They’re not ‘top-up’ benefits if you don’t work full-time

[Gobbledegobble]

If people do work full-time, absolutely those wages should be enough to live a decent life and not require outside support, and that requires systemic change (and higher taxation for corporations, closure of tax evasion loopholes and legislation to outlaw poverty wages). I’m a lifelong labour voter and will never vote Tory. BUT working 15, 20 hours a week and bemoaning that you ‘just’ need ‘top-up’ benefits is disingenuous. I couldn’t survive on part-time wages so I work full-time. I ‘top up’ my wages, if you will! But my own efforts. Outside of you or your children having a disability / chronic health need requiring ongoing care, if you can’t afford to live on part-time hours then you can’t afford to work part-time. My partner and I work full time and pay over £1k a month in childcare fees to enable us to do so. Having children does not mean you can’t work until they’re at school and then only school hours, as lots of people seem to think. The cost of childcare is outrageous and again needs systemic change through higher taxation on huge wealth. But it’s not a ‘top-up’ benefit (as if that’s somehow better or more moral than just plain old benefits). Sure I’ll get piled on but I fully support the welfare state and want benefits to be much more generous for when people need them, which should largely be a short-term crisis. Not until the children you chose to have are secondary school age with you being ‘topped up’ by full-time workers’ taxes until then.

@Whatwouldscullydo - obviously this wouldn’t apply if one parent was unwell or unable to work. If the dad (and it’s always the dad) chooses to fuck off and absolve himself of any responsibility, leaving behind the mother of his children, causing her to fall into financial difficulty - that’s another story. If absent, drop-out fathers were criminalized and vilified the way single mothers have been over the years then maybe there’d be a hell of a lot less need for the state to step in. Children shouldn’t go without but when you have millionaires dodging their parental responsibility and the state actively sanctions this, something is seriously wrong.

I work part time as I have 2 health conditions that make it hard. I'm not bad enough for DLA but not well enough to work full time.

I don't actually get top up benefits as I earn well but playing devils advocate there's many reasons people don't work full time.

My kids are all in school now, when I had 2 in nursery it was genuinely ass my wages so I didn't bother with full time tbh!

@Needmorelego possibly in my role. But if not I could freelance to top up my income

Ever thought it was deliberately set up that way?

Why would the men who set the rules and laws this country live by also not make it so it benefited them.

Its no accident that there are enough loop holes to allow men to dodge their responsibilities. Its no accident that many men have working days and hobbies that complete leave their wives unable to work full time.

Its no accident that even when fathers are abusive and violent towards their spousss they are still enabled by the courts to see their children.

Its no accident that all these men have " crazy exs" who the new girlfriend's find out that perhaps they weren't so crazy after all but by then there's another 2 children, she's gone part time to look after them and he's fucked off.

Its no accident that everything is set up to screw over single mums and enable fathers to be absent.

And what do we do? We turn on eachother instead.

Up to 85% to be exact, with a £1100 cap for 2 children. That cap in the the SE wouldn't even cover 3 days of childcare a week.

In my area a single mum with 2 children working full time on minimum wage, will bring home £3835 including UC and childcare allowance. She will pay £2800 a month in childcare, leaving her just over £1000 a month. Rent is around £1200 for a 2 bed.

The same mum working 16 hours over 2 days, would bring home £3370. But only pay £1100 in childcare. Leaving her just over £2200 a month.

So sometimes people are priced out of working full time.

Yep.

Not a black and white situation.

Tax credits were the single biggest damaging thing that happened to this country’s finances in the last 20 years. Tax credits perpetuated the culture of low pay, because they suppressed wages. Employers don’t need to pay the market rage wage if the government will subsidize them. It also discouraged the ‘16 hour’ a week work culture. If low wages were not subsidized, wages would increase to keep up with demand for labour and/or employers would automate more. Both are good for the economy.

bith if these things have led to wage stagnant in in the country to the point that the rot has fully set in. It has damaged this country’s economy as productivity has been suppressed. Employers don’t need to invest in automation when they have plenty of low paid, government subsidized part time workers.

