Work for dole

[ReallyTired]

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7514513.stm

I think that proposals like these are long over due. Although I think that if you make people work full time for their benefits they won't have time to look for job.

Prehaps they should work three days a week and look for a job two days a week.

There are people who for good reasons cannot work full time, but certainly could do something part time.

yes,but some of us live in areas where there are NO F*ING JOBS.atall.and cant move to where there are jobs and thats not for the want of bloody trying!

Divastrop - sadly I think you're wasting your time.

Lorycs - that "help with childcare costs" is all well and good if you can find a job for that magical 16 hours or more per week. It's amazing how many employers manage to offer just under that, and it's amazing how the Government came up with a figure that takes you just over 2 days a week. I wonder why that is - not to make things easier for parents to go back to work, that's for sure.

My DH is ineligible for benefits, but if he was we'd sure be better off if he stayed on them. As it is he works 14 hours a week (all he can get) and earns about £10 a week after childcare costs are taken care of. And the only reason he makes anything at all is because I now work compressed hours to get a morning off. Otherwise we'd be paying 2 full days childcare which would cost the same as what DH earns. So that "help with childcare costs" is a bit of a myth as far as we're concerned, and it's the same for many many others.

Wasting your time trying to argue the point, I mean, not looking for work obviously (I hope not anyway )

If there is genuinley NO work where you live then thats different. Through my line of work i come into contact with lots of people who simply choose to live of benefits and it is their choice. Its not an area of high unemployment. Alot of the jobs advertised they simply dont want to do. Im simply saying it shouldnt be a choice. I was a lone parent for nine years and did a low paid job i hated but i saw it as my duty to provide for dd1. There was not the help with childcare back then either. I was grateful for the top up i got from family credit but would have been ashamed to sit back do NOTHING for my self and live of income support.I got out of the rut by studying, doing my degree and taking a professional qualification. As a student i was out of pocket and had to do low paid jobs aroung my course whilst dd was at school. I manged to find agency work which is flexible. But it was worth it to have a better life and finances at the end.Im no longer a lone parent, but if i was at least i could now support us comfortbly. But thats been down to me. Of course i understand thats not everyones drive, but i do think people should help themselves more. Weve become a want it all and give it to me society.This is a provocative subject and opinions will be divided, but be constructive with your comments. Its good to debate and air views, no need become abusive and start swearing about it.

Where are these places that have no jobs whatsoever for anybody?

And why do you have to live there?

its easier to go from a job to a job than go from dole to a job - a form of proposal that forced non primary care givers to work full time could and should be introduced.

however, we have to be careful that we don't introduce a difference labour force intot he market that is perhaps cheaper - therefore having a couter effect.

therefore , i suggest that they clear up the railways andplany pretty flowers to look at. they do this three days a week, One day is compulsory college - in whatever and one half day to assess support needs, training,. qualifications, ambitions, support, literacy, numeracy and filling in job applications.

theres always jobs to do even if here are not bone fide jobs.

tbh if there are no jobs where you live you should move or upskill raher than expect to sit on your arse whilst i pay you.

Primary care givers are a diferent matter imo - a system could and should be devised which enables people t look at childcare and perhaps a package of support options for those who havechildren in full time school - support then toget a job or to get traiing within school hours where they so wish

this then enables people to be SAHMs as a real lifestyle choice and not b default becuase they can't do owt else having got knocked up at 15

Im curious, which town do you live in that has no work?

also reform the system so that employers need to play a role, too.

and so to accommodate seasonal and temporary work.

Theres a very definate increase in seasonal and tempory work in Kent. Employers are much more flexible nowdays. If you have a child under six or achild with special needs you have the right to request child friendly work hours. Emplyers can only refuse is their buisness cannot be run effectively with you doing so. There are many job shares around now too. In kent there is a big increase in immigrant workers filling the employment gaps.Yet still many benefit claimants state that they havnt been able to find work- sometimes for years!?! How come the immigrants found it so easily then!!!!!!!!

There are several reasons for this, Lor, and no, I am not on the dole, FWIW.

No. 1 is that most immigrants come to this country unaccompanied. As they don't have their families with them, their cost of living is far lower than a British person living here with a family.

No. 2, the benefits system works actively against someone who works seasonal or temp employment, in many ways. For one, tax credits. A person using these for childcare and/or WTC would have to keep changing their income details if working a seasonal/temp job, leading to far more room for error and delays in payout, which of course, they need to live on (as temp or seasonal work rarely pays a living wage) and/or pay their childminder.

