To ask for a view on this ? If someone gets benefits and are not a carer / single parent etc .. then they should contribute to society in order to receive benefits ?

[Ooola]

I think in society we should all support orhers.
The taxpayers contribute by paying taxes .
Vulnerable people such as disabled , carers etc should be supported by others .
Those who can’t find work and get benefits .. should be required to give something back for the money they get ...not be forced to work for a big co operation but to contribute . Things like park maintenance , listening services , support to the struggling public services . There could be matching service so that they could chose to gain experience or use the skills they have to benefit others .
Any police checks , as are required in other jobs , would be funded . Does this sound fair ? If we all give what we can then it may be of benefit to all , including the claimant who could use this to build c v , etc . Surely it’s win win in principle ? If someone gets benefits say at a level of 10 k , 13 k , 20 k
.. it feels fair that they give something for that especially as it is comparable to someone working and getting minimum wage ?
Clearly time would need to be given off for job interviews etc .

What you are suggesting is something like some US states do called welfare aid where claimants have to do demeaning jobs like litter picking to get their food stamps, it is a form of slave labour.

Nat6999 Why is litter picking demeaning ?
Alongside a professional job , I have been a cleaner - I had to clean poo off toilets , pubes out of showers . I did not consider it demeaning .
If such jobs , which are necessary, are called demeaning , then shouldn’t we do them ?

I suppose I reacted to litter picking as I do it all the time myself . 😊

Looking at the votes , over 200 people agree with the OP.
It would be interesting to hear your views and reasoning .

How can you force someone to do ‘Voluntary’ work. Bit of an oximoron (spelling?) there

I am on benefits (though I am a carer so would be exempt for the OPs proposals), I haven't worked for over 3 years but I have over 20 years experience in my profession, a master's etc. I volunteer for a charity once a week and I've found its improved my confidence, gives me something to put on my CV, I enjoy it and it helps the charity, who would have to less to spend on its charitable purposes without the help of volunteers. I don't think you can force people to volunteer, but they could be encouraged to do it. Though that doesn't really fit with the current ethos around benefits where it's all about sanctions and doing what you are told instead of supporting people to find work.

I've worked for 26 years and recently found myself unemployed due to redundancy.

As I'm in a single adult in A Universal credit area with some savings(due to my redundancy) who mortgages (so don't get anything paid towards it ) i get 240 a month and you want me to go and work for 60quid a week really! Im trying to find a new job.

In order not to be in poverty, an individual needs to have income equivalent to a full-time minimum wage job, say about 16K at the moment. To achieve this for as many people as possible, with as little government effort, how about:

1. A universal income of 8K a year for everyone
2. A 50% rate of tax on all income from working, with no personal allowance.
3. For the vast majority of working people, the admin would be via PAYE, i.e. no need to claim universal income separately.
4. The current benefits system would still exist. For anyone claiming benefits, the universal income would be a component of their benefits income. If prior to the existence of universal income they would have been entitled to more than 8K anyway, or 16K for a couple, then it won't increase their income.
5. This assumes a national scheme, however I would prefer a localised approach, where you have different poverty levels and minimum wages and universal incomes in each local area.

This would mean that someone who had a full-time minimum wage job would break even, they'd be repaying the universal income through tax on their job. For people earning this much or more, it would be equivalent to have a 16K personal allowance and paying 50% tax on income above that.

The "50% tax" would replace both tax and NI, including employer NI. It wouldn't be the big increase you might think, as the burden of tax in the current system last time I checked was something like 38% in the basic-rate band and 47% for higher rate. The extra few thousand in effective personal allowance will offset the increase to 50% for many people.

(An administrative detail: what is currently employer NI would become an employer contribution to the employees tax bill, which makes it a taxable benefit. Effectively everyone in work would get a pay increase to the level of previous salary + employer NI. The extra pay would then be clawed back via the higher headline tax rate. Over time this employer contribution could be phased out so that eventually contractual salary and taxable income became identical.)

For people who claimed the universal income via the benefits system, rather than via employer PAYE, it would be paid weekly and obviously be unsanctionable. Nobody would ever be in a position where they didn't have money to eat. (Assuming they didn't actually choose to spend weekly money on something else when they were starving!)

41% of the people reading the op chose YANBU.
Tells us all we need to know.
The poor are in for a rough ride.

Gonna say it again.
41%of a supposed left leaning site.
For Shame.

Benefit claimants pay tax on the benefits they receive, isn't that giving back enough?

