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 )

It took her over a year to get a part time job in a cafe, and that was only because her mum was a regular and asked about it.

Why didn't she ask herself???

You see, we feel vacancies with immigrants who are prepared to move continents in search for better life. But a young (or not so young) person who can't find a job within 20min commuting distance can say there are no jobs and sing up for benefits.

Have any of them tried care homes?

Yes I have. It finds very many positions which are no longer open or really wild suggestions. I use AI to assist me in my job search, but not to find positions.
Repositioning (is that moving to a new field/retraining?) tends to be the privilege of those who can take a pay hit while they work their way up.

Because my aunt was a regular in the cafe and my cousin was not. She had no idea the place existed.

Care homes should not be for the last resort. Not fair on the residents.

The amount of times I see "try care homes" is appalling. It's not shelf stacking.

Not to mention the lack of skills matching to vacancies. With the exception of social care, transport and warehousing, the highest demand areas are all in skilled trades or professions, teaching, accountancy and finance, medicine, IT specialisms, engineering. Whereas job losses are occurring in retail, hospitality, manufacturing and administration. So even if the available number of jobs matched the number of job seekers, the majority of them are not qualified for the available vacancies.
A more accurate reflection would come from comparing the number of jobs suitable for most, so those in care, warehousing and driving (177k) with the number of jobseekers (1.78m).

Same. It is not different to "try a nursery". I bet no one on here would want someone who has no intersest in kids working with thier own.

Don't go bringing facts into it

This thread is for fact free blaming of the unemployed and poor

Yeah it does do that as well. Repositioning for the job market, slightly different way of presenting yourself on your CV or linked in for a different type of job skill you’ve over looked. I used to just apply for jobs that had my current job title, put my cv through ai and it suggested 8 other job titles I’d never even considered before.

I agree. Carehomes workers should be much better paid and regulated.

But I use this example on purpose - welfare allows people to be choosy for a very long time, they don't apply for jobs they don't want.

Re upskilling - of course, that's why I say there should be temporary support to allow people to retrain, but it must be withdrawn after certain time limit.

Where are the well paying jobs? Wages have stagnated for years!

So what should happen with the real example I mentioned up thread. A man that has not worked for 20 years. No references or work history.
When his temp support is up, and he is still unemployed, then what happens to him? No money for his housing, bills or food. Just dumped on the street.

Lets be realistic here. Someone that has been out of the workforce for 20 years is not going to find a job in 6 months. People fresh out of uni are struggling to do the same.

So, let's say John earned £50k. You would pay him 3 months at £623 per week, 3 months at £456 per week and a month at £228 per week. So £15k total for a 7 month period of unemployment.
Under the current rules, John would recieve £2975 in UC over the 7 months, plus £7952 for his rent, based on average rent for a one bedroom flat, bringing the total cost to just shy of £11k.
So your proposal is not only significantly more expensive but acts as a disincentive to John taking up work in the first 6 months as he would recieve more than if he took a NMW job.
Not as easy as it looks to make these massive savings, is it?

You missed e.g. Numbers need to be worked out.
But that's exactly the purpose - if John was e.g. IT Developer, there is no need to push him to clean streets. He should take time to try to find an equally skilled job and/ or train new technology. But after a certain time he has to find something or start doing some currently unfunded work in exchange for benefits. There also should be a limit as to how long a person must work before being entitled to any benefits at all.

As to 20 years unemployment @XenoBitch - the system must not allow such cases at all. Able man who was unemployed for such a long time should do some full time community service work in exchange for benefits, even if it's litter picking in the park.

Why the need for land girls and munition workers then?
Able bodied men not in protected occupations were fighting the war ...

It isn’t privilege to drag your arse out of bed at 6am to work for a not-great salary every day. Something many on this thread seem to know nothing about..

It's also not a privilege to do that and still not earn enough to pay your bills and then get admonished for getting help in the form of benefits.

Tell me you know nothing about serious mental illness without saying you understand nothing about serious mental illness.

2500 Post Office jobs to be axed by the end of 2027. It's to improve efficiency apparently. They'll reach the number by voluntary redundancy and people leaving. People leaving isn't cutting jobs (though the end result is the same) and shouldn't be newsworthy really. People leave jobs all the time. It would only be newsworthy if loads leave at the same time.

I have a DD1, living in a care home. She has severe, complex needs. I do not want her looked after by people, who are bored, indifferent and can’t be bothered to communicate with her at her level! Then, I have her crying to me, that X is useless, can’t look after her, she can’t understand them…She turns them out of her room!

I do not know why people think working in a care home is suitable for anyone and everyone? It needs people who care and are patient!

But you’re fine with people caring for her who are doing it for a visa?

So long as they are good at their job, what does it matter? It’s personal attributes that count! The care home where she lives generally pick good staff. They can do it, because they pay the staff well.

I don’t see how it’s good for the economy for local authorities and ICBs to spend taxpayers’ money on people, who are useless though. It’s not their function to fund job creation schemes!

Is there a particular reason why people from the U.K. can’t be good at their job?

How do you know somebody who applies for the job because they need a job won’t be good at it? Many carers are low skilled workers from overseas who applied for a visa. What makes you think they’re passionate about care, but job hunters in the UK aren’t?

Some foreign nationals are great care workers, some UK born people are great care workers. Some of both groups are rubbish and doing it reluctantly.
The point is, it's not a sector where we should be increasing the numbers in the second group by forcing people with no aptitude or interest into care roles, as the only alternative to punary.
The point is, these jobs and how they're done matters a lot. They're not the punitive dumping ground for those percieved as workshy and idle.

Increases in minimum wages impacts employers, particularly those running small businesses which in turn impacts growth negatively . It has increased by over 45% in the last 5 years.