Unemployment rising. Jobseekers' Allowance count falling.

[SpookyFrank]

does this raise a question about the unemployed costing more to everyone else than if you made work for them?

cos it's just been introduced for 18-24 y/o's apparently (on a voluntary basis) whereby the government pay companies to employ young u/e types.

whatgwan?!

I personally think companies should pay for their own labour. Government bribes are only going to damage job security and working conditions in the long run. It's a very expensive way of fudging the statistics IMO, nothing more.

 

[goosegrease]

Your reffering to this scheem whereby people work for an employer for 3 weeks for dole money with no promise of a job at the end of it? It's a bit like try before you buy from the employers point of view. It's a slap in the face for the worker involved.
A mate of mine ended up on that working for a shed making firm. He said that the others there laughed at him for doing it. A qualified joiner should get a qualified joiners wage from day one they rightly said. The gaffer bunged him a few extra quid at the end of week and gave him the job in the end.
If there is a vacancy at a company that needs filling then why should the company get 3 weeks free labour? Makes my blood boil.

 

[glenquagmire]

Can get extended past three weeks as well if the employer "needs more time to decide".

 

[DarthSydodyas]

If there is a vacancy at a company that needs filling then why should the company get 3 weeks free labour? Makes my blood boil.

Someone at work was discussing this very issue, how they were approached by the job centre at a time when he was running his own business. However, the time frame he was given for hiring a long-term JSA person for "free" was 6 months. However, after that period, and having made it clear to the JSA folk that there was never a job at the end of it, they just nod and winked and gave him another 3 months to carry it on.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

richer people being made redundant - can afford to live on other funds? eg. savings and partners income.

This. I can only claim contribution based because my partner has more savings than allowed. Even though they are HIS savings, not mine Should he die and leave me a huge amount of wonga (which he doesn't have) id still have to pay inheritance tax on it. We arn't married. When it suites em innit?

I've put off claiming for this very reason (i fianlly bit the bullet and signed on for the first time yesterday), but it will only last for 6 months, and then what? I dunno - probably have to stop claiming.

He won't let me discuss his savings with them anyway, ebcasue he says if they are dealing with me than it is none of their buisness, and he doens't want the snoopy govt having all his data for no reason other than he is lucky enough to live with me.

Damn my boyfreind for being so frugal before we got together.

 

[glenquagmire]

I heard a good one the other day from an acquaintance who works for a 'training provider'. They are required to show that their students are getting work as a result of their courses so they get the students one by one into the office and ask them to stand next to the photocopier and hold some paper while they take a photo. Thus is the contract retained and income increased.

 

[subversplat]

This. I can only claim contribution based because my partner has more savings than allowed. Even though they are HIS savings, not mine Should he die and leave me a huge amount of wonga (which he doesn't have) id still have to pay inheritance tax on it. We arn't married. When it suites em innit?

I've put off claiming for this very reason (i fianlly bit the bullet and signed on for the first time yesterday), but it will only last for 6 months, and then what? I dunno - probably have to stop claiming.

He won't let me discuss his savings with them anyway, ebcasue he says if they are dealing with me than it is none of their buisness, and he doens't want the snoopy govt having all his data for no reason other than he is lucky enough to live with me.

Damn my boyfreind for being so frugal before we got together.

Don't even get me started on "... as if you were married"

 

[goosegrease]

Someone at work was discussing this very issue, how they were approached by the job centre at a time when he was running his own business. However, the time frame he was given for hiring a long-term JSA person for "free" was 6 months. However, after that period, and having made it clear to the JSA folk that there was never a job at the end of it, they just nod and winked and gave him another 3 months to carry it on.

I get the impression that this scheem suits small employers operating in an unionised environment. This wouldn't wash over the channel with our French bros and sisters. I like to think.