All in all, tax credits are directly responsible for the low wage, low productivity economy that is causing so much pain to everyone today. So it’s not a policy to be proud of.

If that is true, it sums up the problem with welfare. Someone working 16 hours a week on minimum wage is actually making the equivalent £55k a year. No wonder, the support for welfare is at record lows.

You lost me at partner.

My partner and I work full time and pay over £1k a month in childcare fees

This is the most significant line in the OP.

If you didn't have the £1k you wouldn't be able to work full time.
Or you would rely on top up benefits to pay towards childcare.

For a lot of people the childcare element is the most largest part of their Tax Credits or UC.

And taking on more hours is the most reliable way to make themselves more dependant on the welfare state.

I 10% agree. That’s obscene to ‘earn’ that much money only working 16 hours a week. And I’m in the SE (Bucks); for 37 hours a week with a childminder (cos I can’t afford a nursery, 8am-5.15pm 4 days a week cos I compress my hours and work around DH) it’s about £1k a month. Convenient how rare childminders seem to be when it suits the argument. Think I need to swallow my pride and look at a 16 hour work week and generous top up

Urgh typo, obviously 100%

Everyone can just work is 9-5 Monday to Friday 🤨 Realistically that's not the case and many can't cover the hours full time that many jobs require. Nor do they have family to provide childcare. I've been a single parent working and it's bloody hard. I'm married noe and work back to back to my dh but I'd never look my nose down at anyone it's only getting worse for the poorest and most vulnerable.

All in all, tax credits are directly responsible for the low wage, low productivity economy that is causing so much pain to everyone today. So it’s not a policy to be proud of

@sst1234 Damming indictment but after 12 years and numerous promises made by Truss and Sunak, the Tories seem happy to keep subsidising wages of big business, indeed they are actively keeping them lower.

btw Govts have always had a form of income support.

… surely OP only has the £1k a month for childcare fees BECAUSE she works full time, not the other way around?!

OP has £1k per month for childcare because she has a partner and neither she nor her partner are disabled. They also have access to careers/companies that offer full-time jobs.

In short, she is a lot more privileged than most of the people she envies.

You might pay over £1,000 pm on childcare fees but If that's to a nursery and if you live in an expensive area there's every possibility that the childcare you rely on - their staff rely on "top-up benefits"

Of course this is moot if you use a childminder or a nanny but it is something to consider

Some people, mostly women, in those jobs do not earn a vast amount.

OP has no experience of certain jobs obviously…
-where you’re on a PTVH contract and that’s all you’re getting.
-where you have to work as many jobs as you can just to earn enough to get by
-where they won’t ever offer you full time, ever.. the hours are there but they prefer to offer hours to multiple people incase someone leaves/ someone is sick etc etc and they don’t want to give permanent contracts out that involve sick pay.
There’s an awful lot of it about. I work in education, though in retail it’s been rife for ages.
It should be illegal.

Considering the benefit cap is 20k for a lone parent outside London, what part time job pays 35k a year?...

It's all relative depending on rental prices in the area. In my area you wouldn't get anywhere near that much because rent is cheaper. The poster said that in her area the rent is about £1200. So after rent and childcare is paid that would leave £1000 to pay all other bills, food, etc. Not a huge amount when you consider energy bills are going to hit £300pm very soon.

A lot of people have no choice but to work part time for various reasons.

Childcare fees aren't included in the benefit cap so they can push it up.

I think some (unaccountably smug) people have a vague prejudice that women who end up divorced with children must have brought it in themselves by “picking badly” or “giving up” on their marriages too easily. Even when men do terrible things to their partners and families, somehow, on some minds, blame attached to the women. It’s misogyny, internalised or otherwise.

The support for welfare is low because people.dont actually know the real I formation about welfare.

They read Facebook and misinformation and believe that instead.

That's why people can spout nonsense that isn't true and even when shown the actual truth, they don't believe it cause Dave on Facebook said
'grr Labour... Scroungers..grr.. my tax.. grr'
Etc etc

UC pays upto 85% of childcare fees and is capped at a maximum of £646.35 per month for one child.