Accrington Web - Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Accrington Web (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/index.php)

- General Chat (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/)

- - Tories "work for benifits" scheme (https://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f69/tories-work-for-benifits-scheme-36004.html)

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Yes there are the illegal employers who could do with sorting out, just as those who employ slave labour need to be weeded out but there are also people who do odd jobs of what they were employed as (plumbing, property repairing, gardening) and still claim dole/incapacity benefit. I knew a guy up Fern Gore who was officially on the sick and doing pointing and wall building etc. Mind you last I heard of him he was in prison so he didn't exactly end up a success story.

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 515342)

you'll have a long wait mate! think these ******* view that as acceptable.:rolleyes:

You're right, 'cos I bet every firm each of our wonderous politicians is a director for is probably as guilty of employing somebody 'unofficially' just as the one man band builder is!

Catch the fat cat employers that will cut down on the so called scroungers.

Think back to your own past,

Have you ever employed someone to do a job for you? ("pay me cash gov' and I'll knock you 25% off, nudge, nudge, wink, wink).

There was a bloke about 2,000 years ago said don't cast the first stone, how many in this thread are guilty of doing it though?

(I know I'm not innocent, but I don't remember the guy that fitted the tiles name (The roof still leaks though :D)).

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Well, I've inspected my palms and can see no nail holes....so I know I'm not perfect.

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

No I'm not perfect either because the guy I was previously talking about did some pointing for us and when we found out he was claiming dole we didn't send him packing.

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 515367)

Well, I've inspected my palms and can see no nail holes....so I know I'm not perfect.

None of us are, but I bet the temptation is there, most of the people on here offered a bit of cash on the side, no questions asked, (do it on a weekend) would come up with a quote, (money), then turn around and say, "it's a perk of the job, no harm in it!"

Absolutly right! no harm in it, only pin money, same as the guy on the dole, but considering your take home pay and his.....

who is the biggest hypocrite?

P.S. Marge using it as an example not you personal.

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

It is Ok Less didn't take it personal.

I can't say I have ever used someone who I know to be claiming benefits......although we do use local tradesmen and often negotiate a 'cash in hand' discount.......to(perhaps) circumvent HMRC.

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Perhaps that is why I have no nail holes.;)

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

I have no skills that I could market at a nudge, nudge discount for cash.

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 515396)

I have no skills that I could market at a nudge, nudge discount for cash.

Have a word with Blazey she'll teach you the fine art of foreskin spotting! (always good for a bit of spare cash).
:D

Ooop's sorry you have to be able to get to the over 18's section for that!:(

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman (Post 515319)

good post Less, was in a similar position at 50 yrs old, earned good money all me life, paid me dues, then was put out of work after nearly 23 yrs at same firm, was lucky enough to get a job after about 10 days, was MINIMUM wage was told at the joke centre, that was all i would get at my age:mad: loved the new job, was only a bread man,but so what i had worked all me life, got me first wage (6 days) and was shocked to see i had dropped about £280 per week, after 6 months we could not exist off that wage, late wife was made redundant, so luckily we owned our property,had savings, so emigrated to spain,started me own business, did ok, unfortunately cancer put paid to that. so for cyfr to say he dont think somebody with 30-40 yrs of engineering experiance would struggle to find a job, is galling to me to put it mildly. i hope the arrogant prat is never in that position.:mad:

I apologise. You're right, it can be hard to get a job. This system is not meant to punish people who have worked hard all their lives, not at all, for people who have worked hard all their life have contributed great amounts to our society.
There does however need to be something done, as we can't have everyone at the age of 54 (Just using the age Jambutty used) simply going on to the dole and staying there until they retire.

My posts might seem to tar everyone with the same brush, but obviously there are those who are genuinely made unemployed as you were and then there are those who are not so genuine. I don't have all the answers and neither do politicians, but it needs something done to try and get you re-employed at a rate you can live on, as you said yourself you want to work. As oposed to the state subsidising an early retirement so to speak.

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

accepted cyfr, it takes a good un to apologise.;)

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Quote:

Originally Posted by Less (Post 515400)

Have a word with Blazey she'll teach you the fine art of foreskin spotting! (always good for a bit of spare cash).
:D

Ooop's sorry you have to be able to get to the over 18's section for that!:(

I'm not allowed in there Less....I know I am 60....but if you add the 6 and the 0 together I reckon that is nearer the mark....and I do not really want the job you mentioned......lucrative or not....I have had my share of perusing the private bits of anatomy of mankind.....even though it was Women.
Apologies for the thread wander....a bit of lightness was called for.....and I am a beacon!

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

There are so many different aspects to this a short of writing such a long post that no-one will bother to read it I think we all try to get a short sharp point across which may not cover all of what is in our head and then that is picked up on by others.

This point of a 54 year old skilled person for instance. There are some professional people who aspire to retire at 55 on private pensions so that skews the picture more than a little. I can quite see that a 54 year old out of work brain surgeon would probably baulk at the idea of mopping loo floors for a living but that's an absolute extreme and probably quite unlikely. There may well be some intermediary possibility though that he wouldn't disregard if he really wanted to work - or if he'd been in a lucrative position then he may well have no need to do so.

