Should I sign on Dole !?

Boredatwork

Hi guys,

I have been given my redundancy notice and finish up on 18th July. I have been expecting it for last 6 months to be honest cause we are so quiet, hense my name on here !!! So I was told I'd be mad to change jobs a few months ago and to wait for my redundancy cheque !

I have a new job lined up, but I won't start that till the 11th Aug when I come back from my holidays.

My question is should I sign up for the dole or job seekers allowance for the 3 weeks between jobs ?

Is there anything that I should be aware of if I do this ?

Should I not tell them in dole office that I have a job lined up already?

Will my new employer know I've signed on when I start there ?

Cheers for any answers guys !

Keano

You will not be entitled to job seekers allowance. AFAIK you have to wait a period of 12 weeks before seeking it after receiving redundancy.

delly

If you have qualifying PRSI payments then you are entitled to jobseekers benefit, which unlike jobseekers allowance is not means tested. If your redundancy is above €50k, only then will you have a waiting period on a sliding scale.

So in theory you could be getting nearly €600 for the 3 weeks you are out of work.

dubman25

Boredatwork wrote: »

Hi guys,

I have been given my redundancy notice and finish up on 18th July. I have been expecting it for last 6 months to be honest cause we are so quiet, hense my name on here !!! So I was told I'd be mad to change jobs a few months ago and to wait for my redundancy cheque !

I have a new job lined up, but I won't start that till the 11th Aug when I come back from my holidays.

My question is should I sign up for the dole or job seekers allowance for the 3 weeks between jobs ?

Is there anything that I should be aware of if I do this ?

Should I not tell them in dole office that I have a job lined up already?

Will my new employer know I've signed on when I start there ?

Cheers for any answers guys !

are you serious asking that here or are you just really bored:D

black & white

AFAIK you cannot sign on if you are out of the country on hols as you must be available and actively seeking work. If you were out of work for a good while you would be entitled to holidays but in your case I doubt it.

AARRRGH

I think ethically, you should not sign on, as you have a job lined up which you don't want to start until you come back from your holidays.

Basically you have chosen to be out of work for a few weeks.

I know I'm fighting a losing battle here, but I think people should be honest and not sponge when they don't have to.

forza athletico

dublindude wrote: »

I think ethically, you should not sign on, as you have a job lined up which you don't want to start until you come back from your holidays.

Basically you have chosen to be out of work for a few weeks.

I know I'm fighting a losing battle here, but I think people should be honest and not sponge when they don't have to.

Why not sign on? I presume that the person in question pays their taxes, unemployed as of July 12 and lucky enough to be offered a redundancy package. People need to still pay their bills

mollydolly271

YEAH DEFO SIGN ON YOU'VE PAID UR TAXES AND AS FAR AS I KNOW YOU ARE ABLE TO GET DOLE STRAIGHT AWAY COS UR BEING LET GO

snellers

as a poster mentioned above surely you would be signing on yet you are not actively looking for work (you have chosen to take a holiday!)

if there was no holiday and you were at home I would feel more inclined to say yes take your entitlement as you pay your taxes but a condition of jobseekers benefit is that you are 'actively seeking employment' - you won't be as you are on holiday!

officially I would say the benefits office would have an issue with your claim and reject it if they found out and it could hamper any claims in the future. Yes I know it's unlikely but it is possible.

White-Teeth

I'm not sure you can, to be honest. As posters have said, the dole is not a cash machine; i.e., you can't take money when you wish.

You need to be actively seeking work to sign on, and you will be on holidays.

Boredatwork

Hi guys,

Thanks for the replies. I won't be actively seeking employment, not cause I'll be on holidays but because I have a job lined up already.

I have been planning and looking forward to this holiday for the best part of 9 months now. When I was given redundancy notice I was considering cancelling it, I was feeling aweful and down in dumps with my whole situation, but when I got offered this new job the holiday was back on and I'm really looking forward to it now again.

This new job entails me actually taking a pay cut, but I'm not a sponger and I would not want to be unemployed. I have worked and paid taxes now for a number of years and I just think if I owed the tax-man a few bob he'd chase me for it so if I can get some of my tax money back then I should. (it will stop the government wasting it anyway!)

