Housing Benefit for under 25s

It is if they have to move away from their families to get work.
I think a few of us have said before that work and housing do not always match up.
The problem is pay. The minimum wage is the same everywhere except London. Looking in our local paper I cannot see any single rooms avaiable to rent. There are lots of two bedroomed flats for £550 to £600 per month, most of them saying no DSS. So your rent would be £60 per week, if you could find someone to share with. If you could not, it would take up half your pay. Would you be willing to move round the country on the offchance that you could get work somewhere else?

It's not whether single people get mortgages. It's a single salary. We got mortgages on my husband's pay alone when we had two children and I did not work, before I was 25.

How would it be if young people on benefits were expected to do so many hours community work as a condition of receiving their benefit? It would seem a better option than having to spend several hours at the job centre, which I believe is the case now.
If no suitable jobs were available that week, then there must be many things that are now neglected because of cuts in council spending, that could be done by job seekers.

I think that idea has been put forwards, nannyfran, but it was considered that it would be too demeaning. It's hard enough finding activities which are considered suitable for those undertaking community service.

To go back up the thread a bit, young peoples' expectations these days are far greater than ours were.

We had to downsize considerably when we moved to the London area but we did that and increased our mortgage by 50% to do so. DH had been made redundant at an age when many others gave up because they thought they were too old to get another job. So mush is about attitude and all this talk about how hard it is for young people today just gives some an excuse not to bother. I agree with whoever said it is a different kind of hard.

I find it interesting that it is considered demeaning to do something in return for money, but not demeaning to receive money for doing nothing.

Community work tricky. I saw a little group the other day - about a dozen individuals in total - who I assume were supposed to be doing community work. They were ambling along a quiet, litter-free promenade in the sunshine trying to find some litter to collect.
Also I volunteer in an NT garden and places like that are currently very busy offering work experience to people on the dole who are being made to do unpaid work experience.They could not cope with an influx from another source. They need supervising... If you let em loose they can do more harm than good.
I think the real heart of the problem re my OP is that it would create a lot more homelessness in young people . This would be inevitable and some of it would become intractable. Not everyone has a family to house them by any means. There are already lots of young men on the street. Women I suspect find a roof more often by sleeping with someone.
The high suicide rates in young males would also rise I think.

Yes community work could be tricky as supervision is needed. However, it would provide some training and create jobs for the supervisors instead of money being spent on nothing but hopelessness.

Why demeaning? Whatever the work if you take a pride in doing it well then it is not demeaning. The lovely fellow who is the litter collector in our town got an award for his community service - he is always cheerful, happy and good at his job, prepared to do extra hours when there is a special event. However, he is due to retire soon, I wonder, if he was training a young person in receipt of benefits to enable them to take over his job whether that young person would be so conscientious.

That's just it, JessM, "people on the dole who are being made to do unpaid work experience" is not a satisfactory situation.

Instead of receiving benefit and being given bits & pieces of sort-of work and sort-of training, it would be better if they were given an actual job, paid for by the money they would have got in benefit, where it is the responsibility of the employer (Council / DSS / however the Govt chooses to organise it) to detail them to do whatever jobs are required.

People would then have more self-respect because of being in work rather than being treated as scroungers and being regularly harrassed by the DSS. They could also, I hope, get a reference from that work when applying for other jobs.

Yes there are many attractive aspects to that idea Farnorth however there are a few down-sides. Such as free labour driving down wages and doing work that would otherwise be occupied by someone employed.
And keeping them properly occupied. Anyone who has ever coped with 15 year olds on work experience will know. You can't just give them photocopying all week but anything else involves a big time investment. At NT they had 2 such girls. Asked to dead-head some miniature roses they cut about 10cms off them and they have taken weeks to come back into bloom... But permanent staff have their own work to complete.

They need supervising

So what's wrong in hiring supervisors to supervise (and train) them? The government (and local authorities) always bemoan how they have no money but do little to help create employment - the more that are working (above minimum wage I would add) the more that are paying tax into the system. Why is it such a hard concept for the powers-that-be to implement? Given that shareholders now seem to have a stranglehold on profits, I don't think anyone can rely on the private sector (in general) to get the ball rolling.

