Universal Credit - how can this be right?

[beentheretoo]

I’ll admit I know very little about Universal Credit apart from what you hear on the news thankfully (touch wood) never had to claim).

A friend recently got a new job 2 days a week I congratulated her and said it’s the type of job they are always looking for people I bet they’ll be offering you more days in no time. She then said oh I don’t want more days it’ll affect my UC, I’m allowed to work up to 16 hours before they take money off me and besides I’m really looking forward to having 3 days to myself once the kids are back in school. She’s a single parent her DH left her when she was a SAHM she was on full UC for a bit then had another PT job now this new one (she has a degree but doesn’t want to go back into that field).

I was thinking about it how can they be right that if you work 16 hours you get full UC but if you work 20 you get money taken away? Where’s the incentive to work more hours? My friends DC are older so doesn’t need childcare and I’m sure loads of people would love 3 days to themselves I bloody would.

Am I getting it correct then?

MrsBertha Pint of Mother's Ruin on the go here.

This thread depresses me. MN although admittedly always very mc at least had rationed debate.
I shall take myself and three children henceforth to the nearest workhouse.

Because you're 'damned if you do, and damned if you don't'. When DC was younger I was in receipt of the old style working tax child credit. So I was eligible for a top up. But obviously if I worked OT that would then get deducted at the end of the tax working year (fair enough). But there are month's when say the washing machine broke or whatever, so I'd work OT to compensate. But knew I'd get then get stung for the WTC at the start of the new financial year. I tried to opt out of the WTC several times but was informed I'd then probably be financially penalised for not filling in the forms? The whole system was way more a hassle than it was worth imho. And the best bit was they'd abolished the old system of a 30 day repayment plan 'getting back into work system'. So when I started back into employment I wasn't entitled to a penny for 4wks (until 1st paycheck). I was informed 'yes, it's very difficult, can family loan not you the money?' 😒... I'm very fortunate they could! But if not I'd not even have got back into work.

You're a nasty piece of work @Sapho47

Bertha Take heart.

Single/lone parents are magnificent. We are a breed apart. We have learned more survival tactics than Captain Scott and Kate Moss.

@Sapho47 I can afford my kids. They want for nothing. Pointing out flaws in a flawed system does not equate not being able to afford my children. Despite your wild assumptions, their expense was considered and factored in to the decision to have them.

Wandavision
It's still very much a man's world. We haven't come far.

But because the perception is that things are equal now,(single mothers get UC, Child support etc etc...) women have to be triply good and on top of everything.

Because we are so lucky!!! To have arrived!!. To be standing square with men !!!

It's nonsense of course. We women today are trudging along the same muddy path towards parity.

But we have to keep going, for the women who come after us.

The problem I have with OPs of this sort, is that they do not see this.

I’m a single parent on legacy benefits. I’ve been training and gradually increasing hours etc because I know the cliff edge is approaching where these family benefits will end and I will be left with just a single wage to support myself and my young adults with for a few years until they get their jobs and education - and it can take a couple of years for them to mature enough to get steady jobs as I’ve learned with my older ones. Plus driving and car ownership is expensive those first years (necessary as we are very rural). While it is nice having the support of tax credits it is a shock to the finances when these end if you haven’t prepared properly.

Sorry I’ve raised such an emotive issue, for what it’s worth I’m not sitting in a lovely mc life myself looking down oh the poor benefits people. I’ve also been a SP and I know what it’s like.

I was just asking how can this be right? Some people have answered that it’s tapered etc so thank you.

At the end of the day it’s none of my business what my friend does same with her child maintenance woes. I have enough going on in my life not to be worrying about others’

@beentheretoo

Sorry I’ve raised such an emotive issue, for what it’s worth I’m not sitting in a lovely mc life myself looking down oh the poor benefits people. I’ve also been a SP and I know what it’s like.

I was just asking how can this be right? Some people have answered that it’s tapered etc so thank you.

At the end of the day it’s none of my business what my friend does same with her child maintenance woes. I have enough going on in my life not to be worrying about others’

But you've got time to post on the internet about her

Well sometimes the internet can be your escape and you could look at it as not about her but about the benefits system overall.

