View Full Version : Unpaid labour’ plans
‘Unpaid labour’ plans condemned
scheme could drive vulnerable people into despair, says archbishop
“In these circumstances, I believe it is right to say to people on benefits they have a responsibility to take advantage of the support and help being offered to them,” he told BBC1’s The Politics Show.
Read more: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1999246#ixzz14gM3Pxxx
I watched the politics show yesterday, as I do every week and my opinion is this,
it won't work.
I can see a rise in rebellious crime, especially in the towns and inner cities,
with many people already living well below the breadline, and living in perpetual despair,
the inner cities hospitals already filled to capacity with outpatients struggling with depression, alcoholism and drug dependency, homelessness to mention but a few.
It was the successive governments who created the welfare society and successive governments have failed in every attempt thus far to rectify the society it has created.
Even the threat of losing benefits is not an incentive to get people back to work,
If there was a decent minimum living wage available then more people would be in work,
that of course is if there were jobs to be had,
and at the rate this coalition government is going, there will be very few people actually left in work, there will be fewer high earners and even less incentives with company bonus's being at a minimum, Golden handshakes a thing of the past.
I think the government are barking up the wrong tree on this one,
I cannot see the average "joe" going out for 30 hours a week, to work for nothing at all, can you?
Apart from anything else, it would do nothing for their self esteem and will only widen the gap between those in paid employment and those doing the same work for no wage,
even £65 in unemployment benefits is a joke.
Who can live on that amount, in this day and age.
annemarie482
08-Nov-10, 11:32
i think its a good idea, especially for those abusing the system.
as they have already said it helps keep them in a routine of getting up for work/ working life etc
why should we make it easy for those happy to sit on the dole?
maybe they will actually find work to avoid working for free.....lets hope so anyway!
There has been a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth since Iain Duncan Smith announced his intention to publish a White Paper on the subject this week. The truth is that we as a country cannot continue to support a significant population of long term unemployed. Something has to be done.
I can understand why some will argue that this will possibly cause a rise in rebellious crime, in some towns and inner cities. It may also exacerbate the despair in which people are now living. However those people in work and paying taxes are quickly becoming increasingly exasperated when they see their hard earned money being taken from them and given to the feckless.
A balance has to be struck. A reduction in some taxes would stimulate growth where more jobs could be created. The welfare benefit system is now a huge industry and it has to be curbed. By all means let the jobless have a year to find work but then surely it is not unreasonable to expect them to participate in sort of work program for any further payments.
Let's not forget that many long term unemployed also get housing benefit as well has council tax relief and a plethora of other benefits. So the sum total of their 'entitlement' is very much more than their £65 a week Job Seekers Allowance.
annemarie482
08-Nov-10, 12:57
Let's not forget that many long term unemployed also get housing benefit as well has council tax relief and a plethora of other benefits. So the sum total of their 'entitlement' is very much more than their £65 a week Job Seekers Allowance.
exactlly. they're rent paid for them, grants for allsorts too!
if they are struggling on what they get then the shouldnt have sky tv, internet and the other luxurys. after all its supposed to tide you over until you get work not to live a life of luxury!:roll:
It seems like an interesting, possibly good idea - it would allow people to build some experience and network etc, my one concern is that unscrupulous councils and organisations will use this cheap labour force in place of creating full time jobs; I hope they don't use these people as an excuse to not create jobs which would have been created otherwise.
Apart from anything else, it would do nothing for their self esteem and will only widen the gap between those in paid employment and those doing the same work for no wage,
even £65 in unemployment benefits is a joke.
Who can live on that amount, in this day and age.
It's not the £65 that's the issue - it's all the accompanying benefits that we as taxpayers have to provide. Free dental care, housing benefit and their council tax paid for them.
I know young people on a salary of £25K who live as paupers because they are paying transport costs, rent/mortgage and council tax. :confused
picturegifts
08-Nov-10, 16:24
No doubt the people who these measures are aimed at will find a way around them and it will hit genuine claimants instead
Lets hope if it does go through that they stop dragging people out of their voluntary work for stupid reasons like an interview that tells us what is already on our sign on form! I have had to take 4 days off recently for stupid things like that,but yet when I mentioned it I was told..."well its only voluntary work" seems your damned if you do,damned if you dont!x
Before you can get everyone off benefits and into work you have to have one important ingredient...........JOBS !!!!!!
