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?

I think this thread needs to go in Classics, so it’s really easy to find the next time someone asks who keeps voting in the Tories. The lack of understanding and empathy from some of you is bloody terrifying.

Some of us have been poor before. Bones of our arses poor. But unless you’ve grown up the same way as this poor little sod, you have no idea how tough it has been for him. He’s grown up in the care system, so no support from a loving mum and/or dad, no watching and learning how to budget or where to make cuts, or how to get through life. And how many kids get through the care system completely unscathed, do you think? Never being able to put down roots? Not knowing if the friends you have this year will still be in your life next year?

So he hasn’t done what a lot of kids would do. He hasn’t got in with the wrong crowd or decided to make his money the easier way. He’s doing his best to stand on his own two feet and do things the right way. He’s in supported accommodation, which would cost him more a month than lots of you are paying in mortgages for your big fancy houses with gardens. And these aren’t luxury properties. He’s not living in a naice area, with naice neighbours ferrying their children to school in their Audi’s each morning. He’s living somewhere that will evict him promptly if the rent isn’t paid. The fact that he’s there in the first place is a good indication that he doesn’t have the skills or the ability to either work full time or cope with independent living. And some of you are wondering why he doesn’t fancy trusting the system not to fuck up his rent payment if he does a few extra hours one week?

Yes, we’ve all had to make cut backs. But if I get rid of my Netflix, I’ve got a DH to keep me company. I’ve got books. I’ve got friends and family. Go and look at your DC. Imagine them all alone in a room, in a building full of vulnerable people. They’ve got no support from family. Would you be happy telling them they can’t have one of the few things that give them any pleasure in life? Or would you be shouting that they couldn’t be expected to stare at their four walls each night without it tipping them over the edge. Why is it ok for this lad, but not your own DC?

This ^

Let's stop blaming people and look at the employers who prefer not to guarantee longer hours and expect employees to carry the risk. It's really not fair to expect people to pick up a few hours at the employers need, if the employer is not prepared to guarantee the hours.

The government likes to boast of high levels of employment without mentioning how many of those are on zero hours contracts who have no guarantee of earnings.

Especially the low paid need a steady income to be able to budget.

These people don’t want to work if there is a system they can milk dry. At least their pension contributions will be reduced so it will bite them in the ass in old age 😆

I won't change my job (18 hrs) as I won't be entitled to parental leave for the first year of a new job and could be dismissed for the first two years. I'd be insane to risk it.

I won't increase my hours partly because it might trigger a change to UC and all the mess that that brings. I have teen with MH issues so it's more prudent to sit tight until she's at college. The system is indeed a bit crap.

Thats not true,
UC is not automatically closed on first 0 payment, if I remember correctly its up to 6 months of 0 payment

👏👏👏

These people don’t want to work if there is a system they can milk dry. At least their pension contributions will be reduced so it will bite them in the ass in old age 😆

Vile Post!

Who are "these people" ?
Disabled people?
Carers?
Young people leaving care?

Then maybe OPs partner needs to work for an organisation that provides decent contracts and a living wage?

Yes this! I remember when I was a manager in retail and one of the women (who I’m really good friends with now) wouldn’t work more than 16 hours a week. If we asked her to stay a hour or two after her shift she’d say, ‘yeah I’ll stay but remember to not pay me!’ I remember asking her why and she used to say if she does overtime here and there it really fucks up her benefits. She’d get paid more but then it gets taxed and she’d be worse off.

One of my friends works the bear minimum and does two days a week. If she worked more hours, her rent wouldn’t get paid and she’d basically struggle more even though she’s working more. It’s fucked but I don’t blame them. I’d do the same

Yeah, you keep telling yourself that.

I assume this is the article the OP was referring to:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63629083

Where does it say he expects to be praised?

Whats wrong is your husbands company not offering permanent contracts

Such a simplistic view. But well done for solving the whole work/cost of living/benefits/wages debate in just twelve words.

OP I read the same article.

I believe it was really poorly covered in the article, but the lad was in Supported Accomodation and so would have been on old style Housing Benefit paid from the LA not UC, as SA rent is sky high and falls under the local council to cover.