If I mention to them in dole office that I start a job in 3 weeks will my application be rejected ?

Should I be looking for Job-seekers allowance or Job seekers benefit ?? What is the difference ?

I presume they will take my P45 ? what will I have to give my new employer, will they know I claimed job-seekers allowance / benefit ?

cheers guys

gixerfixer

Sign on.You are entitled to it if you have being paying your taxes and PRSI payments.If you dont someone else will.:)

AARRRGH

gixerfixer wrote: »

Sign on.You are entitled to it if you have being paying your taxes and PRSI payments.If you dont someone else will.:)

He's not entitled to it: he's not looking for a job.

I really hate the Irish sponging attitude.

Bluetonic

OP, you should sign on and immediately apply for the two weeks unemployment benefit holidays which you and everyone else are entitled to. This will allow you to claim anything due to you while you are away on holidays.

Your local social welfare office will be able to help your further.

I really hate the Irish begrudging attitude.

studiorat

dublindude wrote: »

He's not entitled to it: he's not looking for a job.

I really hate the Irish sponging attitude.

A child of the celtic tiger no doubt!

You are entitled to benefit if you have paid PRSI etc. Just because you have a job lined up doesn't mean you actually have a job. It could easily fall through, it happens. I'd keep looking until you are actually going in on the monday morning, after all you may find something better, if you know what I mean.

When you become long term unemployed your PRSI contribution does not cover you then you are put on assistance this is means tested etc.

You could also consider rent allowance for the period!!

The social welfare system is there for a reason, use it! The TD's don't have a problem claiming their legitimate expenses why should you.

On a personal note, I've been there and I as a self employed person I would not darken the doors of any SW office again. Maybe they've changed over the years but I've found them to be a shower of condecending bastards, I jumped through hoops for £56.00 a week. No thanks...

Job seekers! What a laugh!! When did they start calling it that?

Boredatwork

dublindude wrote: »

He's not entitled to it: he's not looking for a job.

I really hate the Irish sponging attitude.

I am not sponging, I will not be earning for the 3 weeks. I have been working & paying tax since I was 17yrs old. If I was sitting at home waiting to start my new job it would be ok ??

If I was to say shag it, not take this job I have been offered and wait for something better and sit on my hole and claim for the next 6 mts then I think I could be accused of sponging, but I think I have done my share of contributing to the system to apply for and get this allowance for these 3 wks.

Thanks guys.

AARRRGH

Boredatwork wrote: »

I am not sponging, I will not be earning for the 3 weeks.

Eh, you are sponging. You chose to go on holiday before starting your new job. This is all a choice and has nothing to do with looking for work.

You are a sponger.

Boredatwork wrote: »

I have been working & paying tax since I was 17yrs old. If I was sitting at home waiting to start my new job it would be ok ??

If the other company said "we can't employ you for a few weeks" and this was a problem for you, I would have a lot of sympathy, but the reality is you are delaying starting your job because you want to take a nice three week holiday.

Boredatwork wrote: »

If I was to say shag it, not take this job I have been offered and wait for something better and sit on my hole and claim for the next 6 mts then I think I could be accused of sponging, but I think I have done my share of contributing to the system to apply for and get this allowance for these 3 wks.

That's not how the dole works.

I don't think you understand what the dole is.

studiorat

dublindude wrote: »

That's not how the dole works.

I don't think you understand what the dole is.

I don't think you do? Would you like to elaborate on what exactly you think the "dole" is?

The Original Post stated that the next job begins on the 11th not that he was putting it off until then...

The crux of the issue is that the op will be out of work for 3 weeks in the country or not...
What's to stop them applying for a job on the internet?
I believe they are entitled to 2 weeks off. Signing on is monthly thing no?

Next you'll be saying "it's people like you who have the country in the state it's in"

AARRRGH

studiorat wrote: »

I don't think you do? Would you like to elaborate on what exactly you think the "dole" is?

"To qualify for Jobseeker's Benefit you must be available for/genuinely seeking work. You may be asked to show evidence that you are actively seeking work, for example, letters showing job applications or failure to get a job."

The OP is not looking for work. He has a job. He's going on holidays.

studiorat wrote: »

The Original Post stated that the next job begins on the 11th not that he was putting it off until then...

