Maybe I'm different when it comes to benefits?

[martin_y]

So my wife has this friend whos been on benefits for a good 2 or 3 years now. She has a young son.

So my wife know of this job going at BP , and she thinks her friend might be interested. So she calls her explains the job, and how its a big company that look after their staff and ya ya yada.

I didnt take much notice but then about 5 minutes later shes still on the phone, and now shes trying to respond to all the objections her friend has got, so shes trying to a good job on selling her the job.

After the phone call I said to my wife "I hope you are not going to recommend that girl to your company. If you're having to talk her into getting the job, then she doesnt want it at all"

So my wife says "She has to see if its worth her while, because she's might get more by staying on benefits"

Now, Ok, if she works she'll have to find a child minder or nursery, and I know that can be expensive. However, this company does provide a cheaper nursery on site.

But... SO WHAT????

Apart from being a benefit thief, wouldnt you consider the following:
1) the govt is looking carefully at this type of person and possibly they will be reducing the benefits
2)Isnt working better for your own self-esteem?
3) ... and here thing that worries me most. Lets say she applies for jobs in 2 years time when her son starts school. She's going to have "unemployed" on her CV for the past 3/4 years. But if she starts working now gets experience and has , rather 2 years with XX company (its a big international Co, you'd know it for sure).
4) Even if its a job you dont enjoy, I believe that something always leads to something else. She'd be meeting people, building relationships, and she could be getting her CV in front of people that have a better job available.

I think she needs a kick up the ......... I also dont think the dad is paying his maintenance, plus I know she attends one of those 10% churches, so I am pretty sure 10% of the benefit is going there.

later that evening my wife says - "its a pity, because shes intelligent"

I said "I DONT THINK SO!!"

[bradc]

Lets hope the government drops the benefits soon

[col1n]

:unbeleeva lazy bastards, you have to be actively seeking employment to get benefits, id grass them up personally
came across this aswell this morning
poor area my a*rse
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1293730/Somali-asylum-seeker-family-given-2m-house--complaining-5-bed-London-home-poor-area.html?ITO=1708&referrer=yahoo

[Wobble]

this does happen alot . my step father works for the council (legal / eviction side) many a people have told him the same thing ... they are better off on benefits and not paying rent they will still get a good deal (money wise)

hope the gov do something about this, if your able to work then work rather sitting at home watching jeramy kyle drinking special brew and wondering why everone hate you (extreme i know )

[RobboVR4]

The government needs to change this joke of a benefit system. Especially the ones who have kids just to get more money off the state, think it should be capped after 2 children. I know that sounds harsh, but then that may encourage them to get off their arses and find work.
Its also looking likely that the government will be reducing public sector jobs/ pensions, so people who work most of their life are also penalised, does that seem fair? I think benefits & pensions should be put on rates depending on how long youve worked, how much tax/nat insurance youve paid etc. So people have contributed f***all get f***all and people who have worked are on a higher rate.

[Wodjno]

All they need to do is offer jobs to those who are phisically able to work. If they turn down the jobs then they get no money. The company they work for pays them there going rate. The government make up the shortfall, including any childcare.
Simple and effective. Will stop people getting paid for nothing. And the government will save a small fortune.

[martin_y]

ok, my rant wasnt about the govt etc, but my questions is:

If you were in her situation, wouldnt you absolutely jump at the chance, especially when a friend has recommended you, and you have a very good chance at getting the job?

[lancerevo3]

ok, my rant wasnt about the govt etc, but my questions is:

If you were in her situation, wouldnt you absolutely jump at the chance, especially when a friend has recommended you, and you have a very good chance at getting the job?
sure would. but some people just have it to handy,and will not make an effort.

[Ghost_2008]

Dude I deal with this type of sh1t every day....... I work for the local authority where I live and dealing with benefits in some respect is a big part of my job..... at the moment you can get more money in benefits than you can in a lot of "unskilled" jobs, such as working for super markets, fast food resturants etc. The job itself would probably be hard work for crap pay....... when you consider JSA, family tax credit, council tax credit, housing benefit etc etc, all the grants available, other items you can get for free it soon works in favour of staying on benefits........

In fact I was supporting a family in being moved away from their home due to harassment from the local community....... when the tenant was placed into temporary accommodation she was advised by the local authority that she would be better off reducing her hours at work in order to qualify for housing benefit on two properties (her home where they may have needed to return to and the temporary home she was using until a decision had been reached).

I have also attended training causes where a lecturer basically said whats the point in working and buying property etc, you can claim benefit, be provided with decent council housing and the government have a duty of care, so when you become older and need alterations to your home they do that for free......

At the moment there is simply no incentive for people to work........ the system needs to change to encourage people to find employment.....

[martin_y]

The job would have been an admin job.

I agree that one could, in the short term , be better off by not working, but surely long term, she would want to escape that trap of staying on benefits forever?

anyway, I would.