When I was a newly single mum and rubbish at gardening (and still am), I asked at Citizens Advice if there was any help available. I was told that a scheme to get prisoners back into society by work experience (offered as voluntary to the elderly and those in need) was running andd they offered gardening and basic decorating/DIY - and they were supervised the whole time. The team of young men that came to my house were very nice young men, very polite and they worked hard. It is also something that can go on their CV.

Indeed.

By the way, have any of you seen Ken Loach's 'Angel's Share' - a wonderful story about young offenders (and yes, I know the unemployed are NOT offenders) in Glasgow?

JSA for a person under 25 is less than £60 per week.
How far do you expect them to have to travel to do this work to get their JSA? Actually, I thought they were not allowed to do voluntary work while on JSA.

You need to read this about the workfare scheme, which is what some of you are suggesting. I am surprised you do not know that it happens already.
falseeconomy.org.uk/blog/take-part-in-the-boycott-workfare-week-of-action-4-to-12-october-2014

hollydaze because it costs rather a lot. I was told that they are closing job centres around here, not putting more money into helping people get work. In fact helping people get work has been outsourced.
The government hope that charities and small businesses will bear the costs of supervising because they will get free labour out of it. Training is unlikely to happen. It will only lead to a job if there are jobs around to apply for. See the person mentioned my OP. Not lacking in qualification or work record. Just no bloody vacancies to apply for.

Will you please stop being so patronising, durhamjen?!

We do not 'need to' read any of your links, and telling us that we do just puts peoples' backs up.

(people's)

The workfare scheme is happening, Ana. There is a march next month about it. Obviously some people, you for example, do not want to know.
Others might and might be glad of the link.
Why is that patronising? Anything I write puts your back up, so if you do not want that to happen, do not read my comments. Sorry if I am repeating myself; I am sure I have said that before to you.

It's patronising when you say "you need to read this", as though we are all schoolchildren not paying enough attention.

It's also insulting to imply that anyone who questions your posts or opinions is being wilfully blind to the facts, and/or unkind to you.

What charities think about workfare.
keepvolunteeringvoluntary.net/

Under 25s are more likely to be sanctioned than older people.

www.jrf.org.uk/blog/2014/09/sanctions

What the young unemployed feel about benefits.

www.ymca.org.uk/newsmedia/latest/1348-young-and-unemployed-feel-processed-and-punished

Durhamjen you obviously have deeply held views but you will not persuade people by hitting them over the head with them.

I agree with Ana in that I too feel patronised
a) when you keep telling us to read links
b) by the way you feel that, having read them the only conclusion should be your conclusion.
c) If we have not expressed an opinion you can decry us for not agreeing with yours.

Persuasion is about listening as well as telling and about remembering we are all entitled to our opinion.

It is great that you have strongly held views but I love a conversation. I love to learn but I am not looking for a conversion.

In other words "I agree with Ana

Thanks for the links. They are more informative than lots of individual experiences that took place 40 years ago.
Feeling "patronised" Ana is very much in the eye of the beholder IMO. Very difficult to judge the level of sensitivity to these patronised feelings in other people. There are people who feel patronised many times a day and others who never feel patronised. One person feels patronised when someone offers them a seat on the bus, another person does not.
Lots of charities on that list durhamjen though I suspect there are also many that welcome extra pairs of hands and also use "interns" which is the equivalent of workfare for those who have parents who are wealthy enough to support them. Using willing volunteers is one thing. Using unwilling extra pairs of hands is hard work.
Very depressing this victimisation of the vulnerable young. My DS1 belongs to a cohort that left education in the late 80s when there were very few jobs or training opportunities. Someone followed that cohort through and found that they had significantly worse outcomes decades later. It is not their fault that the economy is in a poor state in many areas of the UK.

That was a very well thought out post Gracesgran and put kindly.