Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit administration → Thread
The social experiment starts in April
I am pretty unsure even after reading the link what is happening. Given that it is a random trial, are low paid folks, who have just been sanctioned, for not working enough hours etc…just going to start wandering through the doors in various locations across the country in April 2015???
I say this working in an area SOTON that has according to research got 13% of its JSA claimants sanctioned…....in January last year (2014) against a national average of 5%.
Our workers regullarly feed back that sanctions are their biggest concern when dealing with homeless households…
I’m intrigued that we think this is the social experiment. Not Bedroom Tax; the Benefits Cap etc???
Isn’t this just about applying for a better job?
i.e. I have a job and there is another higher paid job that I may be able to do. If I apply for and get the job I may be better off.
Is that the social experiment?
Isn’t this just about applying for a better job?
i.e. I have a job and there is another higher paid job that I may be able to do. If I apply for and get the job I may be better off.
Is that the social experiment?
What is a “better” job John?
If I’m a lone parent working 16 hours a week for an employer who let’s me have flexible working arrangements around my childcare commitments and who I’ve worked for for over 10 years, is a “better” job simply moving somewhere else whereby I’m expected to work 35 hours a week with no flexibility and losing all of my previous redundancy rights?
Read Lord Freud’s speech….all about how in work UC claimants respond to possible sanctions if they fail to seek additional hours/increase income. Certainly not about someone having to ponder on the chance of a better paid job. And Paul is right, are established rights to be given up. Many will have secured work patterns/family life supported by tax credits. We really need to be clear about what the world of UC will look like. A lot being said about being better off….but only averages £11 per household with those on disability benefits being much worse off….sorry, to me the whole thing is an experiment…as Lord Freud admits, no other country has taken this approach.
Isn’t this just about applying for a better job?
i.e. I have a job and there is another higher paid job that I may be able to do. If I apply for and get the job I may be better off.
Is that the social experiment?
What is a “better” job John?
If I’m a lone parent working 16 hours a week for an employer who let’s me have flexible working arrangements around my childcare commitments and who I’ve worked for for over 10 years, is a “better” job simply moving somewhere else whereby I’m expected to work 35 hours a week with no flexibility and losing all of my previous redundancy rights?
Good Morning Paul,
I tried to respond last night but unfortunately the post would not post.
In answer to your question - wouldn’t the claimant commitment take into account the childcare responsibilities?
It’s hard to envisage the scenario you describe.
As for the ‘redundancy rights’ these are not problems with choices exclusive to claimants of Universal Credit. In the case described you’re likely talking about £936 in statutory redundancy or thereabouts - then again if the company really is in such a financial mess who’s to say when the money would be received?
A more pertinent example would be the person on a low income low hours job - say a cleaner - works mornings and evenings 2hrs per shift. 20hrs per week. Both jobs are walking distance. A new job may be 24hrs per week but be 8miles away negating any gain or making them worse off.
Read Lord Freud’s speech….all about how in work UC claimants respond to possible sanctions if they fail to seek additional hours/increase income. Certainly not about someone having to ponder on the chance of a better paid job. And Paul is right, are established rights to be given up. Many will have secured work patterns/family life supported by tax credits. We really need to be clear about what the world of UC will look like. A lot being said about being better off….but only averages £11 per household with those on disability benefits being much worse off….sorry, to me the whole thing is an experiment…as Lord Freud admits, no other country has taken this approach.
Good Morning,
1. I’m not sure why ‘...additional hours/increase(d) income’ is not ‘...a better paid job.’ I’ve looked but been unable to see it. Someones individual situation may not be better off - as travelling time/start finish times etc may not fit in to current circs.
2. The whole thing has always been an experiment - or at least that’s how it appears to me. Hence the constant tinkering to suit the prevailing winds.
Agree there has been elements of social experiment in the current reforms, bedroom tax….get people to think about moving, benefit cap….get some work so it doesn’t apply….but this part is different as they are trying to assess the impact of an on going interest in someone when they move into work which is very different from the normal support via tax credits and housing benefit which has little or no conditionality around the hours or income via employment. Seriously, this is where a lot of people will get a shock that these changes will mean they do seek additional hours or extra employment or the help they get through UC which may fall to be mainly for housing costs will be at risk if they are sanctioned.
We need to be able to fully understand that. We are engaging with all our working age customers to ensure they are fully aware of how UC will impact on them.
The 2nd example you give John is exactly one that shows an individual will be at risk…..it will be expected or there will be a possible sanction, which of course we will challenge.
This is a useful link to the timetable for moving claimants from TC to UC
http://cpag-mail.org.uk/5MI-371ZM-9CL4WEK95/cr.aspx