Benefits - does this seem realistic?

[Ivy44]

I was giving our office cleaner a lift home from one day (we chat a lot and she lives on my way home) last week and she openly told me how much she gets in benefits, I was a bit taken aback by the amount she gets as I keep reading articles about people on benefits being in poverty, due to all the cuts. She is a single parent of two children who works 16 hours a week as a cleaner, the children are 9 and 13.

Salary - £550 per month
Housing benefit - £360 per month (covers rent on a 3 bed council house)
£180 per month child maintenance
£1,120 per month in child/working tax credits and child benefits

This is the equivalent of a 35k a year gross salary. This isn’t supposed to be judgemental as she’s a nice lady who does a good job for us but I am a bit shocked at how much money is available in benefits, given the articles I keep seeing about poverty, food banks, teachers having to buy food for kids who go to school hungry etc.

ourkidmolly

How can they still be claiming 20 years later? I thought the child/working tax and child benefits all stopped once the children leave home? Again, another question, as I don’t know the answer. Does this mean that in a few years time we will have a lot of single, middle aged women living in poverty as they’ve only ever done unskilled, minimum wage jobs and are no longer entitled to benefits once the kids have grown up - shouldn’t this be a worry?

In answer to your question, yes I believe the Guardian's report about the number of children living in poverty in this country. I think the teachers who report that they have to buy basic items for children in their class and see pupils regularly turn up hungry without proper clothes/shoes are telling the truth. I think people who run food banks and observe the increase in people turning up for food packages are telling the truth as well.

I sense you think that levels of poverty are exaggerated because of the amount this woman claims in benefits? I can't see the link between the two. Her situation is just that..her situation.

It's not relevant to make it equivalent to a gross salary.

She's well under the individual allowance for paying income tax.

Eastie77

Is this because other people aren’t claiming the benefits that they are entitled to?

SciFiScream

It is relevant as it means it’s easier to compare with those who work full time and aren’t eligible for benefits. Her total income is substantially higher than the average salary in Manchester, therefore it isn’t poverty is it?

Bookworm4

I was brought up by a single mother. I’m so middle class that I look down on myself every day!

It's not relevant, it really isn't. It's a type of "spin" that causes people earning wages to resent those on benefits.

She's not building up assets, she's probably not saving into a pension, she's probably not got any savings. She probably doesn't have cheap credit or a good credit rating.

It's more likely than someone on a £35k gross salary has some, if not all, of those things above.

SciFiScream

I don’t think I understand.

Someone earning 35k gross will actually bring home around 2.2k a month, after they have paid income tax and NI. This is the same monthly take home income as my colleague, when you add up her salary, benefits and maintenance.

You don't understand?

It's not the same and pitching her life on a tiny salary, benefits (that are at the whim of politics) and housing benefits as being the same as being on a salary of £35K is incredibly insensitive and exactly what politicians hope we will do.

Divide and conquer.

Benefits 🆚 a salary

You can't save much money on benefits

You never know if policy changes will mean you benefits will stop or decrease

You can have benefits sanctioned for arbitrary reasons

You can't get a reference from the benefits agency

You can't get a mortgage on benefits

SciFiScream

She could work more hours to be fair, as the kids are at school. She chooses not to because she wouldn’t be any better off financially, she told me this and I can see her point. We all cut our cloth to our circumstances.

What happens when the children grow up and the benefits and maintenance stop? Someone who has spent 15 years working as a part time cleaner may well find it difficult to find any other kind of work.

That is an insane amount of money. Far more than I earn working full time. Makes me feel like a bit of a mug.

The person on 35k salary has a pension and other benefits, ability to get a mortgage, savings etc. If you were brought up by a single mother then stop resenting this woman, I'm sure she would prefer to have another career or options but you do not know her circumstances and why she does what she does. Her income is NOT the equivalent of a 35k salary, she has £1800pm, the HB doesn't go to her.
What was the purpose of your post? To build up resentment to benefit claimants?
For those being nasty, you never know when you might be in need of help, plenty marriages, jobs etc end, no one knows what's round the corner.

superloudpoppingaction

So if your income is a salary of 2.2k after tax you can save some of it but if your income is made up of 2.2k of salary, benefits and maintenance, you can’t save any of it? Is it different money?

My colleague tells me that she saves up for various things like holidays. We chat quite a lot on the way home from work.

Ivy44 it will be her problem as to what to do when her benefits and maintenance stop. Not yours.

It's likely that she may spend the rest of her life receiving some sort of state support.

It's not something to be jealous of. It's not something to be sewing seeds of discontent about. It's not a race to the bottom.

Bookworm4

You do realise that most people who don’t receive housing benefit have to pay either rent or a mortgage out of their net salary don’t you?

I do know her circumstances actually, as I’ve said, several times now, we chat quite a bit on the way home. I don’t resent her - I’m just pointing out that 2.2k a month net income is not poverty.

Yes it's different money.
It's money with conditions.
You have to declare savings and anything over a certain amount means certain benefits are cut.

Not child benefit.
That used to be universal for everyone to claim.

It meant every woman had access to a small amount of funds even if their partner was financially abusive.
It's sad to see it now perceived as something 'spongers' get.

No it's not poverty.

However if the Govt decided to stop the tax credits and HB tomorrow (or as soon as political decisions happen) she'd only have a tiny salary and the maintenance to depend upon. Which will also stop when her children age out.

It's an insecure lifestyle.

SciFiScream
My point is that, are we building up a problem for the future? If she goes full time, when the kids leave home and the benefits stop, full time hours on minimum wage is a salary of just over 1k per month net. That’s a huge drop in income from 2.2k per month net. Will we have an increasing amount of single, middle aged women, living in poverty in the next few years? Is that not a concern?

What we need are fairer wages and better access to childcare really.

Living wage is just about livable on.
Being on minimum wage would terrify me.

You've changed your point several times on this thread.

First one was about whether or not the amounts of benefits was correct

Second one was about the fact that £2.2 k per month is not poverty

Now the third one is about storing up problems for the future.

SciFiScream

They are all linked points.

Yes of course it's going to be a blooming problem.

Thank goodness we live in a country where we are more likely to look after those in poverty...perhaps by providing benefits!

Will we have an increasing amount of single, middle aged women, living in poverty in the next few years? Is that not a concern?

Yes we will. Yes I've had 2 friends "weeping and awailing" this year because their tax credits and child maintenance stopped and they were only earning 16 hours x minimum wage and can't now live on it. And I have absolutely no sympathy whatsoever for either of them. They knew this day was coming and they did nothing to improve their career prospects so that they would be in a position to support themselves when the child related money ended. It's not like they didn't know their kids were gonna be 18 one day.

Superloudpoppingaction

I agree re fairer wages and better (free) access to childcare. I’d throw in the cost of housing too.