See my text above.

studiorat wrote: »

The crux of the issue is that the op will be out of work for 3 weeks in the country or not...

By choice! The dole is called "Jobseekers Benefit" because it is for "Job Seekers". The OP, by choice, is choosing not to work (he would rather be abroad on a holiday) and is not looking for work.

It is that simple. He does not qualify.

I know Irish people love screwing over authority and getting away with scams, but the fact is he does not qualify for the dole. He would have to lie to get it.

studiorat wrote: »

Next you'll be saying "it's people like you who have the country in the state it's in"

Don't be irrational.

Gone West

dude, I hear you and agree 100%
It is unethical for him to look for the dole.
No question about it.

Bluetonic

dublindude how come you chose to ignore my post regarding the right of someone on job seekers benefit to have a two week holiday?

I suppose you would begrudge this also to people?

Fact is the OP is entitled to sign on for one week and take holidays for two weeks and still receive payment - to clarify the issue I asked at my local social welfare office earlier today showing the officer the text of the original post and the officer confirmed the OP may sign on.

I hope this helps.

Nickibaby*

This thread is unbeleivable :rolleyes:

OP is not starting a job until the 11th - agreed with his hopefully new employer that this will be the date he starts on. He has lost his job through no fault of his own he was made REDUNDANT. There are so many people who have no intentions of getting a job, while the OP is only going to be out of work for 3 weeks, what he does in those 3 weeks shouldn't be an issue.

He has paid his taxes, and will continue to do so, he is entitled.... some people are so begrudging when things work out for people :rolleyes:

AARRRGH

Bluetonic wrote: »

dublindude how come you chose to ignore my post regarding the right of someone on job seekers benefit to have a two week holiday?

I ignored it because it is a total non-issue.

I am not saying people on the dole are not entitled to a holiday. I am saying people who are not looking for a job are not entitled to be on the dole.

There is a huge difference.

Bluetonic wrote: »

I suppose you would begrudge this also to people?

Eh, I am not a begrudger. I want people to go out and earn success. I don't want them sitting on their arse claiming the dole.

I would never have any issue with someone trying to be rich, or being rich. I have a problem with the exact opposite: spongers.

Nickibaby* wrote: »

Fact is the OP is entitled to sign on for one week and take holidays for two weeks and still receive payment - to clarify the issue I asked at my local social welfare office earlier today showing the officer the text of the original post and the officer confirmed the OP may sign on.

LOL. OK Walter.

Nickibaby* wrote: »

This thread is unbeleivable :rolleyes:

He has paid his taxes, and will continue to do so, he is entitled.... some people are so begrudging when things work out for people :rolleyes:

If he goes into the dole office, and truthfully explains his situation, he won't get the dole.

Paying your taxes does not entitle you to the dole.

You have to be looking for work. He is not looking for work. He is going on holidays before he starts his new job.

studiorat

My suggestion would be that the OP continues to look for a job until such time as they are withdrawing money from their first salary check. Counting chickens an all that. What's to say things won't change in the next month?

Speaking of which, is there provision for someone who is waiting for their first months salary?

Since someone here was kind enough ask the social welfare officer I think there's cause to check this out. Hopefully without being called a sponger in the process.

I'm sticking to my guns here cause being involved in the education business I'm sick of seeing good students among others being done over by a technicality. When most are just trying to improve their lot. I didn't get a chance back in the day, I hope others do.

I don't understand why some people insist on forcing people into doing jobs that they do not want to do. It's not good for employers and it's not good for the employee either. So there!

Bluetonic

dublindude - Why do you still pick and chose what you reply to?

I asked in the local office of the department of social welfare, showing the original post and the officer said they were entitled to sign on.

AARRRGH

Bluetonic wrote: »

dublindude - Why do you still pick and chose what you reply to?

I believe I've been breaking up your quotes and replying to each part.

Bluetonic wrote: »

I asked in the local office of the department of social welfare, showing the original post and the officer said they were entitled to sign on.

I don't believe you. Sorry.

studiorat

Well maybe we should wait and see so. Does he have a contract?
What is this person to live on for maybe the next 2 months.

studiorat

dublindude wrote: »

It is that simple. He does not qualify.

