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?

Child benefit will stop at some point

Everyone needs 35 years National Insurance contributions to receive a full state pension

If your friend continues to work part time, she needs to take this into account for her retirement

says the person who thinks anyone can save a penny should have their benefits removed and seems to have no awareness of the dangers of being stuck living on benefits

You don't seem able to read or understand posts, replacing them instead with your own narrative. Do you need some assistance?

Are you the poster who said that anyone who receives benefits but can save towards a house deposit doesn't need them?

If so everything I've said directly applies to you.

@PearlescentIridescent

Ffs. Do people not understand that the fact that it's hard to get into FT work because of the benefit trap is exactly what PEOPLE WHO ARE ON BENEFITS are talking about.

The choice of short term gain over ling term investment is an absolutely archetypal example of the consequences of deprivation. It is so frustratingly obvious.

It is, if you want to stop and think about it!

Even those who have lived on benefits, those who manage to escape the trap, don't see it, don't believe in it. But once you've seen how it changes every aspect of your life you can't unsee the damage it does.

I've never been in it. I lived damn close to it as a kid and as a young adult. But have never fallen into it. But I have worked with/for those whose lives are totally mired byt it. Those who can't train for better work, move for a better job, afford to save for decent accommodation. Who are stuck on whatever benefits they are on because the next small step will see them fall short of their financial obligations. So they never get to the good job, the better pay etc.

And then they get harangued because they chose to stay on UC etc!

I hope the benefit system is reworked so that it is much easier and less punishing to transition into better paid work. When you have young DC there will always be an element of balancing childcare costs against your working hours but hopefully school helps most parents out.

I just worry so much for NMW workers or really 0 hour contract and shift workers. It must be so difficult to plan around that and with the UC system being weird as it is with weekly pay earners. I've been on salary for so long I even forget people often don't get paid for being off sick etc.

I thought UC was supposed to make it "pay to work" but with 5 week gap it will put many off ever feeling they are in a position to make the leap. Even I want to transfer off WTC to UC but I rely on that money for weekly shopping! I imagine it must be really difficult especially for a parent going from unemployed to employed.

@NativityDreaming sorry I didn’t realise the childcare deduction only applies in England.
www.eden.gov.uk/council-tax-and-housing-benefit/council-tax-reduction/applicable-amount-table/

@CuriousaboutSamphire you're absolutely right and you've articulated it much better than I have. It's just a worrying state given how many people are in those types of situations, how many families now rent etc.

Oh fab, another benefit bashing thread! No mention of the deadbeat shirker dads though who have the option to work full time, flexible hours without the stress of finding childcare. Let’s just chastise the mums trying to make the best of a shit situation.

Here’s my advice; leave your partner, become a single parent and get a job at 16 hours a week. Your mental health problems magically disappear once this happens and you live such a life of luxury.

Are you the poster who said that anyone who receives benefits but can save towards a house deposit doesn't need them?

If you're the poster who thinks people should be given money to buy houses while not working at the expense of people who are working and can't afford the same, then yes.

If your position is more nuanced than that I suggest you consider whether mine is also.

I’m a full time working single parent and claim UC for child care for an under 5 (previously tax credits). I’ve worked FT since he was 1, and always just living on my wage.

On tax credits I accrued so much debt paying child care (because costs are so high, and my credits were reduced so much for my wage) that I am now in 1000s of debt and about to start a debt management plan.

On UC I have to pay costs up front and claim them back. Which is usually a nightmare of a process and has left me short multiple times.

I would’ve been better off not working and staying home with my son, but was scared of falling out of the labour market. And proud, probably.

I was an idiot. This govt do NOT want to help women with childcare responsibilities or single mothers succeed. If they did, they would find early years provision 100%.

@PearlescentIridescent

Ffs. Do people not understand that the fact that it's hard to get into FT work because of the benefit trap is exactly what PEOPLE WHO ARE ON BENEFITS are talking about.

The choice of short term gain over ling term investment is an absolutely archetypal example of the consequences of deprivation. It is so frustratingly obvious.

And I alluded to - I'm on over 150k and can see the problem. I'd be working for minimum wage and claiming benefits if I couldn't get a very good job. There is no financial incentive to do otherwise.

@DontTouchMyHairISwear

All you are doing is taking your perceived slights by society and pointing that at the people who need help most and who have the least. It's a common tactic to keep the rabble fighting among themselves. If housing wasn't in the state it is people wouldn't need astronomical benefits to just scrape by. If pensions were anywhere near the amount of other countries' pensions it wouldn't matter if people were renting in retirement because they would be able to afford it.Instead of caring about any of that, all you can get angry about is the notion of a hypothetical single mum being able to save a small sum of money over a long period and eventually get together a property depost. It's literally mind boggling to me

Wow, someone is projecting here and it's not me. I AM a single mother who was on benefits. I don't have any percieved slights by society and am pretty sure I know more about all of this stuff than you ever could!

You didn't know you could put money in your pension though

Did you spot the WAS on benefits, rather than IS? Ouch for you.