Where are all these jobs that people are supposed to be seeking, how many jobs are on offer in Caithness and Sutherland?....Very very few indeed!!!
C3....:roll:
annemarie482
08-Nov-10, 17:23
Before you can get everyone off benefits and into work you have to have one important ingredient...........JOBS !!!!!!
Where are all these jobs that people are supposed to be seeking, how many jobs are on offer in Caithness and Sutherland?....Very very few indeed!!!
C3....:roll:
i dare say these jobs will be invented as they wont be paid anyway...
lindsaymcc
08-Nov-10, 17:23
Before you can get everyone off benefits and into work you have to have one important ingredient...........JOBS !!!!!!
Where are all these jobs that people are supposed to be seeking, how many jobs are on offer in Caithness and Sutherland?....Very very few indeed!!!
C3....:roll:
Can only agree there, I for one want to go back to work in January when my youngest starts nursery, but from what I can see there are very very few jobs out there!
Not everyone on benefits live the high life,its those who can and do abuse the system who are sitting pretty,while others like me arent,but yet we all get cast with the same stone :( x
Before you can get everyone off benefits and into work you have to have one important ingredient...........JOBS !!!!!!
Where are all these jobs that people are supposed to be seeking, how many jobs are on offer in Caithness and Sutherland?....Very very few indeed!!!
C3....:roll:
If hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans make the effort to trek across Europe to find work in the UK and enjoy a better quality of life, surely it is not unreasonable to expect our own long term unemployed to move in order to find a job.
There is little point in expecting the government to create job opportunities in the sparsely populated areas of the country because I doubt that will happen.
For too many it is easier to make excuses, sit back and let those in work fund all their benefits. However taxpayers, particularly those on salaries of less than £30K are getting rattled when they see the long term unemployed living more comfortable lives than they do.
lindsaymcc
08-Nov-10, 17:55
As mentioned already, not everyone on benefits is living the high life! Ok, so I dont claim job seekers, but due to my husbands disabilities, we do qualify for housing benefit and some council tax benefit. I want to work when my youngest starts nursery in January, and I want to stay in this area. We moved here from Suffolk in April this year, as the quality of life for my kids is so much better. Here they have freedom to be children, live with glorious countryside surrounding them and a lot more opportunities due to the lower cost of living. On the flip side, obviously I need to find a job up here within the near future.
If all the unemployed in Caithness were to up and leave........ what would happen to Caithness then? Local shops would close, and it would become a ghost town! Imagine all the local businesses that would have to close!
lindsaymcc and Thumper Much of the recent proposed legislation is aimed at the long term unemployed. Most right thinking people know that there is significant differences between those people who for various reasons suffer spells of unemployment and those who make little or no attempt to find work. The bottom line is the country cannot continue to fund our huge welfare budget and taxpayers are getting increasingly frustrated at the unfairness of the current system and they want to see change.
lindsaymcc
08-Nov-10, 18:06
lindsaymcc and Thumper Much of the recent proposed legislation is aimed at the long term unemployed. Most right thinking people know that there is significant differences between those people who for various reasons suffer spells of unemployment and those who make little or no attempt to find work. The bottom line is the country cannot continue to fund our huge welfare budget and taxpayers are getting increasingly frustrated at the unfairness of the current system and they want to see change.
I do agree with you there, there are generations of unemployed people on benefits, I just dont really believe they exist in Thurso - where I used to live, most definately. I knew of a grandmother, daughter and son all never worked in their lives, and the son had got his 17yr old girlfriend pregnant. I dont agree with this, however, as Thumper says, we all do get tarred with the same brush!
Fingers crossed something will work and get the generational drop-outs into work, whilst at the same time, us normal folk wanting to earn a living and pay back into society find jobs also!
It seems like an interesting, possibly good idea - it would allow people to build some experience and network etc, my one concern is that unscrupulous councils and organisations will use this cheap labour force in place of creating full time jobs; I hope they don't use these people as an excuse to not create jobs which would have been created otherwise.
This is exactly what they are doing and people can see that too.
No doubt the people who these measures are aimed at will find a way around them and it will hit genuine claimants instead
and how does one go about differienciating between genuine claiments and those who may abuse the system?
As I see it, this government have people joining the dole queues daily,
so from these newly out of work individuals who gets and who doesn't just in case they abuse the system?