The tragic thing is that the tories will most likely get in again in December. We will then have more of the same demonising of the poor.

First time poster - check
Goady post - check
Namechanges in the middle of the thread - check

FFS, YABVU. Aren't people getting sick of penalising poor people already?

Sorry something I keep meaning to say too, where I stay even the volunteer roles are OVER subscribed, it’s a deprived area and claimants are advised to take on volunteer roles to “show willing” and have something recent to put on cv, but because there’s so many unemployed here there are waiting lists for volunteer roles - and they contain the details of the people with the relevant skills and training for the various roles that’s not including those desperately asking for volunteer work without the skills or training to do whatever role they’re applying for.

It costs Charities and other organisations to HAVE volunteers even though they’re not paying them, training, legal requirements (eg background checks, health & safety certs), equipment etc

PettyContractor the idea of a universal basic income really appeals to me but I absolutely would not trust this current govt to implement it.

Universal credit in its premise should have been a good idea, I’m currently still on “legacy benefits” which is an utterly bonkers way of trying to manage. I’ve been a bookkeeper and worked with accountants and it’s completely fucking illogical!

Eg based on when I was still getting benefits for dd when she was a child too:

Housing benefit - paid 4 weekly in arrears. Mondays.

Does ANYONE who’s posted on this thread pay their housing costs be that mortgage or rent 4 weekly? I certainly never have! It’s always been calendar monthly. In real terms this means most months there’s a slight shortfall but the argument is that over the year you get 13 payments and if you’re eligible for you full rent to be covered over the YEAR that happens, but certain months it can be a struggle.

The pain of course with a Monday payment date is it is regularly either be paid early or late because of bank holidays

Council tax benefit - not paid to recipient but recipient has a reduced or non existent council tax bill as it’s paid from one council dept to another. I’m in Scotland where it’s even more complicated because our water isn’t privatised but is included as part of the council tax bill, and council tax benefit doesn’t cover this, so in effect everyone has a council tax bill but people like me eligible for full council tax benefit only pay the water portion of the bill.

Child benefit - weekly Monday’s

As I was a lone parent on benefits I was eligible to receive weekly, no idea how they work out who gets on which weekday, I just know I got mine on Mondays and others I knew in receipt got theirs different days. As with housing benefit a Monday payday meant I was regularly wrong footed due to bank holidays.

Tax credits - weekly Tuesdays

Again don’t know how they work out who gets payments when but we got on Tuesdays.

ESA - fortnightly on Tuesdays

Fortnightly makes no sense at all! Anyone have bills or household costs they pay fortnightly? I certainly never have.

DLA - 4 weekly on Tuesdays

Not the same week as housing benefit paid. Again no bills of mine are paid 4-weekly.

Basically I have worked out my budget as a 4 weekly calendar to try and manage it all, the way it’s ended up working is:

Week 1 - housing benefit & an esa payment

Week 2 - DLA

Week 3 - esa

Week 4 - nothing comes in.

Trying to juggle all that with my bills which I have to pay calendar monthly takes considerable skill and organisation and many really struggle with it!

I’ve set up spreadsheets for friends and relatives who struggle with this type of organisation and advised them how to organise their bills especially direct debits so that they aren’t caught out with money coming out on weeks there’s less in their account. Another issue for benefits recipients are bills/direct debits you can’t change the date of eg tv licence as you have to take that into consideration when deciding which dates to have the direct debits with optional dates come out.

So a calendar monthly all in one benefit payment SHOULD have made things much more streamlined and sensible for recipients.

It was also supposed to be a LOT more responsive/flexible for claimants who do work when they can, shift workers, people who work differing hours through the year (some industries are seasonal and workers have more overtime at certain times of the year), temp workers etc one of the main issues supposedly with legacy benefits was that claimants were very reluctant to take on temp contracts or extra hours because it would mess up their finances for MONTHS (and here’s the interesting part - very rarely in recipients favour. In my and many other recipients experience changes in circs which = change in benefits entitlement usually gets cocked up. If Cock up in govts favour takes AGES to get the money you were eligible for paid BUT if the error favours the recipient they basically snatch it straight back! Often leaving people in real hardship)

Yet I know from family/friends that are on it (I’m dreading the switch!) it doesn’t even cope with annual leave or bank holidays! It really doesn’t cope with mat leave, sick leave or constantly varying hours.