@UhtredRagnarson

Ok

The first £292 you earn per month is discounted by universal credit. On minimum wage this works out at 7.72 hours per week so I’m not sure why your friend thinks 16 hours is the magic number. This means whatever your universal credit amount is, let’s say £1000, you get to keep the £1000 plus the £292.

Anything you earn above £292 is discounted at a rate of 63p per pound. So if you earn £600 per month, £308 would be used to calculated the deduction.

£308x 0.63= £194

So they would take £194 off your universal credit amount of £1000.

£1000-£194= £806

So your total money for the month would be

UC = £806
Wages = £600
Total = £1406

If you work more hours and earn £900 per month the same calculations are applied

£900 - £292 = £608
£608 x0.63 = £383

£1000-£383= £617

So your total money for the month is

UC = £617
Wages = £900
Total = £1517

So you are always going to be bringing in more money by working more hours on UC

I think because some people have to work set hours a week in order to get UC and this is usually haven't as 15/16 hours a week (e.g. if you have pre-settlement under the EUSS). Also to earn an extra £300 from £600 to £900 and only have your income go up from £1406 to £1517 probably dpes not reflect the extra costs in transport and childcare, explaining why someone would not want to work beyond x hours if they cannot cover the corresponding increases. My nursery charges £53 a day for a session from 8am to 18:00, meaning the additional income from an extra day a week is not covered by the increase in income. If you have a two year old in nursery on free hours because of low income then earning that additional £1200 a year may push you over the threshold and you lose that benefit.

I think this is certainly why people make the decisions they do. I have learnt a lot managing part time workers and their motivations to do so as they know they will never be a high earner and have more disposable income working less and lower childcare costs. I think the system is flawed, but I don't profess I know how to fix it.

I don't know about UC as I'm on legacy benefits but it can be a bit of a balance regarding getting taxed and pensions.

I started off working 16 hours (I get working tax credits) and I now work 28 hours. I definitely have more money than I did working 16 hours but obviously the more hours you work the more you get taxed. I also have to pay for wrap around care whereas I worked school hours only when I was doing 16 hours.

@Tumbleweed101

I’m a single parent on legacy benefits. I’ve been training and gradually increasing hours etc because I know the cliff edge is approaching where these family benefits will end and I will be left with just a single wage to support myself and my young adults with for a few years until they get their jobs and education - and it can take a couple of years for them to mature enough to get steady jobs as I’ve learned with my older ones. Plus driving and car ownership is expensive those first years (necessary as we are very rural). While it is nice having the support of tax credits it is a shock to the finances when these end if you haven’t prepared properly.

This is what I'm doing too, I'm doing 28 hours now and plan to go up to full time within the next 4 years.

@meeeeh

I had heard about this. I've just had a baby and I'm looking at going back to work 16 hours per week (I will work the 2 days my husband is off) as the cost of childcare is nearly the same as what I'd earn. I thought I could claim something on this but when I looked into it online it said I wouldn't be entitled to any benefits

Childcare should be a joint cost between you and your husband. Depending on his salary you wouldn’t get anything as there’s 2 of you bringing in an income.

My DD has to work 24 hours to get her above poverty level. She has two children. She rents, but it's a reasonable rent. She gets rubbish maintenance because he isself employed and hides money.

Your friends life isn't most single parents experience of UC. I live in a low income area and no one does just 16 hours, unless they don't have a choice. Their ex's don't pay a lot of maintenance etc.

The Tory ideal was to get everyone doing a bit of work. Whether that lowered the welfare budget, or benefited society wasn't relevant.

We should have a welfare system that supports work, while giving a minimum income guarantee. Instead we've got the mess of UC. Labour's manifesto (with free Wi-Fi and laptops (oh how that was laughed at) would have cost less.

I can't believe that we have a system where a working age adult can just decide to work part time and expect the tax payer to foot the bill for the rest of her outgoings I would love to work 2 days a week but couldn't pay my mortgage if I did.

I can't believe that we have a system where a working age adult can just decide to work part time and expect the tax payer to foot the bill for the rest of her outgoings angry I would love to work 2 days a week but couldn't pay my mortgage if I did.

