General Chat

According uSwitch Quality of Life Index the UK and Ireland are the worst places to live in Europe, while France and Spain are the best.
The UK came 9th out of the 10 countries in the list – thanks to the fact that we pay the highest prices for food and diesel, work longer hours, retire later, get less annual holiday, enjoy fewer hours of sunshine and our government’s below average spending on health and
education. Oh, and just to round it off nicely we can expect to die two years younger than our French counterparts too.

The gov put up tax & company's go to the wall or go overseas, this results in fewer jobs & more unemployment.
The young pay £9000.00 go to University or college, if at the end of that they have no job, now they may have to work for benefit so won’t have time to look for work. The older person who has paid tax into this system & has found him/herself out of work has to work for benefit. The work these people will be doing will probably be jobs once held by other people, only the boss may have got rid of them thinking they need not pay them as the unemployed person can do the job for free. Who loses? & who wins?

My friends son is unemployed but takes whatever work he can get from an agency.

Thats fine until that dries up. He has to re-sign for jobseekers and our local office is totally in-efficent. He has to borrow money to get there as it is not local. I have no objection to people working for their dole money, but agree free labour will disadvantage other people.

. am annoyed that no assistance is given to help him get a job ( he only signs on and nothing else offered, too old for an apprenticeship ) There are no training schemes or anything else available to help him get back into work.

How are people going to live on jobseekers allowance if they have to pay exorbitant fares to travel. I know the money is for jobseeking but people have to eat.

There are not enough jobs in my area and applications for advertised ones are so over subscribed its laughable
It is all one big mess and i don't know the answer.

I feel sorry for people who really want to work but are fighting a losing battle.

I do not think supermarket chains are making their resources available to train retail staff for the future - my take on it is that in the war between the major supermarkets, faced with competition from the likes of Aldi, they will do anything to maintain their market share and boost their profits.

The scenario as I see it, is that the lass who relied on working 24 hours a week to make ends meet now only gets to work 16 hours a week, as someone on a work scheme has been given her other 8 hours, she now needs to try, if she can, to claim benefits to survive :-S

Are the supermarkets exploiting the system? Did they need those shelf stackers or are they making their resources available to train retail staff for the future?

Those lads would have been learning nothing of any future use to them had they been hanging about, doing whatever they do when they are out.

I can see the angle you are coming from Sharron, problem is that a lot of companies are using zero hour contracts and work schemes to boost what are already substantial profits.

I was in a local branch of a major supermarket chain the other week and could not get to the shelves in one aisle, because there was a group of about half a dozen young lads, stacking the shelves that I wanted access to.

I asked the guy that seemed to be supervising them what they were all doing, he told me they were on work experience - well when I looked at the profits that supermarket chain made last year - I don't think they need to be using cheap/free labour.

Can I just put a slightly different angle.

This is a world-wide recession and each country is dealing with it in the way they decide is most appropriate.

We have lost several companies due to this recession, some international, e:g Woolworth which would have provided the full- time jobs once the world economy picked up.

While it is no way ideal, the fact that some companies are managing to rub along using zero hours contracts and those who are being subsidised to keep themselves going must be a better prospect for the future than to have lost the companies that will provide future employment.

The genuine long term unemployed job seeker would probably welcome a few days a week out of the house to do something constructive, but not a full working week when it means they can't spend time looking for a job.

Having to get up and out at a reasonable hour could give the unemployed life-style 'job seeker' a wake up call. It would also give the unemployed young a taste for the discipline required when they do eventually get a paying job. ~They'd also have the opportunity to expand their 'net work' which could in turn lead to a recommendation for employment from one of their ex jobseeker colleaques.

Its always easier to find a job when you are in a job, even if that means so called voluntary work.

To often politicians and others join the one sided view that brands all young people and others on benefits as either cheating the system or being layabouts and scroungers - which is totally untrue.

I do not see that sort of publicity directed at those earning good salaries, those being David Cameron's - hard working people, some of whom abuse the Child Benefit & Tax System.

I agree BK, just thought I'd mention the programme as
these sort of head lines draw the attention and not of those
who struggle every day.
No disrespect intended.