Before you can get everyone off benefits and into work you have to have one important ingredient...........JOBS !!!!!!
Where are all these jobs that people are supposed to be seeking, how many jobs are on offer in Caithness and Sutherland?....Very very few indeed!!!
C3....:roll:
Well said! and you are right and of those jobs that are available, the wages and the attitudes of the employers stinks!
Aaldtimer
08-Nov-10, 18:16
If hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans make the effort to trek across Europe to find work in the UK .....
Unfortunately, not all of them....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11347134 [disgust]
Before you can get everyone off benefits and into work you have to have one important ingredient...........JOBS !!!!!!
Where are all these jobs that people are supposed to be seeking, how many jobs are on offer in Caithness and Sutherland?....Very very few indeed!!!
C3....:roll:
If there isnt a lot of jobs in caithness and sutherland that means one thing you have to relocate to were there is work its as simple as that
What i find amazing is there is so much foriegn workers in the uk that travel from other countries into ours and find work easily because they have the will to work and are greatful to have a job
I do agree that peope out of work should be made to do work in the community to get there benifits 100 %agree with that
Can only agree there, I for one want to go back to work in January when my youngest starts nursery, but from what I can see there are very very few jobs out there!
Don't you find (not meaning you personally) but don't you think sometimes that women in general are trapped somewhat, in as much as many wou;d like to go out / back into work but that the very system set up to protect them has also trapped them at home?
If hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans make the effort to trek across Europe to find work in the UK and enjoy a better quality of life, surely it is not unreasonable to expect our own long term unemployed to move in order to find a job.
There is little point in expecting the government to create job opportunities in the sparsely populated areas of the country because I doubt that will happen.
For too many it is easier to make excuses, sit back and let those in work fund all their benefits. However taxpayers, particularly those on salaries of less than £30K are getting rattled when they see the long term unemployed living more comfortable lives than they do.
This would apply in the inner cities? as opposed to rural communities??
The only thing i disagree with is working 30 hrs for £65 thats a bit unfair thats about £2.16 an hour thats a bit unfair i would say 16 hrs a week because someone unemployed still needs time to search and apply for jobs and interviews and it would be far better
cuddlepop
08-Nov-10, 18:27
How many people are signing on in your area ? are there sufficients jobs advertised that these unemployed people could get?
Up here in the Highlands the answere has to be "insufficient" vacancys.Demand outstrips need especially during the winter.:(
I came to live here in 85 and was told that you had to make sufficient money to last a winter as there's no jobs.
Nothings changed and before you say you can move, we'd have another "clearance" on our hands.
More jobs have to be created to get people into work in their area.
Simples.:)
If there isnt a lot of jobs in caithness and sutherland that means one thing you have to relocate to were there is work its as simple as that
What i find amazing is there is so much foriegn workers in the uk that travel from other countries into ours and find work easily because they have the will to work and are greatful to have a job
I do agree that peope out of work should be made to do work in the community to get there benifits 100 %agree with that
Or they are enslaved by their own kind and work for gangs.
Or they take up menial jobs that the majority of the British believe is beneath them,
or they are here illegally, hiding out in obscure positions working for the British among us who are unscrupulous to say the least.
annemarie482
08-Nov-10, 18:33
Don't you find (not meaning you personally) but don't you think sometimes that women in general are trapped somewhat, in as much as many wou;d like to go out / back into work but that the very system set up to protect them has also trapped them at home?
i know this is a bit off topic but while your sharing situations.....
my partners on a good wage so we dont recieve any benefits at all.
im very happy we're fortunate enough to be in this situation.
however, i want to return to work and i have two children below school age.
but i cant go to work even though i want to, and could easily get a job, because a childminder for two children would cost more than i'd earn.
so i've looked at going to college to improve my prospects, but because im not working, the cost of the course coupled with the childminder fees would put extra strain on my partner.
catch 22? most certainly!!
oldmarine
08-Nov-10, 18:48
‘Unpaid labour’ plans condemned
scheme could drive vulnerable people into despair, says archbishop
“In these circumstances, I believe it is right to say to people on benefits they have a responsibility to take advantage of the support and help being offered to them,” he told BBC1’s The Politics Show.
Read more: http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1999246#ixzz14gM3Pxxx
I watched the politics show yesterday, as I do every week and my opinion is this,
it won't work.
