Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To agree with workfare in principal?

706 replies

IAmMiranda · 29/09/2013 11:23

Donning my flame retardant underwear - though note I'm not for the current scheme, but the principal is sensible.

Working for unemployment benefits makes sense to me - provided that the "wage" is fair for the hours and skills. Eg. £90 a week job sellers could equal 15 hours of charity work?

Taking into account disabilities, childcare and other responsibilities I really don't think its unfair to provide people with jobs to earn the equivalent of benefits?

I do think its wrong to line the pockets of corporations, reduce jobs for other workers etc but surely charity work is an option?

I think I've probably missed some huge glaring point but AIBU?

(NOTE: I have previously been in reciept of JSA and would happily have done 15 hours a week and had plenty of time to job search)

OP posts:
Original poster
IAmMiranda · 02/10/2013 16:05

Crikey, italics went a bit crazy there, sorry!

OP posts:
Original poster
IAmMiranda · 02/10/2013 16:07

Childcare is a difficult issue, people shouldn't have children unless they can afford them I didn't mean that to sound so blunt. I realise I could cause offense by this and I'm sorry in advance (preparing for flaming). What I mean is that childcare isn't an entitlement either. I completely understand that unforeseen circumstances can obliterate all plans.

OP posts:
Offred · 02/10/2013 16:28

I was wondering when the "people shouldn't have children when they can't afford them" brigade would turn up that'll be virtually every family then since most are dependent on tax credits...

Either way I find it personally extremely offensive, I didn't ask to be sexually abused and raped, I didn't ask to have twins unexpectedly and I'm quite sick of being perpetually blamed and abused for it in this way.

I'm not even claiming JSA but nevermind.

Some disgusting attitudes on here. Utterly disgusting.

Offred · 02/10/2013 16:31

Neither did my mate. She got pregnant with her son at 16 after being raped by two men. I'll be sure to tell her she deserves the constant shit she has put up with since because she shouldn't have had her son when she couldn't afford him...

Offred · 02/10/2013 16:39

And JSA is for jobseekers but unfortunately plenty of people whose capacity to work is limited for various reasons have been dumped on it in appropriately by this govt and the lot before.

Offred · 02/10/2013 16:39

The alternative is basically to not claim anything for a lot of people.

BrokenSunglasses · 02/10/2013 16:41

Are most families really dependant in tax credits?

Most people I know don't get them, and they aren't rich, just normal working families.

Child tax credits are way too generous, they allow people to buy more than the essentials, and apart from disability related benefits, benefits should never allow people to buy things that could be considered luxury.

I think they should be scrapped and contribution based JSA should be more generous.

Offred · 02/10/2013 16:42

They've changed entitlement rules now but under labour 90% of families got tax credits.

YouAreMyFavouriteWasteOfTime · 02/10/2013 16:44

that sounds like a good change as a house with an income of 40k does not need govt support

Offred · 02/10/2013 16:44

And what's the point of taking things away from people who need them to give them to people who it is arbitrarily determined deserve them? What a harsh and horrible society that would be, not to mention inefficient and costly to the state which would have to clean up the mess in one way or another...

Offred · 02/10/2013 16:47

How do you know they don't you? Depends on where they live and how many in the household.

When I was with my husband he earned £56k we had less per person after housing than we would have had on benefits and that's not because benefits are generous.

We're also both better off now we have split up.

YouAreMyFavouriteWasteOfTime · 02/10/2013 16:51

a household with an income of 56k does not need state support.

Offred · 02/10/2013 17:05

How do you know?

YouAreMyFavouriteWasteOfTime · 02/10/2013 17:08

if someone earning £56,000 receives state support, who is left to pay for that support?

Offred · 02/10/2013 17:21

How do you know they don't need state support?

handcream · 02/10/2013 17:23

Taking away the terrible situations about being raped and having a baby, what about the people who give no thought to whether they can afford a child? We stopped at 2 because we worked out that to afford what we wanted in life 2 was enough.

Why is that so difficult for others to grasp? Do we keep giving more and more money and support who dont think through the consequences of having children AT ALL!

