Working expectations for parents on UC

[BlackCatGreyWhiskers]

AIBU to find this really frustrating? Basically there is no expectation for parents to work until their child is age 3. So if a family has more than one child that could be several years.

Whereas maternity leave is only 9-12months.

Especially as universal credit claimants can actually get help towards childcare expenses.

I don’t understand why there is a mismatch between the employed and unemployed?

When I went back after maternity, my pay was around £1500 and my childcare £800, then after I went back with my second my childcare went up to £1200. So I earnt next to nothing for 5 years before the eldest started school.

UC (or any benefit) is never going to oay toward an asset, or something that will be an asset.

@RepoTheGeriatricOpera someone I know, their little boy turned 3 this year, not been asked to go to the job centre or review.. I was made redundant and applied they wanted me up there every week! Oh and now she’s pregnant again!

Can she not go for medical retirement, as OH, believes that she will not be able to return to her job?

As the thread goes on it’s clear you just make stuff up to support your own narrative.

I'm a lot less naive than the OP. 'Lol'. 🫣

And if everyone decided not to work for three years after each baby and claim UC - the country would collapse.
If an individual decides to stay at home with their baby - their decision but why should everyone else fund their benefits?

When I went back after maternity, my pay was around £1500 and my childcare £800, then after I went back with my second my childcare went up to £1200. So I earnt next to nothing for 5 years before the eldest started school

Were you not entitled to a UC top up during this period?

You did the right thing.You worked. DD was a single working mum, she got tax credits too, very different from doing nothing. You of course were let down by a system that doesn’t force absent parents to support their children.

What have I made up?
It's ironic you're telling me that I have a narrative. 🫣

I don't understand the mindset of I take home £X, my childcare is £Y. Therefore I work for nothing.
You don't work for nothing. You take home £X. But for a couple of years you have another bill to pay. That is your choice. And you have the other advantages of being in work.

@BlackCatGreyWhiskers You have spotted the flaw in society. Higher rate taxation starts at £42,000 ish. Just above average earnings . So there is obviously a problem that those people aren’t well paid enough and find childcare expensive. We want well paid child carers but don’t want to pay or cannot pay so we don’t have dc. Birth rate is falling. Mums who are benefits claimants or the very wealthy have dc. Wages have stagnated for many. I agree it’s a big issue for working mums but the benefits claimants shout loudest.

You’re completely wrong OP and talking rubbish, or have a total lack of understanding of the UC system in which case why are you commenting on something you don’t understand?

The fact is that on either £1500 a month, or £35k per year (which are NOT matching figures, so you’re wrong somewhere), if you were also paying £800 childcare then you WERE entitled to £110-220 per week UC if you were a single parent.

The only reason you were not entitled is because your partner’s earnings put you as a household over the threshold.

Yes, I have. Everyone individual makes decisions for the best of their families. But the government should be making changes to benefit society.

If we didn’t lose tens of thousands of pounds in childcare subsidies and tax by going over 100k, maybe we wouldn’t have both gone part-time, and GP and dentist waiting lists would be that bit shorter, saving longer term problems and meaning more tax is being paid.

We’ll probably go back to full-time when the youngest is old enough, but that’ll have been ten years out of full-time work. So it’s not forever for us either.

Exactly. The truth might affect the ability to benefit bash though. 🫣

Yep, IF those figures were correct OP was entitled to a £220ish per week UC top up if a single parent.

However OP also reckons she was takin home £1500 a month but was also on £35k per year, so it’s fair to say OP doesn’t actually have a clue what’s going on.

But that shouldn’t be a reason to claim UC!

It’s usually low because they work part time. I work with people who refuse to work overtime or more than 16 hrs as it’ll interfere with their benefits

I have not disputed that I wasn’t single - what’s your point?

Childcare support is only paid to people IN WORK.

If she worked in the public sector (I don’t know about all the private sector) she could, but the company she works for don’t offer ill health retirement now. She’ll be finished on incapability grounds.

So you are altering your work pattern in order to access subsidies too, a bit like the folk who get support from UC?

Then they are misinformed. I get a small UC top up. I work 30 hours a week and I’m much better off than I was working 22 hours.

My point is you’re having a go at people with less money than you had, and you also have no fucking clue about the UC system so you are starting to look really quite stupid commenting on something you don’t understand.

Not true.

https://www.gov.uk/help-with-childcare-costs/free-childcare-2-year-olds-claim-benefits

I agree OP, it's not fair. If every time you had a child you had 3 years when you weren't expected to work and you had multiple kids you could be out of work for many years, becoming harder to employ and making it harder to get back into employment.

For everyone saying 'you do it then', what a petty and immature argument. If the whole country decided not to work for 3 years after every child who would pay the benefits?!

The OP is just saying it should be equal time off between working people and those claiming UC (and I know some of them do work).