While I'm at it. I really don't think you should be making these decisions for people here. Unless of course you are a social welfare officer, then I suggest you get back to work (smiley face)

Let the guy ask for himself, I think the SW are really more qualified to make that call.

AARRRGH

studiorat wrote: »

Well maybe we should wait and see so. Does he have a contract?
What is this person to live on for maybe the next 2 months.

No.

He finishes work on July 18. He doesn't start his new job until August 12, which is three weeks later. This is because he is going on a three week holiday.

There is no two months or sitting around looking for a job. There is simply a holiday between jobs.

AARRRGH

studiorat wrote: »

While I'm at it. I really don't think you should be making these decisions for people here. Unless of course you are a social welfare officer, then I suggest you get back to work (smiley face)

Let the guy ask for himself, I think the SW are really more qualified to make that call.

I agree, but the text I posted above from social welfare is pretty clear -

You have to be unemployed and looking for work.

The OP is not looking for work.

AARRRGH

Anyway, we could talk about this all day.

I don't think it is right to claim the dole when you don't need it or don't qualify for it.

Other people disagree.

That's fine.

I won't change your mind, you won't change my mind.

End of story.

studiorat

I don't think anybody does.

I've gone on holiday in a situation like that, home on Saturday only to arrive into a black hole on Monday morning thinking I was going into work. (well phone call Sunday night) Took me 3 months to sort it out. No help from SW either on account of my girlfriends salary, nice eh?

Until you are actually working you should be still looking, believe me. None of these situations are cut and dried. So if the OP continues to look for work they are therefore entitled to claim benefit.

It's a technicality yes, but a technicality in the claimants favor for a change. It's not un-ethical, it's doing nobody else out of money and it's legal. So if the guy applies for some jobs, what's the problem...

As for pulling one over and all that, some guy who want's to sign on for a few weeks is the least of the dept of finance's problems.

He should also enquire about claiming for the first month assuming he's paid by the month.

Boredatwork

dublindude wrote: »

No.

He finishes work on July 18. He doesn't start his new job until August 12, which is three weeks later. This is because he is going on a three week holiday.

There is no two months or sitting around looking for a job. There is simply a holiday between jobs.

Hi Dublin Dude,

I'm not going on a big elaborate 3 week foreign holiday, I am going on a two week holiday. When offered the job I did say to my new employers that I could come in on the 21st but only for 1 week as I had holidays booked for the following 2 weeks, they said it was pointless, (and I agreeed) so the start date of 11th Aug was decided upon, this is the day after I come back from my holidays, so I won't be out of work 1 day more than I have to.

I also explained that I had this holiday planned and flights paid for before I was made redundant, and until I had this job lined up I was concidering not going on the holiday.

I'm glad to see that you are in the minority of people that think I should not claim any benefits from my situation.

I think the government, and businesses in general, have fostered a culture of screwing the public out of as much money as they can, now I have found myself (not due to any of my actions) in a situation where I can recoup a minisule percentage of the money I have been screwed out of and I think not availing of this would be akin to whiping down my pants and bending over and asking to be shafted even harder !! :eek:

Thanks everyone that posted.

Good-day.

mcaul

Plusses & Minuses for all on this.

Normally when you take 2 weeks holiday you receive holiday pay from your employer.

The op is taking a holiday in his off time between 2 jobs, but if still employed by 1st comapny would be paid whilst on holidays.

I have a terrible dislike for spongers, but in this case, I don't see sponging as the OP is at a loss of income due to redundancy. The fact that this will b corrected in 3 weeks doesn't affect him. Unfortunatley mortgage / food / social life isn't free for people who have been made redundant.

So advice is. Tell SW office you have been made redunadant and that you have found a new job that starts in 3 weeks and you will receive the pay related social welfare for those 3 weeks.

Its not sponging, its not telling lies, its simply what you are entitled to for paying your prsi. (The i stands for Insurance - you ahve a valid claim)

Similar if you were out ill for 3 weeks, you fill in an illness form & get paid the relevant amount. - Unless the company pays while you're ill.

