How many jobs per week am I expected to apply for on universal credit

[jisak]

My youngest has turned 3 so I am now looking for work. It's my first meeting tomorrow to check im doing my commitments.

I can only work 10 hours per week. I've applied for 15 jobs so far

How many should I be applying for?

It is hard to find many 10 hour jobs in my local area and within school hours. I can also only travel 20 mins agreed with my work coach

I'm so scared I get sanctioned

Yeah your right. I will rephrase it as you don't need to work if you have a under three.

It gets her back into long term work and out of dependency

Yet still dependent on benefits paying 85% of childcare and we all know how expensive nursery is. It should be a choice with a child under compulsory school age whether you work or not if on benefits

Doesn’t affect me, but bollocks to that.

I simply couldn’t be racing around like a blue arsed fly to make it all fit in.

‘pride’ be damned.

Why should the taxpayer fund your SAHM lifestyle for 12 years? 😬

They don't. As above, once youngest is 3, you're expected to work.

12 years is a bit too long I agree but I think it should Be for a child under compulsory school age that one parent can be a SAHP with no work commitments if that suits the family better. Especially with such high levels of SEN and huge waits for dla this could really really help or for those who just want to make that choice perhaps for their own MH or any other reason - it should be an equal choice till csa.

That's what working parents do 😁

Disagree. Should be a mother’s fundamental right to be able to look after her baby / young child during the week. Not he forced back to work leaving the baby with a stranger / multiple strangers. Not good for the child or the mother who wants to be with them.

who do you think should pay for that? and at what rate?

At one time I believe it was 16.

I completely agree

It’s doesn’t. Read my previous post. Funding childcare properly will have a net positive impact.

I think individual family circumstances are more important than the economy. It should be an equal choice.

Okay….so we agree childcare when funded properly benefits the wider economy so actually it’s about ‘choice’. If everyone makes that choice who pays for public services and benefits?

parents plural. With potentially four grandparents as back up, plus a larger social circle.

A lone parent has half of that and twice the pressure. Better to work a 10 hour week well and be a reliable employee and parent than be shit at everything working full time.

Not always, I was a single working parent and working FT with no Gps.
So not everyone has a huge back up.
Single parents need support with working and cc costs with the aim of returning to FT work.. Dare I say that some people choose to be single parents and expect the state to support them. Contentious but true .

I’m not a policy maker or a politician so I dont know how it would be brought about- I expect it would need a huge shift in many areas as we have gone down a very capitalist path in the UK where you are expected to work every hour to pay taxes which then are not always used wisely or make the rich even richer.
I am however, a mother to multiple children and a primary teacher. I know first hand, and also via studies that the first 5-7 years of a child’s life is the most important. It shapes the child into who they are fundamentally going to be. All the rest of the years are add ons. Icing on the already made cake.
In answer to your question suppose I view it that we should all be paying for it. Shaping the next generation into worthwhile members of society is for the benefit of every single one of us. It’s best done via a solid foundation, with a present consistent parent for the vast majority of the week. Not nurseries with a mixture of staff coming and going from 7am-6pm

That's really great news op, I wish you the very best 😊

It was 16 until 2008.

Your answer lacks nuance. It looks at one factor, assumes that the SAHP will be able/willing to parent in the way you are (or project you are) and forgets many factors such as household income, housing environment, education of parents , number of parents in the house, access to books/learning activities and educational opportunities.
Respectfully, I think to come on here and make a sweeping suggestion that children would be better looked after at home is really quite linear thinking. In some circumstances they are, but in many others they can thrive in nurseries.

Of course there will be the minority of mothers who can’t or won’t parent well. But for the vast majority of mums and babies, I firmly believe that it’s better to have one primary carer and for that to be the mum. And every mum of a baby or young child should have the viable option to stay with their baby rather than going back to work full time if they choose to.

Interesting

This is so lovely. It's really nice to hear a story like this. It is exactly what I would hope the system is there for... To equip people to educate themselves and be able to provide a future for themselves and their children outside of the benefit system!

You sound really motivated and I wish you the best! Good luck with your studies.

I don't agree with some posters on here. You have a young child to look after. Just a few years ago you didn't have to look for work till your youngest was 5. Over the years the government has chipped away at the value of being there for young children when it was the norm years ago. I think it's wrong. 10 hours work while your child gets used to others at nursery or a childminder sounds like a good balance for parent and child in my opinion.