Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

25 when did it become not an adult?

292 replies

Samcro · 08/07/2015 23:26

so under 25 you don't get the new wage.
surely 25 is and adult. someone who has left education and home, hopefully been working a few years so why?
why is say (for example) a 23 yr old thought to be worth less?

OP posts:
LashesandLipstick · 09/07/2015 09:50

Sweeping generalisations annoy you? Maybe you shouldn't make them about those who disagree with the budget

purits · 09/07/2015 09:54

Fourth post on the thread "when voters are miserable old bastards moaning about today's generation it makes sense to fuck over the young."
Now who's making sweeping generalisations?

LashesandLipstick · 09/07/2015 09:56

Purits it's statistically accurate that Tory voters are older. I personally consider voting for something which hurts the vulnerable miserable.

Bastards was insulting, so fair enough on that account. I'm sure there are plenty of miserable old people who were born in wedlock :)

merrymouse · 09/07/2015 10:01

Dixie, would your son be earning minimum wage after an apprenticeship?

fakenamefornow · 09/07/2015 10:04

Could it be anything to do with the fact that young people are the least likely to vote?

Pensioners, on the other hand...

I guess this would also apply to under 25s going to Afghanistan/Iraq/wherever and dying for their country?

merrymouse · 09/07/2015 10:09

Armed forces are already exempt from minimum wage anyway.

goodnessgraciousgouda · 09/07/2015 10:22

Youth unemployment is defined as 18-25. I have no idea why, but it's about young people, not about the cut off period for being an adult.

Considering youth unemployment is pretty bad by our standards in the UK at the moment, this is likely to be an attempt by the government to make people in that age bracket more attractive to employers.

Make it so you have the possibility (it's not a compulsion) for companies to hire people in this age for a slightly lower salary, give the people in that age bracket a better attempt at getting on the employment ladder and gaining experience, and hopefully therefore lower unemployment rates amongst the young.

It might not be logic that people agree with, but it's not helpful to simply get hysterical about it.

00100001 · 09/07/2015 10:23

whois I'm saying, that is the choice! Smile People SHOULD share! :)

elliejjtiny · 09/07/2015 10:31

I was married for 3 years with 2 DC when I was 25.

WomanScorned · 09/07/2015 10:33

How the heck is an employee who has spent the night in a tent and washed in Asda toilets more attractive to employers?!?

WomanScorned · 09/07/2015 10:35

And Working Tax Credits are not a 'hand out'. They are paid to people who work. The clue is in the name Angry

00100001 · 09/07/2015 10:36

OK, let's look at this simplistically and with approximate numbers.

Let's say for some reason you're 16, and not living with your parents and having to work a full-time (40 hour) minimum wage job at £3.87 per hour. (and let's presume you don't get paid for breaks, etc so you end up getting paid for 5 of those hours.

35 * £3.87 = £135 per week - take away 20% in tax, you get about £108 a week.

What's wrong with that? Confused

You go to a house share - let's say that's... £300 a month inclusive of bills?

You end up with £132 a month to live on... which is about £40 a week.

Surely that's enough to live on after bills?

BathtimeFunkster · 09/07/2015 10:36

Maybe we should make all workers more attractive to employers, by abolishing wages entirely?

Oh wait, we're already fmdoung that via workfare schemes...

00100001 · 09/07/2015 10:37

And also - it doesn't mean that all young people will be paid the minimum wage, as a PP said, it's a just a minimum not a target.

LashesandLipstick · 09/07/2015 10:39

001 are you taking the piss? How is that enough to live on?!

LashesandLipstick · 09/07/2015 10:39

And it's the principle - why should someone be paid more/less based on age

merrymouse · 09/07/2015 10:43

No tax or NI on £135/week (no comment on whether you can live on that amount).

Greenrememberedhills · 09/07/2015 10:44

£132 a month is about £40 a week? Eh? If you have to express such uncaring views you should at least be intelligent about them.