I can see a rise in rebellious crime, especially in the towns and inner cities,
with many people already living well below the breadline, and living in perpetual despair,
the inner cities hospitals already filled to capacity with outpatients struggling with depression, alcoholism and drug dependency, homelessness to mention but a few.
It was the successive governments who created the welfare society and successive governments have failed in every attempt thus far to rectify the society it has created.
Even the threat of losing benefits is not an incentive to get people back to work,
If there was a decent minimum living wage available then more people would be in work,
that of course is if there were jobs to be had,
and at the rate this coalition government is going, there will be very few people actually left in work, there will be fewer high earners and even less incentives with company bonus's being at a minimum, Golden handshakes a thing of the past.
I think the government are barking up the wrong tree on this one,
I cannot see the average "joe" going out for 30 hours a week, to work for nothing at all, can you?
Apart from anything else, it would do nothing for their self esteem and will only widen the gap between those in paid employment and those doing the same work for no wage,
even £65 in unemployment benefits is a joke.
Who can live on that amount, in this day and age.
Sounds good in theory, but would it work as a practical matter?
Or they are enslaved by their own kind and work for gangs.
Or they take up menial jobs that the majority of the British believe is beneath them,
or they are here illegally, hiding out in obscure positions working for the British among us who are unscrupulous to say the least.
When you look at how much foriegner workers that are working and living and paying there way in the uk it just goes to show you how lazy our society is becoming.
Thats the big problem in the uk the long term unemployed no that there better of being unemployed rather than taking up a job that doesnt pay well thats why its a good idea to make them work for there benifits
I always say this if you can get to 65 without being made redundant your a lucky person most people will experience being unemployed during there working career thats what benifits are ther for people that are genuine made redundant and want to find work its not there for the lazy people that dont want to work
Unfortunately, not all of them....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-11347134 [disgust]
Ah !!!...The good old Roma Gypsy, honest and hard working as ever...Nuff said!!!!
C3.....:mad:
However taxpayers, particularly those on salaries of less than £30K are getting rattled when they see the long term unemployed living more comfortable lives than they do.
[/b]
This would apply in the inner cities? as opposed to rural communities??
I'm not sure I understand your question. The short answer is many people earning under £30K are often no better off than the long term unemployed. It doesn't much matter whether they live in the country or in a city centre. They have to pay their tax, NI contributions, rent/mortgage, council tax, transport costs etc. Costs that many long term unemployed don't have to pay. Little wonder these taxpayers are getting rattled.
However taxpayers, particularly those on salaries of less than £30K are getting rattled when they see the long term unemployed living more comfortable lives than they do.
I'm not sure I understand your question. The short answer is many people earning under £30K are often no better off than the long term unemployed. It doesn't much matter whether they live in the country or in a city centre. They have to pay their tax, NI contributions, rent/mortgage, council tax, transport costs etc. Costs that many long term unemployed don't have to pay. Little wonder these taxpayers are getting rattled.
Sorry, I didn't phrase that very well,
what I was meaning was that most of the unemployed people that I know
tend to live in one horse towns or in the inner cities and most of them have a multitude of problems besides, whether it was mental illness/s or otherwise,
not all them are slackers or work shy, but having grown up in a society where not working was accepted, if only among those who are close to them, it is with little wonder that many of them do not know where to start, or have the confidence to do so,
also, there are a great many reasons people don't look for work, one is self esteem or rather the lack of it,
many are uneducated, cannot read or write and others as has been mentioned elsewhere in this post, many are trapped by the very system set up to protect the vulnerable in our society,
someone else mentioned that unemployment benefits were supposed to be a short term help for those who suddenly find themselves out of work and as far as I can see, it was probably set up for just that,
so where then and when and who was responsible for turning it into something else?
Fair enough make them work for their benefit, but give them a benefit which is best suited to them and not "unemployment benefit" which was only ever supposed to be short term.
For those earning less than £30k and getting rattled about whatever, at least they are in work, at least they can hold their head up high and they can budget for whatever, many of those whose only income is their benefit cannot even afford to do this,
it takes them all their time to feed / dress/ themselves, there are many who do not, preferring instead to heat their homes, because when your unemployment money is all that you have, you cannot do it all, often it is food, or heat but seldom both.
I have seen little evidence of this in the highlands or the islands,
and too much of it in the towns and the cities.