Of that, he’d only pay a service charge for bills, hence him saying his ‘rent’ was only £25 or something.

Therefore he’s on the old system work-wise where he can’t go over X hours.

He’s fortunate to have such a secure and affordable housing setup, but it’s very hard to incentivise to leave that. I believe he was a care leaver.

If he moved in to private housing, he’d immediately move on to UC instead, and then be able to work more while keeping 63p of every pound of his UC too.

But then of course he’d have to pay private rents and a deposit, and private landlords simply don’t take people who earn less than £30,000 these days, never mind 16 hours of work and a bit of benefits.

It’s a horrible messy situation and the government haven’t got a clue.

looks like Jack Monroe had entered the chat.

This. It’s a major reason for people needing to use food banks for a few weeks. Zero and part time hours contracts combined with the flawed UC system is to blame. Not benefit claimants.

What a great idea. If only we had a political party to vote for with the will to do that. Oh, that's right, we did . . . but they were "unelectable".

Not coming back, op?

It’s fucked but I don’t blame them. I’d do the same
Unfortunately I have to agree, the rich and powerful make the rules to suit the rich and Powerful, they set up these complex systems with loopholes which only they have the ability; the money and connections to exploit thereby making themselves richer.
All we can do is use our initiative to play the system as best we can ☹️

Pride doesn't pay bills. Hard cash does that. In this day and age, with the technology we have, it should be possible to update circumstances instantly, not wait weeks for it to be done. The system needs to be agile.
When the DC were small, DH couldn't do overtime. Any change in income took min 6 weeks to process, and it was then also calculated for the whole next year.

The other really novel option is that people are paid proper wages that don't require top ups. 😉

Consumerism is a cancer - except when it involves businesses destroying workers' security of employment so they can increase profits to buy more stuff with. Then it's really great.

That's not really in question at this point. Corbyn lost 2 elections, people didn't want to vote for him. He was unelectable. If he was electable he'd have been elected.

I think the benefits system is out of control. It was only ever supposed to be a few quid while someone was in between jobs. People were never supposed to spend their whole lives reliant on benefits, only working part time and not working full time because it made them worse off to do so. If Labour promised to reform the benefits system to make it so that working people were ALWAYS better off than benefit claimants, it would be a guaranteed vote-winner for them, and they are supposed to be the party for working people after all. LABOUR MEANS WORK would be a good three word election slogan for them.

It is so depressing that it STILL works like this.

Back in the late 90s I was a teenager living with my partner who had cancer. He was in receipt of sickness-based income support and therefore also housing benefit, council tax benefit, free prescriptions, hospital travel.

I wanted to work, tried temping, but as soon as I declared any earnings they cut ALL of his money and benefits for weeks.

There was no way that I as a teenager, without even A-levels, could afford the rent on a flat plus full living costs for two adults, one of whom was on chemotherapy and attending hospital multiple times a week.

I literally had no choice but to add myself to his benefit claim. It was depressing and infuriating.

(I'd like to point out that my partner recovered fully in the end, I later acquired three university degrees & my husband and I are now higher-rate taxpayers. People who need state support when their lives are in crisis are not lazy scumbags who just want to mooch off others.)

I get £69 pw carers allowance and in theory can work when that disabled child is at school and keep the benefit if I earn under £150 I think pw. So I'd have to be on a guaranteed £190 pw before I was tempted. But the few jobs I have done while on CB have been short contracts so it's not worth the hassle of going over. Stopping then restarting for just a few months of work. I'd rather earn just below if I'm 100% honest. My stint on carers is a limited period of my life to give my disabled child the best chance of being independent.

I lost the point of me earning my corporate wage if it meant he goes straight into supported living at 18 until he dies of old age. He has much better chances of supporting himself as a adult if I pour myself into him right now. Hopefully I will be back at work next year and my efforts mean he will be independent.

Either way I didn't choose this, making the right desision at the right time with two shit outcomes as my two options. I would much prefer to still be working full time with non disabled child but sometimes life dishes you up shit.

Like if your a high flyer and have a stroke or car crash. You find yourself on the same pile of dung as me.

Isn’t it depressing? The system could be fixed if there was the will I am sure. I am glad you’re both ok now.