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 .

I actually like the "idea" of helping the long term unemployed by finding them roles to help out in society. But to me the idea is eg the unemployed accountant helping with a charity, or the unemployed bricklayer working on a community project. The reality is though they send people to do shelf stacking in Tesco doing others out of a paid job, and helping no one but big business. It makes me furious. .

The type of job would not be enforced . There would be choices based on interest or ability

But if those jobs exist then why aren’t they on the job market? are you saying there are companies with roles to fill but they don’t- they keep those vacancies infilled in order to have job hunters who would ordinarily apply for the job anyway, do the job for less money?

• there are generations of people who are not motivated to work ( I don’t meN I’m deprived areas where it is scarce ) There are some very entitled people out there who refuse to work for minimum wage , won’t do this or that I am nit talking about people trying to get work against the odds .*

And how will you decipher between them?
I’m beginning to wonder if this is a wind up

unfilled

How much do we subsidise the wage bills of billion pound businesses by already?

And now the OP wants to subsidise them even more.

IWorkAtTheCheescakeFactory
No not saying that
Am saying if there is work to be done in the community
Such as neglected land , isolated elderly . These things could be met . The benefits are being paid anyway so why not get communal
Benefit from that money ?

Was simply saying we sometimes have to do things we don’t like .
Sorry , but it’s true .

Yes and that’s not limited to you, me, or any other employed people.
Everyone puts up with shit. The poor get shit on at every turn.
You actually sound a bit jealous of them. Quit your job, coin in the 20k you’ve quoted and go and rake leaves down the park?

So again OP

When are people who already work fulltime going to fit in the additional work required to obtain the benefits they claim?

I have a friend who is a single mum to a 1 yo. She works 30 hours a week and gets topped up by universal credit. Do you really think she should up her hours to 40+ so she doesn't claim anymore? Or would it be prudent to wait a few years until baby is in school etc?

Or according to your scheme should she work as some kind of slave for some of the week too? Who's going to pay the childcare for her to "earn" her benefits??

Honestly. People turn into heartless bastards where benefits are concerned

Today 21:57 Grimbles
I specifically excluded business / for profit earlier in the thread .
No way do I tho k that .

At my workplace we have people trained in the role I am paid to do, coming to us to volunteer as part of their 30 hours a week they have to be looking for work (volunteering counts apparently). Some of them are excellent, a real boost. I have asked why they have not been employed-well, we're not hiring right now.

Read-why would we employ them? The department is getting the support for free.

Also by the way frogsbreath we won't have as many hours for you on your zero hours contract next term, Susie the volunteer is picking up some days and I need to make the work load fair

To the poster who said...

The bad apples are few and far between. They always have been, but because people love to generalise, and always will, they don't seem to get this

Look at any section of society. Their behaviour is not the norm, despite what the daily mail will tell you.

What bothers me more are the genuine ones who have slipped through the net, and are suffering as a result. The ones who won't, or can't ask for help. The ones who are deemed 'fit to work', but clearly aren't.

It's all about targets, not people, open your eyes!

Greysparkles Absolutely not . Work could be minimal /part time . To fit around commitments . Just simply to give something back .

Am saying if there is work to be done in the community
Such as neglected land , isolated elderly . These things could be met . The benefits are being paid anyway so why not get communal
Benefit from that money

So there is a need? Yes? (Neglected land/isolated elderly) fine- that means a demand for a service- that means a job to be done. That means write up an employment contract and give that person an actual employed role. Which means they are now off the unemployed list and in the employed list, earning their own wage, not having to check into a benefits office every week or two, and the elderly person/neglected land gets what they need. How is that not better than keeping people officially unemployed but doing the same job?

Ooola

So there would be no minimum amount of hours someone could give to the unpaid work?
Kind of like volunteering then?
Well great. That already exists...

Just create jobs instead?

*I am nit talking about people trying to get work against the odds .

And how will you decipher between them? *

Oh that's easy. The undeserving ones are those nasty scroungers that were on whatever the latest channel 5 benefits porn offering was. Or maybe the feckless layabouts the daily fail told us about.

You havent actually answered greysparkles you know.

Well, you have but managed to avoid any of the points AND contradict yourself. Good job 👍

I watched Schindler's List yesterday. Many companies used slave labour from the work and concentration camps. Even Oskar Schindler grew a conscious though.

greenlobster

Easy. They’ll have Brighthouse Sofas.

I’m sick of people poor bashing.

I think I need to step away from this thread I can’t stop posting

Conscience. If there is work,people should be paid a fair wage for it.

Although, if I could get someone to sort out my neglected land out back for free, that would be great.

Why would I pay someone to do it and keep them in a job hey?

Greysparkles Absolutely not . Work could be minimal /part time . To fit around commitments . Just simply to give something back

But she works 30 hours a week! And pays tax!!!!! That is "giving back"

Pardonwhat Yes sounds like what I feel is fair .
Register as a volunteer . Give an amount of time and effort that is manageable / contribute to society . In return you get support from society .