Emma

Merlin I agree with what you said. Some jobs that once where employed jobs are now used as voluntary jobs & should not be.

With respect, I can see why some may think as they do, with TV programs being aired with titles like On Benefits and Proud, that give a one sided view of things, maybe they should make a follow up called On Benefits and not through choice. Makes me wonder how many of those same people you mean where unemployed & have good understanding as to what it’s like in the real world of unemployment as it’s not all gadgets, cars & designer clothes for everybody, some people out there find it very, very hard indeed. I can’t see any good in this work for your benefit or how it will solve any of the unemployment problems we have in the UK.

Well put Jonesey .....


have to agree

I'm with you on that one IGP, the government has not put people out of work. What successive governments have done however is to make it reasonably comfortable for the out of work to live on benefits encouraging some but not all to adopt it as a lifestyle. It is that situation the current government is trying to change.

I am not saying that everyone who is in receipt of benefits is work shy, obviously not but undoubtedly there are some who are. There are also some who use their benefits to "Top up" what they earn in the black economy. It is those whose lifestyles fall into those categories that the latest measures announced are designed to disrupt the most. Difficult to hold down a cash in the hand job in your local shop/pub/garage if the Jobcentre can call on you at short notice to attend a course. Life changing if now you have to do work of some kind every week in order to receive your benefits instead of only having to sign on at the JC once a fortnight.

The basic problem in the UK is too many people and too few jobs and no government "Tinkering" with benefit payments is likely to solve that but it would be nice to think that those getting the benefits are those genuinely entitled to them rather than those just taking the rest of us for a ride.

What evidence is there that "the politicians of this country have put so many people out of work."

I lost my job with a major high street bank after 37 years service because I was deemed surplus to requirements. There wasn't a politician in sight.

Over the years I worked I paid more into the system that most on benefits ever will, but that isn't the way things work. The fact you paid in 'entitles' you to a big fat zero, and that applies to everyone.

Because I was stupid enough to buy my own house, for which I am still paying, incidentally, I don't qualify for a single penny of state relief. Worse still I have to pay tax on my pension, which is less than many are receiving in benefits, many of which are - quite wrongly in my opinion - tax free.

I would love to be able to get a few pounds dole money for a few hours work, but it isn't to be.

On Benefits and Proud ..Monday 9pm ch 5

Am sure this programme will cause a lot of discussion.

Emma

MERLIN
TRUE.......IF THERES A JOB FOR THE UNEMPLOYED
WHY WEREN'T THEY GIVEN THE CHANCE OF IT IN
THE FIRST PLACE..OR IS IT CHEAP LABOUR I'D SAY ZERO
WAGE IS MORE THAN CHEAP.
OR ARE THEY NON EXISTANT JOBS CREATED
TO FORFILL GOVENMENT EMBARRASMENT

If there are jobs for the Unemployed to do enabling them to get unemployment benifit,there is a Vacancy which should be filled ,there are to many things which are being done on a Volenteer, basis which at one time were genuine Full time jobs.

Then another aspect,,,

would it not hurt a young unemployed person who hasnt had a job for 2/3 years work one hour a week to cut an elderly housebound person grass or clean their windows,sweep elderly peoples paths clean of snow.?


how many times have people wrote on here how unfair that some on the dole seem to have more than working people who cant afford the latest gadgets or run cars.have the lastest designer clothes.,,,swan about town centers all day and dont want to work and should be made to something for their tax-payers handouts.....

Excellent point maggiewinchester.

Another thing that worries me is the unemployed people with children in school- who will provide & pay for their childcare after school & during school holidays or is this Govt going to bring about a large number of "latch key" kids by carrying out this idea?

I cannot see anything good coming out of this at all.

So, the unemployed will pick up litter or cook meals for the elderly - are these seen by the tories as in the same 'ilk'?

Who will teach /pay for the unemployed to cook nutritious meals - or isn't that important?
Who will pay for CRB's? Or does it not really matter what sort of person deals with the elderly?

Not only does this show the contempt the tories have for the unemployed (all their own fault, apparently) it also shows just what they think of the elderly!!