Other reasons to follow, but need to get up here for a sec.

Fair points. But im ashamed to say that alot of brits take advantage of the system.I meet lots of immigrant families who work very very hard. Working opposite shifts so one of them is always with the kids, and some dont even speak alot of English so i is not easy for them to find work.i know of one woman who has lived,worked and paid taxes in the uk for some time now as has her husband. She cannot get any child allowance without a british passport let alone help with rent or anything. She and her husband are totally exhausted working long hours opposite each other, but solder on as life here is better for then than it is back home. Do we see many couples in need here doing that to provide for their families. I think not. Thats because the system makes it too easy for them to shelve their responsibilities.Of course accept help if you need it, but dont expect it to be handed out to for nothing. Theres a difference.

'She cannot get any child allowance without a british passport let alone help with rent or anything. '

That's not at all true.

I say this as a naturalised citizen myself.

An EU/EEA national is eligible for recourse to public funds after living and working in the UK for 12 months.

If the person is not an EU/EEA national, he/she is eligible for recourse to public funds after achieving permanent residence status/ILR.

These measures are put in place to ensure immigrants are able to support themselves without recourse to public funds, a condition of any visa to the UK with a finite leave to remain.

Additionally, it is not obligatory to get a British passport once you are naturalised. You are issued a Certificate of Naturalisation which is proof that you are a UK national via naturalisation.

she doesnt have perm residence yet, she's on a working visa. your missing the point here- point is without claiming assistance she and her family manage, yet even with offered assistance alot of people still claim not to be able to. Its about responsibilities.

No, I am not missing the point.

Because why should the British taxpayer support a non-EU/EEA national who just wants to come here for economic reasons? They must support themselves with no recourse to public funds, that is the condition of their visa. After 5 years, they may apply for ILR and then be eligible for help. 11 months after this, they can become British nationals.

To get a work permit, your employer must sponsor your application and prove to the Home Office that they could find NO British person or EU/EEA national to do the job (Commonwealth nationals under a certain age can enter and work in hte UK on a 2-year Working Holidaymaker Visa). It is a lengthy and expensive process designed to bring in people with skills in which the UK is lacking and the employee is well aware that he/she must support themselves as part of the agreement.

Expat, you said:

No. 1 is that most immigrants come to this country unaccompanied. As they don't have their families with them, their cost of living is far lower than a British person living here with a family.

I agree with you completely. I am under the impression that most immigrants come here for the opportunities. Many of them find jobs, and work very hard sending money back home to families.

So, my question for those who say they can't work because there's nothing available in their area - what then keeps you in that area? Isn't it logical that you could/should go to where there are opportunities/jobs available?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think a lot of people get stuck in one area because they cannot afford to move.

For someone like divastrop, who is a lone parent, it might mean giving up an assured tenancy/council house to face homelessness in the new area.

Can someone who lives in area X and gets made homeless move to area Y and ask that council to house her?
Or can she only be housed BY the council in area X?

I ask because I was talking to a friend who is thinking of leaving her dh, she doesn't want to stay in this area but wants to move away, will a council in a different area house her if she tells them she is homeless?

I'd check with the council she's wanting to move to. If she can, it's ideal to get a job in the council she wants to move to, then she has a connection to it. Ditto if she's moving to be nearer family who can verify they are helping her with childcare.

Councils can have differing policies on what constitutes homelessness and intentional homelessness.

Thanks Expat, she does have family in that area which is why she wants to move there

I'm not advocating it as a way to live, but London is full of women from the Phillipines and people from Poland who come there to work because the salaries/opportunities are significantly greater than what is available back home. America is full of Mexicans who do the same. I'm sure that those people would prefer not to take such drastic actions to support themselves/their families, but is it a case of 'needs must'?

How is it that the UK is viewed as a land of employment opportunity by so many immigrants, and yet the numbers of citizens on the dole (and other benefits) longterm have steadily risen?

i wonder if the rise isn't related to how expensive it is to live in the UK, early - barring 15 to a two-bed flat or caravan the landlord has no license for.

Expat, you say, 'why should the British taxpayer support a non EU/EEA citizen' but why should us britsh taxpayers support the british people who sit on there backsides and do nothing to help themselves. We should admire those who come from poor countries, lost their homes and literally arrive with what they stand up in. Theyve manged to adjust to a new culture and work and provide. Those people have pride in themselves.