Worrying trend

It is the employers I am castigating, not the people being exploited.

MissAdventure

The dwp won't allow peo9le to work part time out of choice, and top up their money.
Their aim is for you to work full time, and they will expect you to, and be pushing you to.

This!

DaisyAnneReturns

I'd be cautious about drawing conclusions from personal observations ascthd OP does, especially when there is actually quite a lot of official data on economic inactivity, long-term sickness, part-time employment and NEETs, and some of it does show significant changes since the pandemic.

The claims in this post need to be separated out. Someone working part-time isn't necessarily claiming benefits, someone who is economically inactive isn't necessarily unemployed, and someone not signing on isn't necessarily disconnected from support. Likewise, working fewer hours doesn't automatically mean losing State Pension credits — depending on their circumstances, people can receive National Insurance credits through benefits or other routes.

If we're going to argue that this represents a worrying national trend, it would be much more useful to provide the ONS/DWP figures rather than extrapolating from the people we happen to know. The data are available, and they make for a much more interesting discussion than anecdote does.

So well put, DAR so much more eloquently than myself and more structured.

Peaseblossom

I think a lot of people deliberately work part-time, just enough hours so they can get benefits, which I think is bloody annoying, because that means the taxpayers have to be the ones to pick up the slack. There's too many benefits paid nowadays, it didn't used to be like this years ago. Obviously it's unavoidable for some people when they've got children etc. but a lot of people are just bone idle. Some of them have never even worked since leaving school, they've just lived off benefits, but they still manage to have Sky TV and mobile phones etc.

I’m not sure how many more times I have to repeat this, 1) it’s not about hours, it’s income 2) Most Jobcentres simply don’t allow this part time work because I want to rest on my laurels approach any more.

Fancythat 16:38 It was just an observation, not a criticism.

I still dont get why it was written.
But never mind.

fwiw, I think DH has in mind to make a 3rd business out of his hobby.
Again, we shall see.
It is in it's infant stages so far.

fancythat

I still dont get why it was written.
But never mind.

fwiw, I think DH has in mind to make a 3rd business out of his hobby.
Again, we shall see.
It is in it's infant stages so far.

Good luck

I notice the OP hasn't come back.

Greenfinch

My grandson is a NEET. He doesn’t feel justified in claiming benefits and although he has had a few interviews, because he is autistic, the prospect seems hopeless. There is no support. What is he supposed to do?

He needs to sign on, even if he does not want to claim benefits, because that will give him access to pension credits. Go talk to them with him.

Your local college will have some courses that help with access to work - there is support

Thanks FranP. We will look into that.

I think that working part time and being topped up with benefits is a situation that has become open to abuse.

There will be genuine claimants. And l know it is difficult to get full tine work. But is some case it is a veritable Chancers Charter.

Maybe the hours should be increased and the benefits reduced.

It is very hard to get anything here unless you are sick or over 65 when you would get some sort of pension anyway if you have a low income ome. Our old age pension is means tested and many of us get zilch ( us included!) You are self funded retirees. Some slight help with medical expenses but you wouldn’t get rich on it. You are lucky living in the UK they are very generous.

There is a thread on MN which illustrates my views. A young single mum works full time in a school, but her wages are low and she needs to claim UC. She has recently moved to a council house, which she is decorating herself as she goes along.

Her grandmother died recently, and she has been left £12k, which is above the amount UC claimants (even those in work) can have in savings before losing money, and she posted to ask for advice.

Some of the replies are vicious. She's been called a beggar, a grifter, a scrounger and so on, and told she should give up her council house to let someone 'more deserving' have it. If she did that, she would have to pay a so-called 'market rent' to a private landlord, which would be much more than her current rent, and she would lose the security of a council tenancy. She has also been told that she should cancel the UC claim and live off the £12k until it is spent, as UC is not for people with savings.

She wanted to do something to improve her daughter's life, but is unable to do so, as her wages are too low and she needs top ups to survive. If she put the money in an account for her daughter it would count as deprivation of assets.

Many people are in similar positions, doing important jobs. They are working but not earning enough to meet the rent and cost of living, so are trapped on benefits and can't enjoy gifts or other windfalls without losing money. I appreciate that benefits aren't intended to subsidise those with money in the bank, but cases like this seem very unjust. When their work is making profits for employers who earn significant salaries themselves, it's even worse. I think it's an awful system.

I think it’s highly unlikely that NEETS or even working young people will benefit from a state pension. It’s increasingly unaffordable.

I agree Doodledog. It is a ridiculous situation.

On the the one hand people with dependents are advised to have an emergency fund equivalent to six months of regularly outgoings.

Research by the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) indicates that single-parent households face higher overall proportional costs, needing a minimum of roughly £527 per week (£2,280/month) to maintain a basic, acceptable standard of living.

On the other hand, capital over £6,000 would mean she would lose £104.40 pw in Universal Credit. Payments are reduced by £4.35 for every £250 between £6,000 and £16,000.