Eoin

Sorry, I'm a bit confused I think. You have the option of starting your job on the 21st of the month, but because you have chosen to go on holidays you are not starting for another three weeks. Is it this three weeks you think you should get money for?

Sephiroth_dude

dublindude wrote: »

Anyway, we could talk about this all day.

I don't think it is right to claim the dole when you don't need it or don't qualify for it.

Other people disagree.

That's fine.

I won't change your mind, you won't change my mind.

End of story.

Im being laid off work temporarily till september,i will be signing on for the job seekers benefit,am I a sponger?In your opinion do I qualify for it?

AARRRGH

Sephiroth_dude wrote: »

Im being laid off work temporarily till september,i will be signing on for the job seekers benefit,am I a sponger?In your opinion do I qualify for it?

No I don't think you're a sponger, because you have no choice in the matter.

gixerfixer

Nickibaby* wrote: »

This thread is unbeleivable :rolleyes:

OP is not starting a job until the 11th - agreed with his hopefully new employer that this will be the date he starts on. He has lost his job through no fault of his own he was made REDUNDANT. There are so many people who have no intentions of getting a job, while the OP is only going to be out of work for 3 weeks, what he does in those 3 weeks shouldn't be an issue.

He has paid his taxes, and will continue to do so, he is entitled.... some people are so begrudging when things work out for people :rolleyes:

Well put.There is so many begrudgers in Ireland it's unreal.I have actually heard of people who would prefer if a family that has fallen between the cracks in society where left out on the street rather than get a house through the social housing programmes.These are the same kind of people who begrudge the OP from getting the dole even though he has paid his taxes and PRSI.Unbelievable really.

AARRRGH

It's not begrudgery. Begrudgery is when you are envious of someone who has something, such as success. I would never begrudge a successful person.

Trying to connect my opinion (I don't like sponging) with people getting enjoyment out of families living homeless on the street is absolutely ridiculous.

I've said this a million times already, but the dole is not for people who choose to go on holidays rather than start a job.

nesf

I don't see the ethical problem here. He won't be receiving any pay or doing nixers or whatever during the three weeks. Sure he'll be on holidays but he has been paying his PRSI and will be paying it again after three weeks. The dole is there to give people an income between jobs, I don't see the difference between a person going on holidays for three weeks or a person sitting on their ass at home for three weeks between jobs to be honest.

Bluetonic

Really, I think everything has been covered, this thread should be left to die.

studiorat

The holiday in question was booked 9 mths previous.

Prolly better in Philosophy since so many seem it to be a question of ethics...

Newaglish

mcaul wrote: »

Plusses & Minuses for all on this.

Normally when you take 2 weeks holiday you receive holiday pay from your employer.

The op is taking a holiday in his off time between 2 jobs, but if still employed by 1st comapny would be paid whilst on holidays.

I have a terrible dislike for spongers, but in this case, I don't see sponging as the OP is at a loss of income due to redundancy. The fact that this will b corrected in 3 weeks doesn't affect him. Unfortunatley mortgage / food / social life isn't free for people who have been made redundant.

If the OP has been made redundant, they will receive all accrued holiday pay that they have built up, as part of their redundancy package. They ARE being paid for this time off in exactly the same way that if they still had a job.

I really can't stand the "I pay my taxes" argument either.

I pay my taxes but:

I shouldn't get child benefit - I don't have children
I shouldn't get old age non-cont. pension - I am not over 65
I shouldn't get a 3rd level grant - I am a graduate, not a student
I shouldn't get disability allowance - I am not disabled
I shouldn't get jobseekers allowance - I am not seeking work. Neither is the OP

Bluetonic

Newaglish wrote: »

They ARE being paid for this time off in exactly the same way that if they still had a job.

Really it's all been covered but can I suggest a little education for yourself. It would go a long way.

Newaglish

Bluetonic wrote: »

Really it's all been covered but can I suggest a little education for yourself. It would go a long way.

Please elaborate? Are you saying that employees are not entitled to arrears of holiday pay on redundancy?

I may be mistaken as I work specifically in the area of redundancies in the case of insolvency, where arrears of holiday are paid to the employee and I assumed it would be the same in a regular redundancy case.

PS. Attack the post, not the poster.