They're not getting paid nothing for working, at the moment they are getting paid for doing nothing. Enforcing some work is not unreasonable after all they are already getting paid for it. As long as they are not losing their benefits they are actually better off than those on minimum wage...
It would be good also if the same stratagy was implemented to prisoners, they get more benefits than the unemployed. Housed, fed, leisure facilities, no household bills to find and can spend all day playing pool and table tennis.
And how many unemployed and pensioners can afford the lavish Xmas lunch that prisoners get and they dont even have to cook it or pay for it and I doubt they even have to do the washing up.
No wonder they are full and turning people away!!!!
C3...:mad:
Sorry, I didn't phrase that very well,
what I was meaning was that most of the unemployed people that I know
tend to live in one horse towns or in the inner cities and most of them have a multitude of problems besides, whether it was mental illness/s or otherwise,
not all them are slackers or work shy, but having grown up in a society where not working was accepted, if only among those who are close to them, it is with little wonder that many of them do not know where to start, or have the confidence to do so,
also, there are a great many reasons people don't look for work, one is self esteem or rather the lack of it,
many are uneducated, cannot read or write and others as has been mentioned elsewhere in this post, many are trapped by the very system set up to protect the vulnerable in our society,
someone else mentioned that unemployment benefits were supposed to be a short term help for those who suddenly find themselves out of work and as far as I can see, it was probably set up for just that,
so where then and when and who was responsible for turning it into something else?
Fair enough make them work for their benefit, but give them a benefit which is best suited to them and not "unemployment benefit" which was only ever supposed to be short term.
For those earning less than £30k and getting rattled about whatever, at least they are in work, at least they can hold their head up high and they can budget for whatever, many of those whose only income is their benefit cannot even afford to do this,
it takes them all their time to feed / dress/ themselves, there are many who do not, preferring instead to heat their homes, because when your unemployment money is all that you have, you cannot do it all, often it is food, or heat but seldom both.
I have seen little evidence of this in the highlands or the islands,
and too much of it in the towns and the cities.
You’re right of course. There are as many reasons for people being without work as there are unemployed. Every person is an individual but unfortunately social policy makers tend to promote blanket ‘one size fits all policies’ which only tickle the edge of a problem.
We’ll have to see what Iain Duncan Smith’s White Paper proposes but I hope it will contain an element of training and support for those that can be identified as needing it.
You make a good point when you say, “make them work for their benefit, but give them a benefit which is best suited to them and not "unemployment benefit"”. Perhaps it should reflect the purpose of any back to work type program by calling it a Civil Training Payment/Award/Wage.
You’re right of course. There are as many reasons for people being without work as there are unemployed. Every person is an individual but unfortunately social policy makers tend to promote blanket ‘one size fits all policies’ which only tickle the edge of a problem.
We’ll have to see what Iain Duncan Smith’s White Paper proposes but I hope it will contain an element of training and support for those that can be identified as needing it.
You make a good point when you say, “make them work for their benefit, but give them a benefit which is best suited to them and not "unemployment benefit"”. Perhaps it should reflect the purpose of any back to work type program by calling it a Civil Training Payment/Award/Wage.
Yes that could work in subtle ways too, giving those in receipt some sense of decency and confidence in themselves,
Or is Mr. Smith looking along these lines..............
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/library/mrc/topicaldocument/
Lots of good points made on this post, but like I said before, there really is nothing new here and the coalition government are'nt the first to try to reverse the damage which has been done to "today's society",
Losing benefits in my opinion will only serve to incite riots, rather than scare folks into seeking employment, non paid employment that is.
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/library/mrc/topicaldocument/topicaldocument-prev/#Cuts
Not the first time for cuts either,
History repeats itself, in every shape & form in life,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/victorians/bsurface_01.shtml
Workhouses were introduced to deter dependancy. ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workhouse
"For Punishment of Strang and Idle Beggars, and Reliefe of the Pure and Impotent"
It's the wimmins fault.
If the wimmin stayed at home looking after the house, kids and putting decent meals on the table there would be more jobs. Less problems with the 'youth of today' and families would be eating healthier.
It's the wimmins fault.
If the wimmin stayed at home looking after the house, kids and putting decent meals on the table there would be more jobs. Less problems with the 'youth of today' and families would be eating healthier.
You know, you could be right there, there again maybe not.
:)
Before you can get everyone off benefits and into work you have to have one important ingredient...........JOBS !!!!!!
