Universal Credit implications for long-term SAHMs??? Help please!

[CSLewis]

Hi, I've just read the Mumsnet summary about Universal Credit, and read that parents of children aged 5-13 will be required to seek work during school hours, though I think those with a baby under one may be exempt.

Does anyone have any further details about this? It feels to me that a parent of young (primary-aged) children is being forced to return to the job market, regardless of whether they judge it to be in the best interests of their family

Don'tmind

I don't think its as simple as that though. I'm not sure if everyones TC works like this but we claim as a couple. The money is paid because dh works, not because I don't work. So according to the calculator we will be slightly better off. This is because the new UC covers most benefits and the assessment will now include council tax discounts. We haven't applied for this before as the application form was so difficult it didn't seem worth it. Now people are automatically assessed for this and could be better off.

Who said anything about riches?

I don't believe there are women who work because they've been brainwashed into not valuing parenting/homemaking. That sounds really unlikely to me.

nkf.

Why does that sound unlikely. Society is always changing, its not so long ago that single parents were completely frowned upon by society. When I grew up your mother was bad if she worked especially if there was no extended family for childcare, as it forced latch key kids.
Times change and now people are brainwashed by spin doctors, the same as society has always been.
The proof is how wrong assumptions are made about sahps being a luxury, how sp's on benefits are having nails done every week. Now maybe this type exist and so what if they do. Whose place is it to say what we can and can't do, and what is acceptable. There is a huge increase in women devaluing the role of parenting/homemaker, its come from somewhere.

When I grew up, most of my friends' mothers worked. Same as I see cogito says upthread. I was born in the 70s. morethan you either grew up in a completely different class, or in a very different times.

I hate it when people keep saying the good old days where mums stay at home and wait for their children to come home. There is already more than a generation of children who has grown up with their mums working. Women aren't devaluing the role of parenting. Just look at how many mums are working part time. Obviously most think it's a great balance of work/family or they wouldn't have chosen it. I feel what women has valued more now is the role of self. That we are more than just a mum and wife.

Onelittle totally agree - most mothers worked when I was growing up - 1970s . They juggled and we were looked after by Aunties,Grannies etc.

I loved going to my Aunties house - she made gorgeous cakes

one littletoddling.

I grew up in late sixties, and seventees and none of my friends mums worked. It was as stated above, oh and my dad was white collar worker, we lived in a working class town. I'm sorry if you don't like this for some reason. I do believe that being a sahp, sahm in particular has been devalued. Obviously it has unless everyone would be doing this. I also think that government spout lots of rubbish to play off one part of society to another and we end up with terms such as workers and shirkers.

OneLittleToddlingTerror - you say women value themselves more than "just" being wife and mum.

Firstly there are many more ways to do that than working on a supermarket checkout or similar.

Secondly, is that why when people are talking about workshy SAHPs almost everyone assumes they are referring to women?!

There are many many areas of society where being a non working mother is highly valued. Whole newspapers given over to praise of them with many a snide attack on mothers who work. Whole cultures and religions that prize the "traditional" family unit.

I think that if you personally value something and it seems that the rest of society doesn't, you work very hard to make sure that you can have the thing you value. And you ignore the gainsayers. And nobody is saying women can't be non working mothers. This thread began with a question about UC. And how if you are in receipt of it, you will have to look for school hours work once your kids are in school. From that to society doesn't value motherhood is a big leap.

surely it doesn't mean school hours, it could mean evenings, nights and weekends too?

And I agree - it is no-one's place to say what you can and can't do. So long as you obey the law, you can do what you like. Why do you think you are being told otherwise?

gaelicsheep I don't like asking someone else if I could buy myself a coffee, a new paperback, or some new clothes. I didn't like it when I was a teenager. I longed for the day when I could earn myself a designer bag. And now I'm earning my wage so I don't have to answer to anyone how I sepnt it.

A couple of weeks ago, wife of a colleague rung during lunch whether she could get £50 to fill up a car. I found that very demeaning. But to each their own.

Agree with nkf too. I simply see everywhere praising the "traditional" family unit too. And hence my other posts about this "golden age" which is thrown around everywhere. I have even been told in my face that I should have stayed at home for my DD. Well, I simply told them my mum worked ft and I grew up ok, tyvm.

"There must be some mechanism of proving you've applied for jobs though. And if no suitable jobs are available where you are, what happens? If there are none to apply for, do you apply for unsuitable ones and hope you get rejected?"

"I expect you keep records of your applications. And I would have thought you aren't expected to apply for things that make no sense. Like jobs that require certain kinds of licences or qualifications that you don't have."

I have to laugh when I see people making comments like this, because it's that or weep.

