Sir Keir Starmer has vowed to press ahead with savage welfare cuts, describing the current system as “unsustainable, indefensible and unfair”.

Doodledog

theworriedwell

Iam64

Just a word of support for Doodledog - not a martyr, a responsible employee

Honestly the intention might be good but the reality is if you aren't well enough you won't be effective and then if you get worse you are off for longer. It is a really poor way to work.

Well given that you are making judgements on a situation you didn't see and are not aware of, I rest my case .

I'm going by what you said.

"I got pleurisy, and came back too soon, partly because there were real problems covering my role as we were already stretched because of colleague's absence. I ended up becoming really ill and had to go off sick again"

Do you really think being pressured into returning to work while you were still unwell was a good thing? Do you think going sick again because you became really ill was a good thing? I don't think it was good for you as it made you more sick, I think it was almost certainly more disruptive as you probably needed more time off overall than if you'd gone back to work when you were well.

HR managers, or any manager for that matter, who operates like that is are fools in my opinion, based on long experience. I'm sorry you ended up really ill and I'm sorry that you were made to feel you had to do and then feel you have to defend it.

Wyllow3

Gross stereotyping. Yes we know some people abuse the system and it needs to be tackled but we know nothing about the family. Spread stuff like that just buys into the prejudices which then label all those genuinely struggling on next to nothing as 'bad".

👏👏👏👏

woodenspoon

It’s obvious to anybody. You included.

I tend not to judge any situation or circumstance based on uncertainty or lack of knowledge of the situation…

I make my decisions…if required of course….based on facts always have and always will.

Doodledog

Sometimes usernames tell us all we need to know, and you can tell people's motivation for posting 'just by looking'.

Indeed! But quite a nasty statement all round frankly!

Gross stereotyping. Yes we know some people abuse the system and it needs to be tackled but we know nothing about the family. Spread stuff like that just buys into the prejudices which then label all those genuinely struggling on next to nothing as 'bad".

Sometimes usernames tell us all we need to know, and you can tell people's motivation for posting 'just by looking'.

Granniesunite

Gosh what powers you have! Able to deduce all that from just looking at a family.

I completely agree and I have no idea what woodenspoon means “just by looking at them” Such judgement!

If I walked into a shop, cafe or down Amy high street I certainly would not be able to pick out the unemployed people!

I was unemployed for a short time, as was my DH (at a different time to me) I wonder if we “looked” unemployed!

You have zero idea about these families backstories, stop being so utterly judgy!

woodenspoon

Just back from a holiday in the Canaries. Absolutely amazing to see so many kids out there with families clearly the perennial unemployed and just knowing my taxes and everyone else’s are paying for this. Yesterday at the airport one family alone had a mother who could barely walk, pushing a child in a wheelchair, another overweight girl barely able to walk, a boy, and a father in his vest shorts and flip flops padding through the airport stuffing food in as they walked. Controversial view coming up: after one child like that then no extra support or encouragement to have more. It’s obvious they have never worked yet can afford an all inclusive holiday. There were many more like them and that is just one airport in a snapshot of time.

For the rest of us, we work hard all our lives to afford holudays.

Honestly? Did you interview them all?

When I was working in the jobcentre, some people couldn’t even afford a passport, let alone an all inclusive family holiday abroad!

It’s obvious to anybody. You included.

Gosh what powers you have! Able to deduce all that from just looking at a family.

Just back from a holiday in the Canaries. Absolutely amazing to see so many kids out there with families clearly the perennial unemployed and just knowing my taxes and everyone else’s are paying for this. Yesterday at the airport one family alone had a mother who could barely walk, pushing a child in a wheelchair, another overweight girl barely able to walk, a boy, and a father in his vest shorts and flip flops padding through the airport stuffing food in as they walked. Controversial view coming up: after one child like that then no extra support or encouragement to have more. It’s obvious they have never worked yet can afford an all inclusive holiday. There were many more like them and that is just one airport in a snapshot of time.

For the rest of us, we work hard all our lives to afford holudays.

theworriedwell

Iam64

Just a word of support for Doodledog - not a martyr, a responsible employee

Honestly the intention might be good but the reality is if you aren't well enough you won't be effective and then if you get worse you are off for longer. It is a really poor way to work.

Well given that you are making judgements on a situation you didn't see and are not aware of, I rest my case .