Where are all these jobs that people are supposed to be seeking, how many jobs are on offer in Caithness and Sutherland?....Very very few indeed!!!
C3....:roll:
But that isn't a new situation is it? I think in the far north we are actually going to buck the trend. As the population rises (as it has been) then it stands to reason, with more consumers there will be more jobs.:D
changilass
08-Nov-10, 22:49
The only ones who are gonna work are the ones who want work but cannae find it.
You can't force criminals to do community work, so how are they gonna manage to force folks who havnea been convicted to do it.
As usual, sounds good on paper, but there is no way its gonna work.
It's the wimmins fault.
If the wimmin stayed at home looking after the house, kids and putting decent meals on the table there would be more jobs. Less problems with the 'youth of today' and families would be eating healthier.
Fully agree there. But how many families could afford only one income in this day and age? People have far too many material expectations :(
I work 40 hours a week. I earn a decent wage (18000 pa) but I live on my own, i have to pay £575 per month for rent, £93 per month for council tax, £25 per month Water rates,£80 per month gas/elec at least, I have to pay £75 every 6 months to renew the tenancy on my home, it costs me 80 per month to run my car as i work shifts and cannot rely on public transport, plus the £40 per month insurance on my car and the compulsary insurance on my contents stipulated by the estate agent so i can rent my home, £12 per month tv licence. None of these things i consider to be luxuries....and all are things that the average person on benefits has (tv, car, house etc).
This leaves me with around £60 per week to buy food for me and my dogs, tax my car, and for any unforseen eventuality that may arise. I get off my backside go to work and pay my bills etc..which leaves me with less money left over than the average person on benefits...who doesn't have to pay council tax, rent etc and gets prescriptions and dentists free. I can't afford to go to the dentist and dread having to have medicine due to the cost.
Now, although i know there are many people on benefits that genuinly deserve them or are using them as they were originally supposed to be used, but there are LOTS of people that use them as either a top up to "cash" work, or as a career choice!!!...these are the people that i believe should be made to work for their benefits...after all they are getting paid to do nothing at the moment!....i'm sure the people that are chosen will be long term claimants and not people with genuine reasons or who are actively seeking employment..but i for one will relish in seeing workshy layabouts being made to get up off their backsides...it will make the tax deduction in my wages easier to swallow..lol..!!
annemarie482
08-Nov-10, 23:34
here here saffy100
could not agree more.
bang on my thoughts there, couldnt have put it better!
Before you can get everyone off benefits and into work you have to have one important ingredient...........JOBS !!!!!!
Where are all these jobs that people are supposed to be seeking, how many jobs are on offer in Caithness and Sutherland?....Very very few indeed!!!
C3....:roll:
Exactly!!! The Govt needs to put more effort into supporting companies and generating real jobs instead of what amounts to nothing more than community service for those on benefits!
i dare say these jobs will be invented as they wont be paid anyway...
Well why can't they 'invent' paid jobs?
Years ago the then Manpower Services Comission presided over the Community Programme which encouraged people to take "jobs" some paid at the going rate some not. i remember that working the canals in rochdale (thats cleaning - not navigating them) for 30 hours a week earned people £68. They could claim FIS as tax credits were called and housing benefit and the like and it worked out that they were around £10 per week better off. The programmes were always full.
Once again its worth pointing out that not everyone unemployed for over six months is a workshy waster. Yes - long term unemployment means those out of work for six months or more. It is very easy to turn around and find yourself out of work for six months. if we look at those who are out of work for over a year - not difficult in some areas of the country at this time - we will find its around the 745 000 across the UK as a whole. In my experience most of those people who are out of work for over a year have additional barriers. Age is a major barrier = over fifities find it harder to find work than other groups; health problems; alcohol,drugs problems; criminal records; caring responsibilities; all these issues can be overcome but it requires thoughtful interventions and imagination to resolve and using a big stick is not either of those things.
I think its worth pointing out that even if we were to stop paying benefits to anyone unemployed for over 12 months it wouldnt amount to that much. Compare it to how much tax is avoided by the BIG players like vodafone and Philip Green. Anything which targets these people seems to be conspicuous by its absence, whilst those on benefits and low incomes are in the paper almost weekly, tax credits, child benefit, long term unemployed, single parents and so on and so on and so on. The libdems once said in Lib Dem policy documents "big business and the super-rich get special loopholes and the rest of us end up paying more".They were right but appear to be content to allow this to continue. Shocking.
