To think UC's new AET is fucking ridiculous?

[sentfrommyiphone]

I’ve been working & claiming UC for the past 2 years. Today I got an email saying I need to attend a mandatory appointment to review my commitments, the reason for this being the AET is now £892 & I only earn £881.58.
I now have to attend regular work meetings because of this £10.42 shortfall! & if I fail to attend any of these I will be sanctioned.
The ironic thing is, I have to take time out of my working day to attend an appointment with UC about helping me find more work?
I’m on a fixed term time only contract at 20 hours a week & im paid pro rata.

What the actual fuck?

Can’t you ask for an appointment outside of working hours? I suppose the cut off has to be somewhere.

Well especially when youre about to have several weeks off!

I’m guessing you’re a TA (but not full time?)- you could do an hour at after school club. Most people have to use some sort of wrap around care. I’m a teacher so in some ways it is family friendly but I still have to use wrap around care on my working days.

Up your hours?

Attend appointments outside of your work hours?

To be honest OP I really have limited sympathy. You are working term time and only 20 hours a week. It looks like from your OP that you are doing this by choice. Most people don't have the luxury of working so few hours. I think if you expect top ups on your wage from UC then you need to earn the amount that is needed. If that means changing jobs then that's what you have to do. Just like many other families have to.

I think the AET is still pretty low at 18 x nmw per week.

This looks like a workable answer.

Same. I'm self employed; UC is far better imo.

Pp need to stop suggesting fraud

You are working 20 hours a week and complaining about working an extra couple of hours to then get a top of up of 'free' money.
I don't get what is unreasonable about that?

Well I’m sorry but ”prefer” shouldn’t be funded by taxpayer so I see no issue when them asking you to work more than 20 hours pw!

I agree with you, is there a reason you cannot work another hour? or more? guessing not as you said I'm quite lucky that I have an extremely understanding manager who has said I can do an extra hour a month if need be. So why dont you work the extra hour normally? Or a few more

Apart from the Op's issue,

I think the bigger problem is all the people ( women usually ) who were encouraged / asked / requested / told to work 16 hours a week in order to be eligible for UC. ( or anything else ? )

they will all be looking for 2 more hours a week, or leaving the jobs that they have gained employment rights etc, in and starting again.

there are so many 16 hours a week jobs advertised and UC cannot expect / hope that all these employers / companies etc. will increase these 16 hours to 18 hours.

I have no problem with UC. Works well for us.

sighs

Why the sigh? Do you think people should just be able to work forever in their minimum hour job and never have to increase hours while continuing to get tops ups? We would all love a job that fitted perfectly with school hours and holidays but the reality is very different.

Agree. That's great if it is the case. Working parents should only have to work to fit in school hours, so term time only, 930-230 and uc paid too! Hurrah!! Of course the country may collapse but who cares as long as we all only have to do what we love. Yay.

You can't expect to stay in a job with limited earnings just because you like it and fits in with your lifestyle whilst expecting the taxpayers to pick up the bill though.

This. YABU.

Precisely, I mean the minimum is just that, a minimum amount that must be earned in order to access top up benefits. Too many people look at the minimum as a maximum that they will work in order to get as much as they can which is fine to a point but to be bitching and moaning about having to go to a meeting or work a little bit more is ridiculous. I mean the amount earned is not enough to even pay income tax. I wonder if the OP has ever stopped to think about where the funds would come from to pay UC if all working parents just decided that course of action.

Another barmy scenario for you OP. My sisters husband has been really ill recently and due to his work (which was 48 hrs p/w) his company he worked for wouldnt /couldnt let him back on his job until his medication was stable (warfarin).His work is fine,the hospital consultants are in agreement with his work and he has been on sick for a while, as this is proving hard to get stable. He has a job but had to go on UC for a limited time, due to him only getting ss pay til he can go back again and pick up where he left off. All ok until he has to see a work coach every week to look for more hours. Its bizarre to me he has a job he is employed he is going back,he wants to ,work wants him to, he just needs time to stabalize this medication yet UC work coach are treating him like he is unemployed. I will never understand it!

Changing jobs means you lose your rights to parental leave for 12 months and can be dismissed in the first two years. I've not risked changing my job in 14yrs as a lone parent. UC shouldn't be making parents lives less stable.

Waits for the "I worked eleventy billion hours a week as a lone parent with no support and four kids......" .

cant you arrange the appointment for outside your working hours if you only work 20 hours a week ?

Unfortunately sometimes that is just what happens. When you are relying on benefits to top a wage you don't have the same agency in your decisions as someone who isn't. If OP worked 18 hours a week at minimum wage she would be fine. She is working term time and very part time so her wage is working out at less than the total needed to claim
She either needs to do more hours where she is, not just 1 or 2 extra a month otherwise she will face the same problem everytime there is a rise in minimum wage or she needs to get a new job where the amount earned complies with the minimum for the top up.

As I understand it (I may be wrong) he needs to get a "Fit Note" - in other words a sick note - from his GP and provide that to the people at the Job Centre

Or, you know, they could just put their school age kids in after school care for a couple of hours every day, like every other ft working person. But hey, let's not get reality get in the way of made up fantasy scenarios about workhouses.

Eurghh. Your the sort of people that invents these silly rules. Firstly you need to understand the difference between a job and a career. Even certain careers don't hold much scope to keep climbing the never ending money tree.

People who have children have to do what fits in. What about the single parents? High childcare costs to cover the 13 weeks of school hols? I can't fathom your logic one single bit.