Murdoch has really done a number on this country and the world at large. Instead of focusing on why housing in this country is in shambles and in effect a huge driver of poverty or the cost of corporations dodging taxes which amount to tenfold the welfare bill, or the fact that corporations are the biggest welfare recipients in the form of subsidies which in turn they provide low quality and low paid jobs for and those people still end up on benefits, not to mention zero hour contracts which cause a lot of these issues, people want to focus on the feckless poor and blame them for all society's ills.

I thought the pandemic would have got rid of this "I'm alright Jack" attitude as people would have seen how precariously close to poverty they are with one misstep not even of their own doing but no, still in the same place. You realise UC the way it is set up hides just how much money is spent on rent because the cap on rent paid for an area is usually 10-20% less than the going rate and people are just paying that money to pay off someone else's mortgage, courtesy of the government, while families actually struggle to pay for essentials. Let's not even get into how many MPs are landlords and its in their best interests. If rent was more in line with income and countries like Germany people wouldn't need astronomical salaries or benefits for a decent standard of living. But yes let's rage at those on benefits refusing to work and extra 20 hours when it costs them more money to do so, instead of the system that makes this possible.

@TulisaIsBrill no my comment was not aimed at you I've agreed with everything you've said on the thread

If you're the poster who thinks people should be given money to buy houses while not working at the expense of people who are working and can't afford the same, then yes.

Erm, people on UC work!! Many of them full time and pay tax too! Educate yourself.

@AnaisNun

I’m a full time working single parent and claim UC for child care for an under 5 (previously tax credits). I’ve worked FT since he was 1, and always just living on my wage.

On tax credits I accrued so much debt paying child care (because costs are so high, and my credits were reduced so much for my wage) that I am now in 1000s of debt and about to start a debt management plan.

On UC I have to pay costs up front and claim them back. Which is usually a nightmare of a process and has left me short multiple times.

I would’ve been better off not working and staying home with my son, but was scared of falling out of the labour market. And proud, probably.

I was an idiot. This govt do NOT want to help women with childcare responsibilities or single mothers succeed. If they did, they would find early years provision 100%.

@DontTouchMyHairISwear maybe this posters lived experience will help you undertsand why some people can't find their way to taking on a better paid job.

Look at what she said - On UC I have to pay costs up front and claim them back. Which is usually a nightmare of a process and has left me short multiple times. That is a far more clear explanation than mine.

I would’ve been better off not working and staying home with my son, but was scared of falling out of the labour market. And proud, probably. So just think how hard it is for women with more than one child, those who don't have a work history, only worked a zero hours contract etc.

@DontTouchMyHairISwear

Did you spot the WAS on benefits, rather than IS? Ouch for you.

What ouch - you said you knew more about this stuff than anyone?

Yet you didn't even read the form to work out you could avoid am overpayment by opening up a personal pension and whacking the difference between the income the award was based on and your final P60 figure.

You would basically have been able to put £1 into your pension for every 27p you have up. It's a sweet deal

@AnaisNun

I’m a full time working single parent and claim UC for child care for an under 5 (previously tax credits). I’ve worked FT since he was 1, and always just living on my wage.

On tax credits I accrued so much debt paying child care (because costs are so high, and my credits were reduced so much for my wage) that I am now in 1000s of debt and about to start a debt management plan.

On UC I have to pay costs up front and claim them back. Which is usually a nightmare of a process and has left me short multiple times.

I would’ve been better off not working and staying home with my son, but was scared of falling out of the labour market. And proud, probably.

I was an idiot. This govt do NOT want to help women with childcare responsibilities or single mothers succeed. If they did, they would find early years provision 100%.

I’m sorry you’re in this situation.

@TulisaIsBrill I also agree with that which is why I hope the system changes to support people (let's be real, mainly mothers) into work.

I am lucky that due to my unusually low living costs with no car and no childcare expenses that my jump to being better off in FT work is relatively small. I don't want to jinx it but I'm in the process of applying for a role for the perfect amount in my company and if I get it it will be an incredible relief.

The amount of people my age who in 40 years are due to retire and have rented all their lives are going to be absolutely fucked.

Oh fab, another benefit bashing thread! No mention of the deadbeat shirker dads though who have the option to work full time, flexible hours without the stress of finding childcare. Let’s just chastise the mums trying to make the best of a shit situation.

Yep, my ex's reason for not paying maintenance when he pissed off? "All that money you get from the state...."
Totally bypassed him that I had a ft job and the state isn't the child's other parent.
It's ok though because the state told him he didn't need to pay anyway, not what he owed for years and not on an ongoing basis.
Yet I get the shit for it.

Oh fab, another benefit bashing thread! No mention of the deadbeat shirker dads though who have the option to work full time, flexible hours without the stress of finding childcare. Let’s just chastise the mums trying to make the best of a shit situation

Nice whataboutery but its not actually relevant to the question at hand. That's a whole different argument.

@Benelovencd absolutely. The way we treat our housing market and our pride in our ridiculous housing costs is mind boggling.

I hope to god this changes somehow but it's not in the interest of the powers that be

@DontTouchMyHairISwear but this bit is relevant:

Let’s just chastise the mums trying to make the best of a shit situation

Because that's what posters like you are doing.

No it isn't. That's your narrative.