Do some mums just not like working?

[Dragontooth]

I know this sounds awful, and judgey but I'm trying to understand. I am not a benefit basher and I used to be on benefits, also a single parent.
I'm on a lot of 'being skint' forums, I was on UC but now I have quite a lot of experience in various things so I like to try to help.
There are a number of mums who were previously on legacy benefits who are terrified by UC and the work search appointments. Lots who are unemployed and some who do very part time jobs, 10 hours or less.
I don't understand why they are so resistant to finding work or better paid work. Having been on benefits, it is a horrible existence. I was paid £850 per month. Clearly it would only take a MW part time job to make me so much better off. And they pay for childcare/ holiday club.
It literally changes your life. You can pay for things to have a better, easier life like driving lessons. Not only that but you are back in the work place so it's not such a shock when your children leave home.
I feel these women are so anxious, they can't see how their lives could look with more money/ options. Not only that but a lot of them have their heads in the sand about retirement, will we even get a state pension? Then there's the fact that it's so much harder getting back into employment after five or ten years out, I think that's what UC wants to avoid. I'm not saying it's a kind or person centred system but in reality is taking years out of the workplace really in these women's best interests either?
Disability/ disabled children obviously excluded.

Working doesn’t necessarily mean more money. It is very hard to earn a wage that is enough to support a family. Especially if you are limited in your skill set or education. Some people are actually only capable of minimum wage work (whether due to education, intelligence or other reasons), so returning to work would mean being stuck in a dead end job forever. Many jobs that pay minimum wage are incredibly difficult and take a toll on people mentally and physically (e.g childcare/caring - lots of occupational health dangers), factory work etc. employers that pay minimum wage tend to have very very low standards in how they treat their staff, allowing them no autonomy in their work, no flexibility and just generally creating a toxic workplace.

Have you ever worked a minimum wage, zero hours job?

Aside from this, many people are just scared by the possibility of change or have lost confidence after time out of the workplace.

What people need is fair wages, decent working conditions and some sort of help with transition e.g something to build their confidence and skills.

Only if you meet the AET for couples though I wouldn't trust the work coaches not to ignore that and nag you to work.

Really? You don't understand the difference between legal and ethical? One thing is that they might not go to jail but it's hardly a surprise a huge amount of people are resentful of them.

I am not going to work loads also because we are using the UC childcare element so if we get a zero award we can't claim that (not entitled to the low income 15 hours or the new 15 hours).

I also genuinely believe that some
people have more to contribute to society outside of paid economic activity - Taking care of children, being a cater and being part of their local community. This is a much better use of some people’s time than say, a job in retail.

Yes indeed. But I was referring to the comment that if most women worked we wouldn’t have teachers or food in the supermarkets.

The poster already said why. The first two kids she was really young and was in foster care herself and the other two kids were twins which is not something she could control

So is the definition of a benefit scrounger someone who is fraudulently claiming benefits? I genuinely don't know. I thought it just meant someone who lived on benefits as a lifestyle choice but was claiming legally?

I work in a pretty decent job and all my colleagues have done years of study in order to get work in our field (research, most have PhD's as min qualification). I manage elements of our institution and I'd say on balance most people who work there would prefer NOT to work if they didn't have the normal bills to pay. And a lot of 'work' outputted there is very worthy, fulfilling and makes a difference on a system level to people's health. So my colleagues definitely feel it's a worthy way to spend your time.

It isn't that unusual to not like work...I mean the clue is in the name 'work' - so I am not at all surprised that if people can avoid work they will. I've had 28 jobs in my 25 years of working and I can count on one hand the amount of colleagues who seemed to prefer work life to real life (home, family, friends, leisure time etc) - sometimes i feel like the jokes on me having worked FT since DS 1 was 20 weeks old as a lone parent. I had better mat leave for DS2 and DD but ended up a lone parent again and working FT from when my youngest was 4. I just remember their early life as being incredibly stressful, a logistical nightmare and my parenting really suffered. My pride and ego meant I pushed myself and got a high paying career but who is really the winner here?

I totally agree, it blows my mind!

I agree with this! I wanted to be a sahm when my kids were small. I returned to uni & retrained when my DTs started nursery aged 3 & now have a good career rather than just the ‘job’ I had before.
The 7 years I had out of work are just a small part of a long working life & I loved being a SAHM and having long holidays as a student in the early primary years! Was so
much less stressful than working & juggling childcare etc!

Well he did 😊

How can there be no availability in standard class? Train tickets aren't limited by number

The only way to have choice is to be well off. Make a choice to work hard at school, develop a career, get into a stable relationship with someone of a similar mindset. Then you get the choice to stay home with kids if you want to.

You can't expect to make life choices that result in you being a single mother with no qualifications and then not work at all, while being paid the equivalent to someone who does work.

Obviously these choices are largely illusions and depends on health, supportive parents, a decent school etc.

But ultimately the state can't afford to pay people to be SAHP

I explained in a previous post my last pregnancy was unplanned, I didn’t know till
the second trimester and it was a multiple birth

Is both parent working full time really the ideal? I mean me and OH do it out of necessity and always have, but it's fucking exhausting and shit for the kids too. Ive hated it. It would have been nice if one of us could have just worked around 20 hours when they were in nursery and the first couple of years of primary. My youngest has severe autism though and that's another layer of shit. Might be easier with NT kids.

Many people do not like working not just mums. That doesn't mean some people are not hard workers. Some people may be in the wrong industry or poorly fitted to their jobs. Some people are bullied at work.

Most people need to eat and pay bills so they work. Lucky people find work they are suited to and do all this. Of course it gets even harder if you have disabilities or caring responsibilities. I think work could be so much better for so many more people. There are accommodations that could be made for people with challenges too. Unfortunately I think with AI many who even like to work will find themselves without jobs in the future.

Because continuing to have kids means they aren't required by UC to look for work, meaning they can keep receiving UC with no requirement to either work or look for work.

Try booking Caledonian Sleeper standard class, Euston to Aberdeen with 3 days' notice and then you will see 'how'.

My friend says lack confidence holds her back and she too long out of it workwise. Most of my neighbours went back work once kids older.

I think the issue here is the state have to step in in the first place. Years ago most families could at the very least afford for one parent to reduce hours whilst the kids were young, or have a couple of years where they could not work what the kids were very little. There was a choice and you could alternatively work FT and benefit from having a better lifestyle for it too. Now it is common for both parents to work full time. The issueis wages don't go as far and expensive housing, utilities and general COL has taken that choice away. Now we have resentment towards people choosing to people prioritising people being at home.

The birthrate is likely to fall significantly due to this and this creates issues for future workforces, heathcare demands and pensions, but we are so determined that a few people don't get money from the state that we are happy to accept a shit future for it instead.

Agreed.

It is still a choice. We are not animals and contraception is freely available (unlike for animals).

Increasingly Gen Z are turning away from having children and choosing to live child free lives.

We had a brief period where we both worked full time...in the days before wfh so both out the house five days a week with a commute and a DC in childcare. No family help. I found it absolutely gruelling. Felt like survival and just getting through the day... praying DC didn't come down sick or a train was cancelled. No I don't think this way of living is good for kids or parents

That's kind. Thank you.

Exactly.

Not to mention the fact that it wouldn’t be people, it would largely be women and it would make things more tricky for women who do want to have careers.