Discussion in 'Current Affairs & Debate' started by Madison, May 7, 2015.
Is that a no then?
I personally have a level of savings that wouldn't allow me to claim benefits immediately if I became unemployed. My entire stance was never meant to be a personal thing as I have said ALL ALONG, mainly because the scenario I described is not necessarily applicable to someone in my exact life situation. It's probably more applicable to someone like yourself, in all honesty. From what I know of you.
Oh it's absolutely applicable to my situation - someone who didn't go to university and has dipped in and out of call centre and shop work and taken whatever jobs I can find when I found myself without one. I don't have a masters to look at and think "I'm worth so much more".
Sharla in PROPER CUNT MODE tonight!
For what it's worth, if I was made redundant tomorrow, I'd probably give it a few months before I started thinking I could apply to the Co-op down the road who are recruiting. And I'd quite happily sign on throughout.
Quite, he seems to be advocating abolishing unemployment benefit entirely for one thing. Honestly, I'm surprised how right wing Moopy is becoming lately.
Exactly, probably something like being unemployed for 5-6 months (you basically become unemployable if you've done nothing for more than 6 months)
If being left wing means educated and skilled people should be saved from jobs that are beneath them, I'm not surprised the electorate rejected Labour.
THANK YOU. Fucking finally. And Lolly is far more the type of person I was talking about than myself. I was doing all the overtime under the sun in a shop a mere seven fucking months ago!
Again, you're making it personal. I wasn't talking about myself here... I was talking about people with more skills, knowledge or experience in a given type of job, usually older.
do you get free coffees if you work in Starbucks
Yes. Hands off the pastries and sandwiches though.
That's some proper right wing BS being spouted by Sharla, which I assume is trolling as his position in life is hardly one of privilege.
Agreed. It would fuck up my CV if "Co-op Shelfstacker" popped up above my global project management, IT infrastructure, system management experience. And that IS the way it works. Recruiters/interviwers only really take into account the last role you do.
I recently signed onto JSA after being effectively fired in January and living off my savings for a good while (I also did a quick clinical trial which usefully paid a grand, to prolong the inevitability of JSA). But when I did start claiming I wasn't wasn't, and still am not, applying to any old shit just to get back into work pronto, and thankfully the people at the job centre don't expect you to do that. I'm applying for literally every job in and around my desired field but I don't want to get stuck working twenty hours a week at Sainsburys (not that they would have me anyway - supermarkets seem to be picky as fuck and never take anyone with a DEGREE God forbid) where my motivation to spend my spare time job hunting will sap away and my cv will get clogged with shit that massively reduces my appeal to a potential employer.
I understand that, but if you found yourself a few months without work and the benefits you were receiving didn't cover your basic outgoings, would you think fuck it, and take the best job you could through a temping agency or even get a bar job for however many nights a week and not put it on your cv, or continue as you were waiting for the right job to come along?
Just as Tetris was imagining older people in this situation I was imagining younger people like her, who've probably done some sort of service industry work to support themselves through their studies yet now they're establishing their careers think it's inappropriate to return to those jobs in the short term because the understimulation may impact on their mental health and wellbeing and the principle that they're doing low skilled workers a favour by not taking their jobs, although I have no idea if these people do actually exist.
I didn't say that working a service industry job would fuck up my mental health in the short term, with the words "in time" I was suggesting being there in terms of years rather than months.
You're also ignoring the important factor of being at the age where gaining relevant experience is imperative. At the moment I have a job that's related to my degree and at least theoretically at my skills level, and i've said that if I lost that job tomorrow I would apply for a lot of things but with concentration towards getting more relevant experience AT LEAST TO BEGIN WITH. I really don't see what is wrong with that. Having actually gotten myself a so-called graduate level job, I don't want to find myself back where I started IF POSSIBLE.
And again, you are also assuming that it is piss easy for someone like Mel to walk into a bar job. I think realistically that most employers would take a look at her CV and reject her knowing she's capable of far more and would be out the door within a couple of months.
Just as you do for more relevant, stimulating roles that you don't have much work experience for, you adapt your CV when you are applying for something different.
I guess it's just a difference of opinion. I would always seek unskilled work / family support in the short term before even considering claiming JSA because I believe that's the right thing to do and that claiming JSA should be an absolute last resort. And, yes, I would sell personal belongings too. Fair enough if you think otherwise, but I don't see how that difference of opinion makes you right and somehow makes those who think otherwise 'cunts', 'Tory scum', 'rightwing BS' or any of the other bollocks being spouted here in outrage.
I just think it's STUPID to sell your telly immediately if you're in a position where you'll PROBABLY get another decently paid and relevant job in a couple of months. Sure, if you're still having no luck after a more considerable time than that perhaps but FUCKING HELL. . Other so-called desirable possessions actually AID your job search as well... having a computer and broadband connection for example.
You are someone who has been paying tax and National Insurance for YEARS at this point, yes? You claim JSA for three months and it will only encompass a tiny fraction of that.