She will not be losing £104.4 per week in Universal Credit since the first £6K out of £12k inheritance will be disregard. She will be losing £104.4 per month.

6000/250x4.35=104.4 per month

If she put the £12k inheritance into Cash ISA, she will receive interest on her savings which can reduce that £104.4 loss in Universal Credit to £60 per month.

If I were in her position, I will declare the inheritance to DWP.

SporeRB01

She will not be losing £104.4 per week in Universal Credit since the first £6K out of £12k inheritance will be disregard. She will be losing £104.4 per month.

6000/250x4.35=104.4 per month

If she put the £12k inheritance into Cash ISA, she will receive interest on her savings which can reduce that £104.4 loss in Universal Credit to £60 per month.

If I were in her position, I will declare the inheritance to DWP.

Me too. She stands to lose a lot more if she attempts to hide it.

Btw, she will only lose her top ups whilst she has the whole £12,000.

If she declares it, then uses it for home improvements, driving lessons, towards a car or even a modest holiday for her and her child, these are all acceptable things and she won’t be investigated for deprivation of income/assets.

She will need to keep receipts, which she will be required to supply, along with her bank statements, when she declares a change in savings.

All perfectly legal and acceptable.

My mistake. Per month.

And then they’ll be the first to complain when they cant afford to buy a house..

Whatever we would do in her position, the fact remains that someone working full-time, with a 6 year old child to support, is unable to receive an inheritance and spend it as she chooses (mainly to get herself out of poverty and have a nest-egg for her daughter).

This is one example of why forcing people onto benefits is cruel. Why should a working person have her income scrutinised and reduced because she is deemed to have too much?

A number of responses were saying that the poster, too, was working and supporting a child with no benefits, and couldn't afford to save £12k, and I get that - times are hard for a lot of people - but IMO that's not the point. The point is that what should have been an opportunity for a working woman to improve her lot, thanks to her grandmother's bequest, has been lost, and someone earning more would get to keep it all.

Cossy

Btw, she will only lose her top ups whilst she has the whole £12,000.

If she declares it, then uses it for home improvements, driving lessons, towards a car or even a modest holiday for her and her child, these are all acceptable things and she won’t be investigated for deprivation of income/assets.

She will need to keep receipts, which she will be required to supply, along with her bank statements, when she declares a change in savings.

All perfectly legal and acceptable.

Yes, all this was pointed out (over and over again ) on the thread, and it is good advice, in the circumstances. But my point is that low wages have trapped her. If she earned more, (or if she earned nothing herself but her husband or partner earned enough to keep the household above the UC level), she would be able to do what she liked with her grandmother's money.

nanna8

It is very hard to get anything here unless you are sick or over 65 when you would get some sort of pension anyway if you have a low income ome. Our old age pension is means tested and many of us get zilch ( us included!) You are self funded retirees. Some slight help with medical expenses but you wouldn’t get rich on it. You are lucky living in the UK they are very generous.

It all relative though Nanna8.

So most us here worked full time, paying copious amounts of National Insurance, (NI), on top of Income Tax.

This NI, whilst not ringfenced is towards medical care, and whilst I was working would have helped fund the State Pension of the generation above me.

So, do you have such a tax on working people, over and above Income Tax?

Then there’s the general cost of living, we all, working or not working, pay for gas, electricity, council tax and water. In my particular neighbourhood, for a couple of any age, our monthly bills are approximately £180 per month for council tax, £75 for water, £200 for gas and electricity combined.

Then there’s various insurances, car costs, TV licence and mobile phone costs.

This all is without including food costs and food costs, even if shopping around carefully are not cheap.

I have no rent or mortgage now as have spent the last 40 years paying mortgages and re-mortgages.

How does this compare with your average costs in your neighbourhood?

In addition, I’m not really understanding what you live on? I do not consider our just over £900 every four weeks particularly generous. My husband and I both receive work place pensions, which allows us a decent, though not luxurious, standard of living.

there are very few 'full '.time jobs to be had anywhere. Even supermarket workers are nearly all part time hours, it is cheaper for employers to staff that way.

Job centres are not fit for purpose anymore.. They used to have job cards pinned on stands round the room which you walked round and found jobs you would want to do and took the card to the desk where the 'officer would ring up and make you an appointment for interview. That stopped years ago, you go to the jobcentre once a fornight to sign up for your next universal credit, that all.! Times have changed from how it once was! Many people would like a full time job but no one is advertising full time hours..

Many NEET students are identified within the school system. Most schools try their best to engage and support these students and their families. However there is not adequate funding for the professionals needed eg Educational Psychologist's, Speech and Language Therapist's,, Autism Specialism, CAMHS (Child and Mental Health Support) and career advisors at key transitional points of students education. Early identification of Young Carers who deserve greater support, although this is improving, many remain unidentified.