In my company we have a 'bench'. If your role disappears you go into another part of the company where it is your job to find another one. We are a big FTSE company but on the day you arrive on the bench you are given a job, its normally a lowly role and you are asked to report weekly on your job search. After a certain length of time if you dont find something (or are too fussy, lazing around etc) you will be found one. Surely its the same on benefits. Money for not working is not an entitlement.

handcream · 02/10/2013 17:26

And I do think this will be welcomed by the country tbh. At present its sometimes better to be a single parent - whether that is a truthful representation of your situation is another issue.

Offred · 02/10/2013 17:30

Which people are these?

How do you determine whether someone has adequately thought through their family planning?

How do you determine which people have struggled through adversity to raise children they never chose to have?

I'm not sure what the reason is for these harshnesses and humiliations or why they are supposed to achieve anything at all other than dehumanising people so they can be better exploited.

People are by and large not choosing unemployment, there is a massive jobs gap. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that plenty of people fall through the gaps in welfare entitlement and have no income and also that due to the stigma people of working age will do almost anything to avoid claiming benefits even when they are entitled to. This is ridiculous and no good for society but still they are run down by smug employed people who stubbornly refuse to acknowledge their luck and mistakenly believe they are somehow a superior being.

Offred · 02/10/2013 17:32

And yes, I've been called a liar about my situation before because people don't want their comfy £50k = private school, two cars and holidays in the Maldives illusions shattered.

Facts are most people are working longer for less, most people don't have enough to live on.

I'm not surprised that people here would find it hard to believe because stats show MN is mostly made up of posters from the south east where there is prosperity and investment. Not the case for the north and things are worsening all the time up here.

BrokenSunglasses · 02/10/2013 17:34

They've changed entitlement rules now but under labour 90% of families got tax credits.

If this is correct than thank fuck they have changed the rules and tax credits are going. 90% of people on benefits is a crazy situation for a country to be in, really completely ludicrous.

YouAreMyFavouriteWasteOfTime · 02/10/2013 17:35

of course 50k does not equal private school etc etc.

but as I said before if someone earning £56,000 receives state support, who is left to pay for that support? and who pays for people on much lower incomes who need support?

do I understand the income was 56k in the North?

handcream · 02/10/2013 17:37

But Offred - how do you? You seem to want to allow people to do anything they like, choose to work, not work, mess around at school, have a child without a father and there will be no consequences. In fact we should not judge them at all.

Well people judge me all the time on this forum and I am sure others have the same view. I have worked my whole working life, decided to stay in the SE and London because that's where the jobs are, didnt have children until I felt I was ready and was able to afford them with a stable partner. I didnt give up work because I recognised that leaving a large gap in your career would be difficult to explain. People are constantly saying how lucky I am....

TotemPole · 02/10/2013 18:22

There should be a JSA provision for childcare to help people get into the work placements.

Why doesn't someone sort out childcare so people can take a regular job for a regular wage?

It isn't just about the cost, it's also the availability. This is something people don't get. It isn't the same for everyone in all areas.

TotemPole · 02/10/2013 18:25

My sign on day was simply changed to take into account an interview. Similarly for illness or other such circumstances.

Really? I can't change my sign on day for an interview.

Offred · 02/10/2013 18:26

Because I've lived in a family earning that amount... Would have thought that was obvious.

Again, how do you know how far other people's incomes go you?

I don't know what you're wittering on about with the who is going to pay. There is enough money to pay now but, universal entitlement is cheaper and more effective at targeting those in need than means testing.

Ideally people would earn enough to live and the government wouldn't need to top up wages. I also think it is ridiculous for the economy that most people can't survive on their wage. I don't think the answer is to stop supporting vulnerable people.

I'm not sure where on this thread I've said any of those things handcream.

Anyway, to reiterate, what I am saying; these policies are not designed to, and won't benefit ordinary people or society. They will be costly; monetarily and socially but they will financially benefit big business by driving down labour costs and that is the real motivation.

People can bleat about what they did or how hard they worked all they like, that is a ridiculous way to approach economics and social policy and personal experiences of ungrateful and superior individualists cannot be extrapolated across the whole country.