[Scanny]

i dont agree with getting money for kids anyway. planned or not, its a choice! why should my taxes be paying for other peoples kids?

as for the work shy, simple! if they want benefits, they work for the council for minimum wage up to whatever their benefits are. cleaning offices, picking up litter, sweeping the streets etc. they can do unskilled jobs to earn their 'income'

i hate spongers

[Robotnik123]

Dude I deal with this type of sh1t every day....... I work for the local authority where I live and dealing with benefits in some respect is a big part of my job..... at the moment you can get more money in benefits than you can in a lot of "unskilled" jobs, such as working for super markets, fast food resturants etc. The job itself would probably be hard work for crap pay....... when you consider JSA, family tax credit, council tax credit, housing benefit etc etc, all the grants available, other items you can get for free it soon works in favour of staying on benefits........



A lot has to be said about the govt making benefits too generous, but what about the fact that employers aren't really paying unskilled workers a decent wage? An increase in the national minimum wage would help, but of course that would mean everyone paying more for their supermarket groceries, fastfood, etc. or not having the convenience of 24hr shopping and such and no-one wants that either.

[oldgit9]

When I met my wife, she was on benefits. It was not out of choice. She had been actively seeking work for years. But they all didn’t pay enough. After she worked out the sums, it just wasn’t viable. Who in their right mind would work for £120 a week, only to pay out £140 a week in child care, rent etc. (figures are an example and not actual figures). An example just off the top of my head…when the wife was on benefits, the council was paying the rent on her two bedroom house. She had to contribute £110 a month towards the rent. If the wife got a full time job, then the council will stop paying the rent and she would have to pay £570 a month just on rent. On top of that, she would have to pay water rates, council tax, child minders etc. And that’s before the other bills, food, tv licence, phone line, clothes for her and her daughter etc.

Not long before we got married, the wife found a part time job. Ok it’s only working something like 16hrs a week…but its something. With all the bills and my debt (thanks to a previous relationship…the b!tch), we simply couldn’t afford to live in the rented house. Luckily for us, the forces have married accommodation. which is dirt cheap. We can now finally start to save for a house of our own.

Yes….a lot of people take the p!$$ and have no intention on going back to work. These are the people that are giving people like my wife, a bad name. A prime example of someone taking the p!$$ is in today’s papers. A side-headline in today’s “Daily Star”…”ASYLUM SEEKERS LIVING IN £2M 5-BEDROOM MANSION (http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/view/144016/Asylum-seekers-living-in-2m-5-bedroom-mansion/)”. Read the story and see why he was moved to his new home. One of the reasons was, his old house was too far away from his kids school. The school was “four to five stops away”. My daughters school is 3 miles away and I drop her off every morning on the way to work. But if she was to catch the bus, then it would be at least 10-15 stops away with a half mile walk after the bus ride. People like this make me sick.

[martin_y]

. Who in their right mind would work for £120 a week, only to pay out £140 a week in child care, rent etc. (figures are an example and not actual figures).

... that would be someone who is willing to get a job so they could then move on to a better job, and then a better one, and then a better one, and so on?

[AlanDITD]

Self esteem isnt a pre-requisite of Survival and Protection.

I would do the same why in Gods name would i provide my children with less of my time and less money by working. (if i had any)

The government has ruined the system your wives friend has taken what was offered to her and rightly so, she hasnt broken any rules.

[AlanDITD]

... that would be someone who is willing to get a job so they could then move on to a better job, and then a better one, and then a better one, and so on?

Mate get with the real world.....lets say 1 year minimum before a promotion, thats 1 year of not having enough money to feed your kids and pay your rent, sounds sensible to go to work.


I hate benefit scroungers but a single mum with one kid i do have some sympathy for!

[Wodjno]

Mate get with the real world.....lets say 1 year minimum before a promotion, thats 1 year of not having enough money to feed your kids and pay your rent, sounds sensible to go to work.


I hate benefit scroungers but a single mum with one kid i do have some sympathy for!

and thats exacly why this would work ...




All they need to do is offer jobs to those who are phisically able to work. If they turn down the jobs then they get no money. The company they work for pays them there going rate. The government make up the shortfall, including any childcare.
Simple and effective. Will stop people getting paid for nothing. And the government will save a small fortune.

[AlanDITD]

Ahh sorry wodjno i missed your post mate and i agree with you 100%

[KiwiTT]

... at the moment you can get more money in benefits than you can in a lot of "unskilled" jobs ...And that is the point ... the benefits are too high ... and should be cut ...

The levels of life are as follows

1) No Work, no Benefits, No income
2) No Work, Basic Benefits, Low Income
3) No Work, Benefits with Kids, Low Income + a bit extra
4) Unskilled Work, Medium Income
5) Skilled Work, Medium Income + a bit extra
6) Manager, High Income
7) Owner of Business, High Income + a bit extra
8) Retired, Medium Income
9) Invalid, Low Income

[bradc]

There should also be something about the number of years you have worked at a full time age and the benefit should be proportional to your income (up to a point). It should also be illegal to go straight onto the benefit until you have had at least 1 year of full time work.

Something like if you've worked 10 years at $35k you get 1 year of the benefit at a normal rate. However if you've only worked for 2 years at $30k you get a reduced benefit. Then if you've worked 30 years at $55k you get an increased rate.