But that isn't a new situation is it? I think in the far north we are actually going to buck the trend. As the population rises (as it has been) then it stands to reason, with more consumers there will be more jobs.:D
Where are they then?
Most decent prospects that I have come across are miles and miles away and without decent public transport in place.............?
Fully agree there. But how many families could afford only one income in this day and age? People have far too many material expectations :(
and some people have given up those expectations in search of a more peaceful life.
I am however, in agreement that women should stay at home, more so when they have children,
But even women with no young children especially in rural locations can find themselves trapped in one way or another.
oldmarine
09-Nov-10, 14:57
Fortunately at 85 years of age I am retired. However, if my investments, retirement funds, and social security funds dry up I will become a street person.
Where are they then?
Most decent prospects that I have come across are miles and miles away and without decent public transport in place.............?
Sorry I don't know what your situation is. I've always had my own transport and have never relied on buses etc. I never would have contemplated the move to Caithness otherwise.
Crikey - a woman's place is in the home????? Did we just travel back in time? I think that a woman's place is wherever she and her family agree it is - home or work - and even that is implying there is an element of choice for everybody. Material expectations? What? like keeping a roof over your head or running a car in a part of the world where there is little or no public transport? Food on the table and a fire in the grate? Are these material expectations or the basic necessities of life? Today couples often cant afford to buy or run a home without both of them working and that becomes even MORE difficult when children arrive.
And what if there is only a woman? Many people slag off single mums and their entitlement to benefits and yet we are hearing that a "woman's place is in the home". You cant have it both ways folks. Are we going to hear next that working mothers are the reason we have anti social young people?
Already work for nothing.....When I go back from maternity leave I will be working for less than nothing.
By the time the childcare costs are deducted I will be paying out more than I earn.
I love my job (most of the time anyway)
I love my kids.
But I dont want too spend all my time at home, its nice to get some adult conversations at times and work my brain too.
I have already gone from pursuing a career to having a job to working part time since having the children, dont really want to give up working totally even though the kids are small at the moment and they soon grow up its all a bit like a set of scales weighing up the pros and cons ....
Yeh any one that hasna got a job should be made to go out there to work to earn the money they get from the taxpayers
lindsaymcc
09-Nov-10, 21:09
I think the whole SAHM vs WOHM (stay at home mum vs work out of home mum) debate is a very personal choice.
Personally, when I had my kids, I wanted to be at home until at least they were in Nursery at 3yrs old. My youngest will be 3 at the end of the month and starts nursery in January. I would like to work part time until he starts school in August 2012 providing there is a job out there for me!
My mum went back to work full time when I was 2yrs old...... I was a horrid child [lol][lol][lol] but I can remember the days of being a latch-key-kid and coming home from school to an empty house, and being on my own until 5.30-6pm. I hated it! I dont want that for my kids.
We go without holidays and other luxuries in order I can be home with the kids, but as I say, I would like, one day to be a working mum!
It's sometimes not even a choice though. When my older boys were small I had to work. Not for holidays or for fancy cars but for paying the mortgage and putting food on the table. It was especially important that I worked as my first husband suffered several periods of unemployment because of the economic climate in the late 80's early 90's when anyone working in construction/ engineering was often in and out of work. I would have preferred to stay home but I did not have a choice. I had to go back to work.
Today things are different, I am a sahm for the two wee ones. We don't have fancy stuff but we manage a holiday thanks to parents and sisters that live in France. My wages are not needed for paying the mortgage or the coal bill, the Bruce earns enough for that and with child benefit and tax credits and the keep that my 20 year old pays we manage. Just. It can be hard hard work when something unexpected happens but touch wood we aren't bankrupt yet. At least this time round I had a choice. I am really really lucky.
Yeh any one that hasna got a job should be made to go out there to work to earn the money they get from the taxpayers
That will include all the MP's, MSP's and EURO MP's then ?
(and 90% of council office staff)!
C3...:roll:
Exactly!!! The Govt needs to put more effort into supporting companies and generating real jobs instead of what amounts to nothing more than community service for those on benefits!
Well why can't they 'invent' paid jobs?
Because all the money is being handed over to the EU and in foreign aid.
Because all the money is being handed over to the EU and in foreign aid.
