Kemi B - the best form of welfare is a well paying job...

[Oofftheflooff]

She is absolutely right isn't she? Discussing the triple lock pension challenge and instead focusing on getting people into work. Do you agree with her ? Working 3 or 6 or 9 hours to then top up with benefits isn't the way forward (not including disabilities in here )

I agree with you on the second part. £14.6 billion a year of public money goes to private landlords, which is an absolute disgrace. Just imagine if that was going back to local authorities. Even taking into account the lower spend because social housing rents are less, it would be a real boost to the local economy. Not to mention people having the security of a long term affordable home.

I generally can’t stand Kemi thanks to her comments about our statutory maternity pay being too generous and I still can’t. I do agree that benefits were always supposed to be a short term stop gap to help people undergoing massive changes, like divorce, illness work through them and then make adjustments.

However, the Conservative Party also promotes more working in the office and less flexible working at home. Policies like WFH contracts help women and those with caring responsibilities continue to be employed and contribute to the economy. They also help those with disabilities and long term illnesses to continue to be employed and that’s what we need more of. Labour is strengthening some of those policies but not going far enough.

The Conservatives like Reform want to push us all back in the office to benefit businesses but no thought to the impact largely on women who undertake these caring and parental responsibilities.

Yep, DP works from home. If he had to go into the office, he would not be able to hold down his job (he is disabled).

Fine?

Not well paid then

Could you and your husband live on this fine wage?

Well, if you can work, at home or anywhere else, it’s better than just sitting there and getting benefits. And I say this as someone disabled.

£32k and £34k as a starting salary is perfectly fine

What does perfectly fine mean to you?

And the people claiming £500 on top are likely not just starting out, but have responsibilities - rent, children.

It's enough to live off and is comparable to what new grads make.

Of course she's right, but where are the jobs? Every day you hear of people applying for dozens of jobs and getting nowhere. We used to have big warehouses and factories, companies with dozens of clerks and secretaries, mines with miners, joiners, electricians, steel plants, chemical works, etc, etc. In the 1970s, you could walk into a decently paid job with no bother. We need more actual JOBS!

Enough to live on without benefit top ups?

You have already been ttold why that isn't always the case on a teacher or nurse salary.

And they are not the well paid jobs Badenoch was talking about and you are mentioning wrt your husband.

They are hardworking and important jobs. We would be in a bad place without people doing these jobs. So if they need top ups, will you tell them to find something in the private sector instead?

32k 34k is enough to afford rent. Again you start on this salary and it's fine. It's enough to live off.. plenty of grads do. It's a perfectly normal wage to start your working career on

Plenty of people do not earn this much and never will. They do not have a career ladder to climb, but they will still be doing vital jobs.

It is kind of telling that she wont say what she does or earns, but it keen to point out her DH earns loads, and her DC is "only" 18 and on £30k.... like being older than that and on the same or less is a moral failing.

And as some said on the fb group I talked about earlier some don’t work full time on purpose because if they do they’d be no better off than working part time and getting top up universal credit.

which I can understand. I wouldn’t work full time if I could do three days a week and the government would make my wages up to full time wages 🤷‍♀️

sadly I seem to have missed that trick.

I think this particular thread of the discussion arose around someone asking why some nurses and teachers are claiming £500 in UC.
People are trying to explain that it is because the salary they earn is not enough (as determined by UC calculator).
You keep saying that 32K is plenty for a new grad to live on isn't relevant.

Established teachers and nurses are also claiming UC, likely because of rent, being a single income household and/or having dependents.

Surely they have some hidden cost - enormous commuting costs, childcare barriers? It is not a trick (unless people are lying).

I don't think you can do that if you are single and have no kids/disabilities/caring responsibilities.

Not that they mentioned. Was just a statement of fact of they earn X for part time work, plus get Y of UC. If they worked full time they’d get the equivalent of X and Y by way of full time wages but obviously have to work full time. Which they’d rather not do if it doesn’t mean they’re any better off.

Yes it is enough to live off... It's the Same pay so many other people start off.

or because they prefer to work part time and get money from UC.

To drop my hours to 22.5 even though I’m a single parent? | Mumsnet

Welfare should be reformed that unless severe disabilities or caring for a person with severe disabilities there must be no top ups until claimant works full time. Only then to consider housing cost support.
And build social housing in parallel.

It is enough to live off for some, not all.

Will you advice the people who need top ups to follow your husbands example and move to the private sector for that well paid job?

If there's a job available! Like most people born last century, I found it quite easy to get a job. Now there's Oxbridge grads struggling. People over 40 who have been great at their job for decades find themselves unemployed and can't get one.
Obviously there's a difference between agreeing with her in principle (can work but don't want to folk), but people need to realise the world has changed.

So, John who is unemployed after redundancy gets UC, including his rent covered while he is unemployed. After a few weeks he finds a job for 25 hours a week which he could take while he carries on seeking full time work. Except, he can't. Because under your new rule, his housing costs would stop, he'd get rent arrears and eventually an eviction notice. So he has to carry on not working at all until he finds a full time job?

Yes, because childcare costs are very often more than what people earn.
There are many people working school hours only. Working full time on equivalent pay would make them worse off because they'd need wrap around and holiday childcare.