People who won't work otherwise they lose benefits

[Alphavilla]

Came across BBC article recently quoting a 20 year old man saying he had cut out Netflix and booze to cut his costs in these difficult times. However apparently he could not work more than his 16 hours otherwise he would lose his benefits. My DH is a manager in large organisation and he finds it difficult to get shifts/jobs covered as the employees claim they can't add more hours to their part time shift because they would lose entitlement to benefits. So there is work to be had, but it seems it is more lucrative not to work. What has gone wrong?

Not entirely but most regulate them more stringently than the UK.

From the linked source

"Not all have an explicit ban, but it’s correct that most EU countries outlaw these contracts, heavily restrict them, or don’t see them widely used. The UK is one of around half a dozen European countries where zero hours contracts are both legal and fairly common."

The fact check is from 2016 but little has changed.

@Notanotherwindow it doesn't get removed it gets adjusted
I was on it whilst temping some months i got nothing as i temped that month the next month I got £300 i was entitled to as didn't have hrs, another month maybe £150 as I worked some hrs
UC can be adjusted monthly against earnings , its not like Tax credits where you can get over paid
Also some businesses have overtime when its busy, they can't offer 40 hrs every week so maybe have a 20 hr contract and overtime when work is up,

Yep. These threads are getting very tedious

So consumerism is a cancer….. well, it’s the system we’ve got and it has been milked and exploited so that some people benefit hugely and some never do - they just have to grind away while others reap the benefits.

The benefits system is there partly to put off the have nots from bucking against the haves….. it comes with a side dish of lies …. “You can be well off if you just work hard enough and have the right aspirations” but actually it’s getting harder and harder to do that and have any kind of life, you know the things we’re genetically programmed to do - find a mate and procreate.

The whole system is designed so that employers can pay the least possible especially in less desirable jobs that still need doing, while funnelling the profits into the hands of those who already have more than enough.

We’re told that money isn’t everything yet if you have very little and choose family life or a creative life you’re punished for not being aspirational enough….

It really seems that some people positively salivate at the opportunity to judge and sneer and moralise at those they seem less worthy because they are claiming benefits which wouldn’t be necessary if the capitalist system wasn’t so fucked and so abused.

And it suits the powers that be to have us all at each other’s throats rather than eyeing up nooses for theirs.

Some chap allegedly said “Judge not lest you be judged.”

Pity that isn’t considered good advice.

@BertieBotts but thats not how UC works

It does all cost although Smart TVs and smartphones are pretty cheap nowadays. Another reason benefits are too low, especially for vulnerable care leavers under 25 who get very little and may be struggling to deal with 'adult' finances.

It would also help if support services had not been gutted since 2010.

Go and educate yourself op and then come back.

The tabloids have to get their hate from somewhere. Strange just how many of these have popped up since the budget.

@Madeawish1111 - I'm so sorry to hear this. Really - we as a society need to do a lot more to support you. Respite care options, proper income - everything.

The benefits v work discussions really focus on the sector who can work but choose not to as it isn't worth it. That sector is real. There are numerous factors that have created this including zero-hours contracts, rigid employment law, reductions in public transport, increased costs of transport that is available, childcare options, lack of available rentals, the system itself etc etc. That's something that should be debated as it's not doing anyone any favours.

I've posted several times on this thread, thanks for summing my feelings up in a single post!

Universal credit has changed that. If anyone still thinks they are better off working less, they have a huge misunderstanding of how universal credit works. You are always going to earn more by working more. I speak as someone who needed to rely on universal credit for 3 years after leaving my ex and is now a high earner.

@Florenz rents have gone sky high too and any price difference would be eaten up by utilities.

Plus you need a deposit. And a guaranteed income to pass checks.

And that's even before we ask whether the individual is actually capable of living independently.

Guessing the op will be back any minute now to admit they got it wrong, thank the informative posters and we'll all skip off into the sunset as friends.

I thought the point of UC was that they used real time reporting so that benefits would be adjusted up and down as and when needed. So basically, if you did overtime one week you would get less UC and then if you didn’t do any the following week if would go back up again. Is this not how it works?

We were on tax credits or the previous equivalents until our kids aged out of it, despite both working full time, so I’m the furthest thing from a benefit basher. Tax credits were a pain in the arse because you were always up to two years in arrears and inevitably ended up owing them money with no recourse.

I thought one of the “selling points” of UC was that it would address this, but from what people are saying it seems this isn’t the case.

This

@Florenz he is somebody who has come out of our care system so maybe if we could start at the beginning and unpack why that’s so utterly shit and kids come out of it with such mental health issues they can’t realistically expect to ever recover from them we can look at the overall lifetime support package cost.

It literally makes me laugh out fucking loud when idiots on here, suggest calling social services for the minorest of matters because quite simply unless a child is of poor little Star and Arthur level of abuse the kiddies better off with the parents because the care system is absolutely abysmal.

One solution for the OP’s husband is to increase the pay for those low paid workers

Anyone begrudging care leavers a large package of support has no experience of the care system.

I agree, they leave these poor little souls far too late and the damage is just done. Even the children adopted suffered terribly throughout their lives.

@acrimoniousone Thank you x

I see all the threads come on picking people apart for trying to navigate modern life to the best of their abilities and it makes me so sad and angry.

Everything needs an overhaul to at least make life more equitable for more people, but it is now so complicated I don’t know where one could start….

Because the work doesn’t pay enough to cover their bills
not all disabilities are physical
many fluctuate from week to week

Anyone begrudging care leavers a large package of support has no experience of the care system.

This.

This isn't true. You have to not be entitled for 6 months for it to fully stop.

This is what I thought too.

If i pick up over time my money is adjusted accordingly

What's gone wrong is companies don't pay people a living wage and they (the companies) rely on the government topping up people's wages so the companies can maintain their huge profits and offer retiring MPs and civil servants lucrative positions.

They then use every legal loophole that exists to avoid paying tax on said profits.

But yes, let's hate the feckless poor. Burn them. Burn them I say. They should be lining up outside the factory gates each morning while the gaffer chooses which of them will have that day's work.