Couple of things:
I can't get away with big empty gaps on my CV. I have to vouch for everything during my vetting so when I couldn't prove I was on JSA then I would admit to the supermarket/bar job, which would lead to more questions and judgements, my vetting being compromised etc.
I doubt a supermarket/bar etc. would hire me when they saw my CV. It would be clear to them that this was only going to be temporary until I got another PM/IT job again. And in the past I HAVE been rejected for roles because those hiring think it would be too junior for me and I'd leave (and I've thought/known it myself when applying for the role - they weren't just fobbing me off with a line).
Towards the end of last year I did dumb down my CV and got a temp admin role which then compromised my availability for more secure, suitable roles. I had to pretend to recruiters I was immediately available while working away. Fucking stressful!
It's really NOT that easy to pop in and out of a shop job.
FYI I wasn't calling Sharla cunty because of his opinions, but because he was clearly trolling Tetris.
Yes, this is very true. Few employers will hire people if they're not likely to stay for the long term.
Depends on your definition of trolling. Does he actually BELIEVE what he is saying to some extent?
I would sell my TV sounds like the kind of thing that would only ever be said by somebody who'll never be faced with the (ridiculous self imposed) choice of claiming benefits vs selling off possessions. What do you get for a half decent second hand TV anyway? A hundred quid maybe? Two weeks worth of benefits at the most? Why would you do that when benefits are there to support you in your search for work? Accepting that support may require you to swallow a little pride, but it doesn't make you a system fiddling scumbag. I also don't understand why you would rather ask your family for support - fifty quid a week is a lot more to them than it is to the state...
Ps. I'm not actually having a pop RobotBoy, I agree with you on politics more often than not
I don't see the welfare state as the last resort in that context at all. I'd much prefer not to have to rely on it, but would have absolutely no problem using it if my circumstances dictated it, and I was eligible. Even if the process is a bit dehumanising.
Isn't the very essence of the welfare state that it is there for all of us?
I wonder how people in places like Scandinavia feel, where they pay higher tax but then get 90% of their salary instead of a flat rate benefit? I'm guessing there is less stigma or reluctance to claim there.
For the record: when I have been out of work and claiming I have scrounged a bit of extra money by doing the odd one-day extra work, university research participation groups and manning someone's stall of TAT at a convention. I've even ironed people's clothes for spare cash!
It's certainly not a GLOSSY CORPORATE JOB or NOTHING attitude!
Oh I expect so, but there was no need to be a snidey twat whilst ignoring all the perfectly reasonable arguments you made.
Well either that or someone desperate for a ten bag and a stone.
No, I don't think you're having a pop. I just personally would want to have exhausted all other avenues, within reason, before claiming JSA. And of course broadband connections, laptops etc are perfectly reasonable things to own, particularly when looking for work. Sky subscriptions? Season tickets? iPhones? Probably less so, if we're honest, for someone who is long term unemployed and surviving on support from family, friends or the state.
The way I read it, he was questioning Tetris' series of opinions and hypotheticals stated as FACT.
Although I can't speak for it, there seems to be a sense that the system is for everyone. People buy into it... it's there for people who have paid in a lot and those who haven't. I can't understand the logic of people complaining about those that have paid into the system complaining about people who have not claiming benefits and then saying they wouldn't claim themselves in those circumstances if they were eligible. Who SHOULD claim then?
You also have to work for the state or in a labour market programme (how would THAT look on your CV?) and not limit your search for a full time job to the geographical area in which you live. Both things the left have been up in arms about in the UK during the debate about our own welfare state.
You don't have to join the Work Programme if you're short term unemployed (on JSA for less than three months, although I personally thinks that is too short a cut-off point) and I also don't think it's standard practice for Job Centres to encourage job search outside of your geographical area within the first couple of months of your unemployment. I'm talking SHORT-TERM unemployment here... that is the scenario that I have been positing all along.
This a slightly unrelated but there is evidence to say that professional people being able to maintain their lifestyle to some extent is conducive to them suitable work again faster. It's part of the logic behind the Scandi model, because while they work hard to get you to actively job search, they also recognise that social networks are helpful in job search at all levels. Being poor and thus socially isolated is not conducive to anyone getting work.
I'll admit that some of what I was saying was opinion, some is based on examples of people I know and other assertions can be backed by actual economic papers.
FYI: Another reason why people SHOULD claim JSA/benefits while out of work - further down the line you might get vetted for a job and have to explain the gap in your work history, if not with payslips and a salary from a company then a record of signing on proving you were job hunting in that time. Something OFFICIAL has to be provided (and to also prove that you weren't in prison during that time and didn't decalre it). I've been advised of this by recruiters and screening agencies.
A personal reference in that period is all that is required. My job is amongst the toughest in terms of providing watertight references - every period of unemployment more than 6 days has to be accounted for with hard evidence, but it certainly doesn't mean you can't have been unemployed and living at home or traveling etc.
I remember my employer asking for proof that i'd been backpacking. I told them to sod off and they never asked me again