Actually, especially given the way housing costs work in the UK, I think it's a statistical inevitability that a proportion of the population will never be able to earn enough to sustain a minimal standard of living. It's not an option to tell people they can't have children because they don't earn enough, so it's up to us (the people who think that standard of living must be achieved) to supply the cash that makes up the difference.

(Bear in mind that it is sometimes cheaper to let someone sit at home, them working might require bigger subsidies. Just because they're at home doesn't necessarily mean they're contributing nothing, looking after family can be valuable work. )

@beentheretoo if you've also been a lone parent why are you even asking this question? Presumably you had to do all these complex financial/time calculations when you were? Or did you just not work at all?

@BustyDusty absolutely and amen.

Re the pensions question, obviously you can save into a pension as a single parent on 16 hours a week but it won't be very much, realistically speaking. In fact, if you're going to be renting into retirement, that money could well be just enough to tip you over the threshold for pension credit/Hb/CTS etc so you won't see it yourself anyway.

@Countrygirl2021

I can't believe that we have a system where a working age adult can just decide to work part time and expect the tax payer to foot the bill for the rest of her outgoings I would love to work 2 days a week but couldn't pay my mortgage if I did.

And I bet OP's friend doesn't have a mortgage and will have no hope of getting one. Comparison is the thief of joy.

Yes I'm fairly certain we can rest easy knowing that the bulk of those lovely benefits are going towards paying off the friend's landlord's mortgage rather than her own.

Actually, especially given the way housing costs work in the UK, I think it's a statistical inevitability that a proportion of the population will never be able to earn enough to sustain a minimal standard of living. It's not an option to tell people they can't have children because they don't earn enough, so it's up to us (the people who think that standard of living must be achieved) to supply the cash that makes up the difference.

I don't necessarily disagree but you should be working more than 2 days a week. There is a difference between working as hard as you can but there being a shortfall because you work in a minimum wage job, verses just opting out of work.

And no, I'm not lucky to have a mortgage. I have one because of ridiculous hard work and postponing having children until I was secure.

OP, what are the age of the children. If she moved to UC, which she would if shes separated, she will only be able to work 16h if one of her child is not yet in primary school.

Once they are, she will be expected to j crease her hours. If she is in a job that indeed offers more, she'll have to justify it and risk having her benefits stopped.

This is one positive move from TC to UC where si game mums could work 16h whatever the age of the children.

Also, it might sound like a good deal at the time, but a number of single mums I met years ago who.took that option now regret it bitterly as their youngest has finished school and child tax credits and Maintenance has ended and all they can claim is minimum entitlenrnt and are expected to look for 35h jobs. These are women who have never worked more than 16h or not since their early 20s. Some are going through the menopause, struggling and the prospect of FT work is petrifying them. Three that I k is off are now claiming sickness benefits for anxiety and depression because they see it as a better option than working FT. Their lifestyle has taken a massive nose dive and they wished they'd gone back to work FT much sooner and used the time at home to gain more qualification.

What can seem like a blessing at the time can come and bit you bitterly in tears to come.

I can't believe that we have a system where a working age adult can just decide to work part time and expect the tax payer to foot the bill for the rest of her outgoings angry I would love to work 2 days a week but couldn't pay my mortgage if I did.

Not everyone has a choice to work full time. There are multiple reasons why a working age adult may not be able to, Illness, lack of jobs, poor education leading to limited work options, single parent, lack of transport, and if you hadn’t realised were in the midst of a pandemic with more job losses due in September!

I pity anyone unlucky enough to be on UC. It’s not the flat screen TVs, free housing and frivolity that many make it out to be. I’ve never been on it but I believe that as a society we should have a cushion for all those who need it. The last year has proved just how vulnerable most are due to no fault of their own.

@dontdisturbmenow I'm seeing similar. These women are pretty fucked because realistically if all you've got on your CV is 15 years of part time minimum wage work there's no way you're going to land a ft job that makes up the drop in income. At the same time it seems counter intuitive to take on extra hours/angle for seniority which generally means unpaid hours at the point children are young and it would lead to a financial squeeze because of the interaction between benefits, wages and childcare costs. It's a difficult, fine balancing act as a low paid lp getting yourself off top ups and it takes a lot of planning.