Now given the technology we ALL know is available nowadays AND the software I was working with even 15-20 years ago it is absolutely possible for there to be an IT system that COULD cope with the various adjustments on a monthly basis - anyone who’s worked in payroll knows that!

I think it’s a combination of cost cutting AND not wanting it to work well is why this hasn’t been properly implemented.

@TheQueef it’s fucking terrifying isn’t it? I am in a constant state of anxiety dreading the postman. I’m currently awaiting response to PiP claim as I had the letter telling me DLA was being withdrawn. I have had excellent support from my welfare rights advisor at my local council who are the people I always use for such matters having learned the hard way that it’s foolhardy to even ATTEMPT to do these forms myself. It took a month of several hours a day of work and research (with some great support from mners too) to complete the form. Basically a full time job in itself!

The vast majority of disabled claimants who even people like op agree should be getting support, are getting £100’s less within a few months on uc, despite promises of transfer protection etc. There are several organisations who are going through legally challenging this on behalf of the groups they represent. Some are even getting together with each other to do so - it’s an absolute disgrace that this is even necessary!

And when was the last time you were job hunting?!

I've been looking for a job all year. I apply to about 5-10 a week online, via the paper and I contact people directly. I now have 2 p/t jobs that I really like but am still on the look out. Applying for jobs (5-10 a week) takes me about 3 hours a week. I have 2 CV's that I send out. One is my specialist area and the other is generalist. I cut and paste a very good cover letter I have.

I bet this is a lot more than other people do.

If the work is there for job seekers to do then that's great... employ them and give them actual jobs!

So it would be a job? Then they should get a job and get paid for that, makes no sense

*I've been looking for a job all year. I apply to about 5-10 a week online, via the paper and I contact people directly. I now have 2 p/t jobs that I really like but am still on the look out. Applying for jobs (5-10 a week) takes me about 3 hours a week. I have 2 CV's that I send out. One is my specialist area and the other is generalist. I cut and paste a very good cover letter I have.

I bet this is a lot more than other people do.*

I apply for more a day than that.

Are you advocating modern slave labour? Yes you are being unreasonable, not to mention patronising!

As a side note how many people on benefits do you believe are in receipt of 10 to 30 grand?? The benefit cap is not indicative of how much the majority are actually receiving. You could get a job for Disney though, with your fantasy tales!

There is no way to do it without taking away work someone could be paid to do, is there?

I bet this is a lot more than other people do.

I bet it's not! There's a requirement for uc recipients classed as job seekers to spend full time hours job seeking and even if they get part time work they're still expected to spend whatever time they're deemed to have spare (and it's really only actual hours worked they're excused for, travel time etc isn't allowed for) looking for full time/better paid work.

I'm also thinking as you were able to find work relatively quickly that you're

A living in an area not doing too badly

B are fortunate enough to have a good cv with recent experience and refs

C don't have huge issues with childcare or transport to work

Any in favour, surely there are some very intelligent and capable people on the dole, maybe they can do your job for their benefits and you can go scrub toilets and pick up dog shit for basic benefits. That's the ideal in your eyes, isn't it? Maybe you'd love to join in at the easiest place in society, dangling off the bottom rung by the fingernails. Just think how easy your life would be, like all those begging lazy bastards who are coining it on benefits already.

Thank heavens so many respondents see that jobs should be done by people getting paid a proper wage.

OP, I must ask, are you just a GF or a political analyst/researcher trying to see what spiteful party policy would be popular amongst the "lady" voters.

The U.K. has one of the lowest unemployment rates in Europe. I think we’re about seventh overall. That looks like a good thing but unfortunately many U.K. jobs are zero hours, insecure work.
The current government believes benefits are wrong as a political stance. It believes poverty is an offence and should be further punished. If we hadn’t stripped out so many public services there would be far more substantive jobs, far better communities, better facilities and more opportunities. Austerity increases poverty, sadly.
I think instead of developing a punitive approach there should be better access to adult education, more children’s centres to improve parenting support, more libraries, more police, more ambulances, youth services,, better roads, better public lavatories and community transport. It would provide better jobs for many and these people would spend more, thus boosting the economy.
The long term unemployed should be supported to gain experience and qualifications to enable them to gain employment.

I’m incredulous when we go to France and see beaches with wardens, regular rubbish clearance throughout the day, lifeguards, first aid facilities provided by the council, clean lavatories and even free suncream. Our public services have been decimated and we have lost jobs because of it.

I think the OP is nuts . Pretty obvious she knows nothing about the system !