 

[trevhagl]

Not looked at any figures but a few suggestions. A lot of the people being made redundant may not be the kind to want to sign on. Prefuring to live on on savings/redundancy payments for the time being, or depend on their partners for and become stay at home mums/dads. It saves on child care costs and with the summer holls on the horizon.
People with a good work record may find it fairly easy to find lower paid, less skilled work elsewhere. There is also an unofficial sector of workers taking cash in hand wages below the radar of the tax man and official employment stats.
Older workers may opt to take pension credits rather than sign on.

I think a lot of people who have savings or redundancy will be tempted not to bother cos they are absolute bastards (the dole) who treat you like a 5 year old and even if you're a brain surgeon they would try to force you into a job at Macdonalds...

 

[DarthSydodyas]

I get the impression that this scheem suits small employers operating in an unionised environment. This wouldn't wash over the channel with our French bros and sisters. I like to think.

I'd understand it if it was purely designed to help long-term unemployed back onto their feet, but the problem is the incentives for employers and government seems greater. The latter does it purely for statistics.

In any event, what my colleague had done was contact his casual workforce and told them about the scheme. He would offset their salary against what they earned from the scheme, but obviously where he was unable to give them work they would still have an income coming in without hassle.

 

[scifisam]

I thought that graduates still counted as being in 'full time education', and therefore unable to claim dole, until September? Something to do with the income tax exemption.

There is no income tax exemption for students. I don't know why so many people think this.

 

[ViolentPanda]

There is no income tax exemption for students. I don't know why so many people think this.

Because a full-time student used to be able to claim back the tax paid on money they earned during summer. Major put paid to that.

 

[SpookyFrank]

There is no income tax exemption for students. I don't know why so many people think this.

I never paid any tax when I was a student

And yes I did have a job, on the books and everything. I paid NI but no tax. This was four or five years ago.

 

[SpookyFrank]

If there is a vacancy at a company that needs filling then why should the company get 3 weeks free labour? Makes my blood boil.

More to the point, why would they bother hiring someone when then can just replace them with a new doley after the three weeks are up?

If you work, you should get paid for it. End of. And if someone works for you then it should be you that pays them, not the government. Not so long ago it would have seemed absurd to even question that.

 

[JHE]

Because a full-time student used to be able to claim back the tax paid on money they earned during summer. Major put paid to that.

In my day (long ago) it worked roughly like this:

Because, as a student just working during the summer holiday, you were very unlikely to earn more than your 'personal allowance' or whatever it's called (the sum you can earn without having to pay any income tax), you were allotted a tax code that meant you weren't paying income tax. There was, therefore, no need to go through the bother of claiming money back from the Inland Revenue.


The situation may well be different now that many students also work during term time.

 

[untethered]

Because a full-time student used to be able to claim back the tax paid on money they earned during summer. Major put paid to that.

Anyone that has overpaid tax is entitled to a rebate.

 

[Blagsta]

I never paid any tax when I was a student

And yes I did have a job, on the books and everything. I paid NI but no tax. This was four or five years ago.

That'll be because you were earning under the personal tax threshold. Normally though, you get put on emergency tax and then have to claim it back.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

Because a full-time student used to be able to claim back the tax paid on money they earned during summer. Major put paid to that.

Yeah. I always temped during Uni summer hols and never paid any tax at all. In fact I didn't have to pay and claim back, I just got the full whack up front.

 

[scifisam]

Student tax laws.

Basically, full-time university students pay the same amount of tax as any other worker, with the same threshhold, it's just that they don't have to claim it back if they're going to be earning less than the usual tax threshold during the year and they only work during the official holidays. Non-students earning less have to pay the tax then claim it back. Students whose pay packet is large enough that they'll be earning over the tax threshold will have to pay tax. Students who work in term time will have to pay tax for any work in the whole year, including holidays.

It doesn't apply to final year students, only those who'll be continuing in the same course.

 

[goosegrease]

More to the point, why would they bother hiring someone when then can just replace them with a new doley after the three weeks are up?

If you work, you should get paid for it. End of. And if someone works for you then it should be you that pays them, not the government. Not so long ago it would have seemed absurd to even question that.

Labour gave us the minimum wage and the minimum conditions.