WomanScorned · 09/07/2015 10:46

£40 a week - enough to live on?
My son's work is physical, and he's a growing lad. £40 a week won't even feed him, as all the teens with hollow legs threads attest to.
So, you think he should come in from work, sit alone, in his bare room, with no phone, no tv, no internet, no hope of travelling or meeting people or even going to the cinema.
Still, at least every suicide will free up a shitty minimum wage, zero hours 'job' for one other young person. Oh, and they won't be breeding more scrounging pauper children, as they can't afford to go anywhere to meet a partner!

Starbrite00 · 09/07/2015 10:52

I left uni at 22, worked full time since. I was married a month before 23rd birthday and had my daughter at 25.
I left home at 16 so I think it is really unfair.
I actually don't know anyone that stayed at home with parents after 22, a 25 year old living with patents is really odd to me.

Starbrite00 · 09/07/2015 10:56

001, you need to try live on 40 a week. You seriously think that's good enough for working 40hrs.
I think its scandalous.

RealHuman · 09/07/2015 11:05

This would be one of those many minumum-wage jobs in easy walking distance of your houseshare, I assume, since you're not factoring in getting the bus or running a scooter in your thirty forty pounds a week?

DixieNormas · 09/07/2015 11:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Bellebella · 09/07/2015 11:11

I think it is disgusting. I am almost 23, have been living with my partner since I was 19, have a 2 year old and have been working since I was 17. Why on earth would I not be paid the same as someone doing the exact same job as me?

You have to realise as well not everyone has the means to live with their parents. I have not lived with my mum since I was 14, my dad died when I was 10 so I had no choice but to get a place young. Not all have supportive parents!

RedToothBrush · 09/07/2015 11:13

As an under 25 year old you lack experience. Youth unemployment (which is defined as under 25) is particularly high. So the difference in wage makes you more competitive and attractive in the job market. This is coupled by the huge push for apprenticeships which are only available up to 25 years old. When you apply to university, you are assessed based on your parents income up to the age of 25 if you are dependant on them.

So the whole set up is built around the fact that under 25 you are expected to be in education or training of some description. Which does make sense on paper and has been consistent with previous government policy and classification for years - its not a new Tory invention for this budget.

Of course there are real problems with this. Not just for the under 25s. Would you at age 26 want to now start a family? You are less likely to have savings built up as employers who would previously paid more for a 21 year old may simply reduce their pay structures for those who are younger. And of course it completely neglects to acknowledge that there are loads of people who are married and have kids by this age. It rather infantilises under 25 year olds, rather than encourage them to take on responsibility.

There is an area where age discrimination under law might be an issue though - if someone has the same responsibilities and experience in a particular field as a college but is paid substantially less then an employer may in fact be breaking the law. It was less of an issue when the lower wage cut off was 21 as the amount of experience you can have accumulated simply isn't as much, but with a bigger range this might be more of an issue. The trouble is not many people will be aware of it and fewer still will want to or have the funds to pursue it legally. Age discrimination cases to date have generally centred around older people and have been supported by charities with an interest in the old. However there are fewer large charities dedicated to youths and they don't have the same power as the likes of Age UK. A MP under could not legally be paid less than any other MP on the grounds of age for example.

Not only that but I graduated before my 21st birthday. There will be lots of graduates in a similar position. Being a summer baby rather than an Autumn baby has yet another disadvantage. My point being that it will lead to graduate jobs being replaced by lower paid as 'training or apprenticeship' posts rather than graduate jobs that have more status and pay. Especially since large businesses are being forced invest more in these types of post. What no one has thought about is this means that less people will be repaying student loans straight away and since they are then written off after 30 years under the current rules, it means that there is going to be a bigger shortfall long term which is already being criticised as not bringing in enough money (so don't be surprised if there are further changes to loans system).

Under 25s are far more likely to be single and therefore more able and willing to live in shared accommodation even if they don't live with parents.

However the cost of accommodation has not been properly addressed for ANY group and personally I do think in many respects affordability of housing is a separate issue rather than one restricted to the young.