After almost 40years, the RA I’d worked with for 30 years had me off long term sick for the first time. My team was struggling with many unallocated cases. I managed my case load from home for 6 months. HR and my manager visited, I updated on my wait to be well enough to start ‘the gold standard treatment which within 2 weeks would make clear if I could ever work again. Recommendation, you allow iam64 the time for this “. This was the recommendation of the ASOS doctor employed by my employer. The HR person told me if I didn’t resign now, I’d be ‘terminated’
The HR person clearly didn’t understand the report meant if they sacked me, I’d have a tribunal case. In fact the doc told me he’d phrased his report in knowledge they might sack me but if it went to tribunal, I’d succeed. My manager later apologised, had no idea of the HR plan and had told them if I was sacked, she’d speak for me at the tribunal, not the organisation.

Male! Not make! Edit button pleeeeeeeez

Doodledog

Thanks, Iam.

theworriedwell, in my workplace people dreaded passive aggressive HR managers who paid lip service to fair practice, yet made it clear that jobs were on the line if we couldn't deliver what students were promised, then called people 'martyrs' when they did what they could to make that happen.

The same people may have been in senior positions but the most dreaded ones had no idea how to manage employees who took time off and passed their workloads on to others.

Martyrdom was never encouraged, but incompetent managers were.

Mmmm sounds like too places I’ve worked!

Years ago I returned to work after an early, but quite nasty, miscarriage and I was literally ostracised by make line managers.

For me it wasn’t an issue, I have always been able to stick up for myself (thank you stroppy Lancashire Mother, who insisted I spoke up when I witnessed injustice whether directed towards me or anyone else)

I just feel sorry for more vulnerable employees.

MaggsMcG

That's his opinion and I'm not sure he's entirely right or wrong but why does he have to target disabled people. It should be the unemployed first.

I think it’s those who’ve never worked, are still young, have medical issues that can supported and help to get into work not just to “balance the books” but to allow these people to make a decent life for themselves.

Galaxy

I agree with doodledog, not in any way because of money or where 'my taxes are spent' or even the impact on others within the workplace/society (although that resentment tends to manifest itself at the ballot box so might be worth thinking about) but mostly because the 'opting out' is generally a disaster for those who do opt out .

I couldn’t agree more!

Our youth need to learn resilience, both in school and at home.

Sometimes, just getting on with it, is the right thing to do!

That's his opinion and I'm not sure he's entirely right or wrong but why does he have to target disabled people. It should be the unemployed first.

It should be on cards that are just for certain things. Like one only for food, another for energy, another for care etc Rent and council tax paid direct not to claimant. This would drive people back to work

"I don't mean this to sound unsympathetic, as I'm really not; but how much of being unable to cope is because there is an alternative? If people didn't get paid not to work, would they be more likely to find ways to cope?"

"If people didn't have the option to opt out on full pay, would they find other ways to cope, too?"

Just because one person feels working kept them going through depression (I'm very glad you have found a way that works for you that poster - depression is a hard hill to climb) it doesn't mean it works that way for others. Mental ill health, like physical ill health is on a sliding scale and impacts everyone differently.

My husband and I ran our own business.
Stress did for him. He battled on for years and then his symptoms became so severe he was unable to work. He physically and mentally collapsed to the extent that on two occasions ambulances were called for him in the street and for fear he'd had a heart attack.

To suggest he could have battled on if there was no alternative is nonsense.

In fact, there was no alternative. He had no pay. It was just he and I running our business. I had to pick up the slack and we had to live on what money I could make whilst caring from him. Really, it was a terrible situation that lasted a year or so. We made no claims because we could just about manage and had faith things would come good.

Time off, counselling (that we paid for) and a staged return helped him heal, come back to work and lead a normal life.

With the greatest of respect there are so many assumptions on this thread based on the poster's personal experience or no experience whatsover.

Yes, some people swing the lead. But stoicism isn't the only way and as a society I want my taxes to pay to scoop people up when they really need it.

Iam64

Just a word of support for Doodledog - not a martyr, a responsible employee

Exactly my thoughts too! There is often a subtle or not so subtle atmosphere that makes responsible employees aware that their absence is putting a strain on other team members. In my experience HR were about as much use as a chocolate teapot in these situations.

Iam64

Just a word of support for Doodledog - not a martyr, a responsible employee

Honestly the intention might be good but the reality is if you aren't well enough you won't be effective and then if you get worse you are off for longer. It is a really poor way to work.

Doodledog

Thanks, Iam.

theworriedwell, in my workplace people dreaded passive aggressive HR managers who paid lip service to fair practice, yet made it clear that jobs were on the line if we couldn't deliver what students were promised, then called people 'martyrs' when they did what they could to make that happen.

The same people may have been in senior positions but the most dreaded ones had no idea how to manage employees who took time off and passed their workloads on to others.

Martyrdom was never encouraged, but incompetent managers were.

Sorry but going into work when you are ill and making yourself worse is martyrdom and it is useless as people end up being off work for longer. If your HR were useless it doesn't change the facts.

Sorry please ignore, wrong thread

Thank you