Reading this thread, I'm getting a very strong impression that a lot of people are expecting a degree of reasonable and sensible behaviour from the DWP. If we could rely on that, then no one would be worrying, because as the above quotes highlight, how can you be expected to apply for jobs if there are none suitable? Unfortunately, the DWP is not currently applying reason or logic to benefits decisions. You can be sanctioned for not applying for a job that requires a driving licence even though you don't have one. The rules don't explicitly state that you can be sanctioned for such reasons, yet it happens - all it takes is one jobcentre adviser who for whatever reason decides you're being difficult. There are targets for how many claimants should be sanctioned, whether they've broken their agreement or not. You can be sanctioned for missing an appointment due to a sick child. I'm surprised no-one's yet been sanctioned for looking at their adviser in a funny way.

I've nothing against the idea of parents going to work when their kids are in school. The problem comes when the suitability of the work available isn't assessed by the parents in question, but by someone who is being paid to find spurious excuses to cut off people's benefits.

Oh and gaelicsheep I forgot you were one of those who told us to give up our jobs so our men can have it. It's basically saying the same thing in a different way. And no you didn't say men specifically. But it's the norm where the mum stays at home and the dad goes out to work. If you look at any preschooler books depicting family roles, that's what you'll see. (Don't start me on that "I love my mummy" cardboard book I saw in Asda the other day).

Thank you Stormy.

That was my point. Sometimes I wonder how I got my A in GCSE english because I am shit at explaining things :o

No, I suggested that second earners in families who don't really need the money might give up their jobs to free them up for SAHPs who are about to be sanctioned because they can't find suitable work. Unsurprisingly the " I'm alright Jacks" won through

"If you can only work between, say, 9 and 3 (including travel time) because of school hours and you have no other form of child care, those are the hours you will be deemed available for work. If you can't find work to fit in with those hours you won't lose your tax credits"

It's nice that you have such a rosy view of the Job Centre as being reasonable to deal with, but please let me assure you that for vast numbers of people that isn't the case!

I will eat my hat if, when this system comes in, parents aren't required to apply for jobs which affects their ability to pick their DCs up from school.

I wonder for example if travel time is being taken into consideration? I haven't seen this written down anywhere, have you? I suspect what will happen is that the government will issue an amount of hours which parents are expected to work. Job Centre advisers will then interpret the guidelines as they see fit. Especially with targets to meet, I would be very surprised if parents aren't asked to do impossible things by Job Centre staff and then get sanctioned for not complying.

OneLittle

I agree with you entirely, there's nothing like having your own money.
You don't have to work though. FTC is my money, part of dhs money is mine. I have never had to ask for money and find the idea amusing.
We tend to look at it as the families money not his, hers, the kids. This to me is an alien concept and would hate to think I had to ask my dh for money.

I think it's quite clear on this thread who has and hasn't ever had to deal with the DWP.

aufaniae

I fear your comments will be confirmed. I have heard first hand of the treatment of my friend a sp on DLA and another acquaintance a long term patient having kidney dialysis. They were both treated diabolically. The latter having to job seek for the alternate days he was not on dialysis as he was considered fit for work. The poor man was so sick on these days he could hardly move, let alone attend jc meetings.

gaelicsheep

"No, I suggested that second earners in families who don't really need the money might give up their jobs to free them up for SAHPs who are about to be sanctioned because they can't find suitable work. Unsurprisingly the " I'm alright Jacks" won through"

That is just the same as telling us to give up our jobs. I earn as much as my DH, so one of us quitting will be halving our household income. A lot of middle class would be in trouble on losing their second income even if on paper they are affording quite a bit. We have a very large mortgage to pay because we didn't have rich parents to bankroll us and couldn't afford a deposit till our 30s. We bought a tiny house in the catchment of a good primary school. What if we all lose half our income? Who will we sell our houses to? There aren't any SAHP in my street.

Sadly I didn't have the foresight to marry a banker. Or go into the City ourselves. In fact, we jokingly said that at lunch yesterday. A friend joked she should have gone into banking instead of teaching maths/IT with her masters in maths. Another knew who joined Accenture had earned enough already and have semi-retired. While us stupidly followed our dreams, and married men not for their pockets, are still struggling with our "professional" ages. (Yes we are STEM graduates and earn above NMP. But we are all basic rate payers still).

gaelicsheep DH has signed on when he graduated. I'm lucky I didn't have to.

Ahem, marrying an Accenture consultant/partner doesn't mean you have married him for his pocket!

I have signed on for work when I was made redundant a few years ago and I have a friend who is doing the same now. Both of us had/have young children. A brief overview of the way the system currently works in my area is that you sign on as available for work, you agree the sort of work you're able to do, the distance you're able to travel, the childcare that's available to you and then you are required to show evidence every 2 weeks that you have looked for work by reading the jobs columns, the internet jobcentre vacancies and that you have applied for the jobs that fit the criteria agreed between you and the DWP. I didn't even have to show any completed job application forms.
There won't be a vast army of DWP workers checking up that you've applied and then got an interview and then been offered the job.

For those who really don't want to work, there are ways of being turned down for a job you know - biut this would be dishonest.