart has already said she is struggling 1) because of the pregnancy and 2) because she has many medical appointments because she is high risk. Given that she is high risk and quite pregnant already it is unreasonable, in my opinion, to suggest she should be finding a job now. But as it stands she is trying and finding - unsurprisingly - that employers are unwilling to employ someone who is obviously pregnant and needs a lot of time off!

Sorry to speak for you ruledbyheart.

[IneedAsockamnesty]

The 238 sounds like its your protected premium and your disregard but someone with a different sized family and different circumstances would have differing ones.

Someone working and paying £300 pw childcare (if the ages of the children re relivant)but with the exact same other circumstances would have a an additional £300 protected but someone with one less child no childcare would have a much lower protected income.

[ruledbyheart]

DrRanj had you read my posts you would see I am a high risk pregnancy and although looking for work where I live there is fuck all and even less for someone who is obviously pregnant and having to find something to work around all my appointments.

Sorry for being snappy but getting sick of being judged when I have already given details on why I cannot find any bloody work and feel like I'm going round in circles having to explain my reasons to complete strangers on the Internet.

[gaelicsheep]

Also, the whole point of this thread is that her DH does not know when or if he will be working at any point, so juggling that around medical appointments and 3 children sounds to me to be more than impossible.

I just want to say that I would not care one jot if ruledbyheart and her DH had decided to stay on benefits, given what they have to deal with. Except for the fact that they would have a shit life forever more, but then work doesn't seem to change that these days.

[DrRanj]

I apologise. (Hope that's the right emoticon as on iPad and they look weird...)

[ruledbyheart]

Xpost with gaelic sheep, thank you.
I feel like banging my head against a brick wall now

[CressidaFitass]

If I knew the OP I would tell her to go to her MP. I don't know who her MP is but I would research it and make sure you said whatever was most likely to get a good response and some sympathy.

If a local councillor or MP here contacted the supermarket they might jump (on the other hand the MP or councillor might not want to annoy them- but you won't know till you ask).

I would also get in touch with local paper - our local squeak has always got dire tales of a local unfortunate in some dilemma or other. The upshot from that (as long as the speel is flattering and explains their predicament with empathy, not critically) I think there would be a chance that her poor DH might get a job out of it. There are few jobs round here but I would think someone might need a driver/ handyman/goodness knows what ( I dont' know his skills).

The bottom line as far as benefits is concerned, or any money from the tax payer, is that it is running out, pretending that we CAN pay for free health care for all and care for the increasing numbers of elderly and pay people who aren't working or subsidise childcare etc etc etc is pie in the sky, the money is running out, tax will have to go up, benefits will have to go down. If this means people having fewer children and caring for their own elderly then that is what will have to happen. Regardless of who is in government - our standard of living will fall and people will have to cut their cloth etc

[gaelicsheep]

Which is fine if it starts with people cutting their silk and ermine to fit. But it doesn't does it?

[wannabedomesticgoddess]

When I worked I was in management, and I found myself in a conversation about how to get out of employing a girl who was pregnant without opening the company up to a discrimination claim.

I was disgusted with the company for many reasons, but that was the last straw. I found another job soon after.

Companies do not employ pregnant women. Getting a job while pregnant is pretty impossible.

[CressidaFitass]

Gaelic , I think that the wealthy middle classes (especially the vast number on retirement pensions) are due for a hammering in the future - how on earth else can they be paid, especially for the vast numbers of retired former public servants. So many people, mostly in this category are being 'let go' or paid off early to cut staff and costs - all that happens is the tax payer takes on the burden. So not the ermine wearers but he comfortably off will be caught as there are not the younger taxpayers around to fund this.