In areas where whole workforces have been laid off (mines closed for example) retraining has often been the only answer.

There are people who are physically unable to work and they should have the reassurance that they will be adequately looked after in a civilised society. Not all physically disabled people have the brain of a Steven Hawking for example.

When I mentioned earlier about getting people into work who are capable but just clever at avoiding it and that this would save money so there'd be more for the people who need it I was not implying that the individual people are not paid enough each, I was picking upon the point that the Government is trying to cut back on the cost of the welfare system to the taxpayer and my (probably not very well put) point was that genuine claimants should be entitled to all they are entitled to and it wouldn't cost the taxpayer more because if people who were able to work were working and not claiming then the money that wasn't going to them would be available to go to the ones who it should go to and they shouldn't have the worry of medical assessment after medical assessment to try to get them into work when they are the ones least able.

And I still don't think I've properly explained what I mean. (I'm supposed to be washing and doing stuff to this flippin laptop which is driving me potty)

When it comes to the bod who was doing out pointing I suppose I felt that the onus was on him to be honest and above board and that it was a matter for his own conscience if he wasn't. Maybe it should have been up to us to report him or look for someone else, but he would have just gone and done work for someone else and we'd already had enough hassle trying to find someone willing to do the work so we didn't.

Before I married my first husband I had actually been engaged to someone else but broke it off when I found out he was working cash in hand whilst claiming the dole. I couldn't have lived with that. Does that make me a hypocrite for not reporting the builder? I don't know. I just don't feel at ease with the 'snoop on, dob in' scenario and yet I would report a burglar breaking into a neighbours house.

Like I said. I'm far from perfect even if I do get accused of being 'holier than thou'

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

most if not all self employed people make a bit for them selves tax free and most people with a trade will do the odd foriegner .but these people still pay something into the system.my gripe is with some people and iam talking about people i no have never worked a day in there lives ,and think the world owes them living.no one who is disabled or as put many years into the system or retired should have to retrain or be forced into work ,but if you just cant be botherd and sit there getting free rent free council tax free dentel treatment and free prescriptions and never payed anything in then yes get the lazey gets into work make them do abit.if you add up the total of the benefits these people or on they get more than some that work.a lot of these people iam on about have the cheek to give stick to imergrints who work and pay into the system

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyfr (Post 515201)

I simply don't believe that somebody with 30 or 40 years of engineering experience would struggle to find a job that he/she can travel to easily. The market would snap them up.

I think they could struggle. It's all about attitude now not skills and training. My company takes people with the right attitude towards work, yes you need to have the right skills but they believe they can train the right person to do anything. If you have the right people they need less managing and do more work. The wrong people will need lots of management and may be lazy with the 'I wish I was at home' attitude.
Does it work? Yes I think it does on the whole, we have a great group of engineers who work well and help each other out, it is generally a nice environment to work in.
Nice place to work makes Neil happy, happy Neil does more work. Not nice place to work makes Neil grumpy, grumpy Neil does only what he has to get through the day :). My state of happiness does not effect my skills, just my willingness to use them if you get my point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington (Post 515203)

I have always figured it is easier to get a job when you have a job...

I agree with you there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty (Post 515239)

If it wasn’t that then there was the three months rule. “Sorry we don’t think that you are going to make the grade” or words that effect as they show you the door at the end of week 12. At week 14 they would have to pay the full going wage.

That can still happen, they call it a probationary period these days where they can boot you for whatever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jambutty (Post 515243)

The reason why so many engineering businesses went down was because of over saturation in that field. Meaning that other engineering firms were not taking on new employees.

That is not the case in some fields. We are struggling to find the right person to fill and engineering position.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyfr (Post 515201)

It isn't your God given right to have benefits without doing the jobs that the Conservatives are suggesting.

Please don't bring God into the debate, lets try and keep it sensible

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cyfr (Post 515434)

There does however need to be something done, as we can't have everyone at the age of 54 (Just using the age Jambutty used) simply going on to the dole and staying there until they retire.

I thought they were all employed at B&Q :D

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Issues of benefits and entitlement frequently stir up heated argument, especially where the Conservative Party is concerned so I thought it might be useful to go to the "horses mouth" so to speak, to get an idea of what is actually being proposed.

Work for Welfare - News Story - Conservative Party

It strikes me that it varies very little from what most members have been arguing in favour of. Could it be that the Conservatives have got it right??? I suppose stranger things have happened.

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

Why is the Government letting in so many immigrants who work for less money than English people and this is creating an English underclass - they then expect that underclass to scrub floors.

What happened to England's "Green and Pleasant Land?" They built houses over it for the immigrants! ;) (see Daily Express front page 14th January 2008)

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

there never seems to be a cash or pension crisis for the MPs or local authorities .. yet these are the bloody hypocrites who are always telling us that we have to be frugile.......pox on them

Re: Tories "work for benifits" scheme

it sounds like new deal scheme to me, which is where you get paid a little bit extra to work a full time job... at a charity shop of labouring type work