Fair point. I'm all for helping those in need but feel that during a recession the govt should be looking after it's own.
Even in a recession we are still one of the richest countries in the world
I am however, in agreement that women should stay at home, more so when they have children,
Yikes, where do I begin on this one.
I think if a family can afford it, then it is great for that family that a parent can stay at home. Now I don't think that men are incompetent in child raising or inable to run a household. Do you? I also don't think that women are incapable of having a career. Do you?
....More so when they have children.....
Well now, this would imply that on principle you believe women should be home bodies, whether or not children are in the picture. Lets look at this from a womans point of view (one that I am an expert at, by the way, being a woman myself). Exactly what would garantee a stay at home woman any kind of stability in her life? Her income would be tied to the male earner of the household. If for any reason that person left, what exactly would she be left with? Or are you going to say that a partner/husband would be obliged to provide for his exes? They can't even be forced to provide for the off-spring they turn their backs on right now.
And why would it be specifically a female role to "stay at home, more so when they have children"???? If I wanted to, I still would not stay at home (and yes I am a mother). The reasons are many, but earning a living is not even the most important ( though I am the only breadwinner). The most important reason is to set my child an example of work and industry. No one else could do it but me. The second most important is for my sanity. In the present it gives me contact with the world outside of my family. In the future, it will keep me busy when my son grows up and moves on with his life.
Yikes, where do I begin on this one.
I think if a family can afford it, then it is great for that family that a parent can stay at home. Now I don't think that men are incompetent in child raising or inable to run a household. Do you? I also don't think that women are incapable of having a career. Do you?
Well now, this would imply that on principle you believe women should be home bodies, whether or not children are in the picture. Lets look at this from a womans point of view (one that I am an expert at, by the way, being a woman myself). Exactly what would garantee a stay at home woman any kind of stability in her life? Her income would be tied to the male earner of the household. If for any reason that person left, what exactly would she be left with? Or are you going to say that a partner/husband would be obliged to provide for his exes? They can't even be forced to provide for the off-spring they turn their backs on right now.
And why would it be specifically a female role to "stay at home, more so when they have children"???? If I wanted to, I still would not stay at home (and yes I am a mother). The reasons are many, but earning a living is not even the most important ( though I am the only breadwinner). The most important reason is to set my child an example of work and industry. No one else could do it but me. The second most important is for my sanity. In the present it gives me contact with the world outside of my family. In the future, it will keep me busy when my son grows up and moves on with his life.
I am a mother too, although my children are up and away but when they were little I stayed at home, fortunately my husband had a good wage, we were local authority tenants therefore, no mortgage to concern us,
I think that the modern woman does not want to stay at home which is first and foremost, the economics of modern living does not allow for just one pasrent working,
the children therefore are passed from pillar to post to ensure adequate childcare, be it grandparents, aunties or child carers, it all cost money for which the woman (normally) has to consider before anything else.
I can see what you are saying, and to an extent I agree with you on certain points,
Children do learn by example, and if they see a parent working hard chances are they, in turn will do so too,
which brings me back to the original post, whereby some of today's children have no knowledge of either parent working, ever!
This is where the governments plan will fall flat on it's face, I think anyway.
These young people will rebel perhaps inwardly / and harm themselves with using such as alcohol (which probably they know anyway) to make their point.
The government may have all these plans "A" but do they have a backup in a "plan B"?
It's not just a question of creating opportunities for unemployed people, it will I think be a case of re-education for those people who have no knowledge of work, of being part of a team, of working on their own initiative,
whose own basic knowledge of life's experience is limited to say the least.
It is these people that the government are targetting without forethought and the understanding that it takes to get people out to work, and to give them ultimatums, or threaten them with losing benefits will / is probably going to exasperate an already desperate situation.
I also wonder where the government stand on child care while we do these jobs? I can easily get after school care for my youngest but not the middle one,who would die if I made him go to an afterschool club or a childminder,but he is also not trustworthy enough to be left alone IMO,when I mentioned this problem while looking for work,I was asked why i couldnt just leave him at home alone,but if I did so and he got in trouble,or came to harm I would be back to being a bad mum who abandoned my child :roll: I work voluntary 5 days a week,and work damn hard at it,would love to find something that pays the bills and fits in with my kids,but most of the school jobs are taken by parents who have a partner who is working,leaving very slim pickings for those of us who desperately need a school hour job!x
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.