Looking for work and having children.

stauntj

I understand a lot of people are hurting on here with long commutes and exorbitant childcare costs and it sucks when someone sitting on their arse claiming the dole reducing your paycheck.

If you can step back from that for a minute and logically look at the actual conditions listed for JA eligibility...my wife meets them all(as listed below)

So where does it say she has to jump into full time employment with a long commute even if it strangles our family? Let's help each other out not kick each other down I say. Some helpful suggestions on here also, tx.

To get Jobseeker's Allowance you must be aged over 18 and under 66. You must also:

Be unemployed (you must be fully unemployed or unemployed for at least 4 days out of 7)
Be capable of work
Be available for full-time work and genuinely seeking work
Satisfy the means test
Meet the habitual residence condition

Markcheese

Effects wrote: »

Lots of people have to deal with childcare costs making a serious dent in their wages. Why should it be any different with social welfare?

Two hours a day commuting? Welcome to the real world.

There a bit of reality in there too though, if you have to drop the kids off at 9 and pick them up between 2 and 3 , knock off 2 hours commuting time (and it's cost ), and a potentially minimum wage job , you could we'll end up in minus territory , which may not be affordable ... I've made a good few assumptions in that ...

stauntj

thenightman wrote: »

Everyone on JSA is treated equally. It would be unfair for DSP to be hounding single people night and day to find work but ignoring others just because they are parents. They chose to become parents at the end of the day, and already receive non means tested taxpayer money in the form of children's allowance.

You understand that my kids will pay for your pension and later years and without this cycle of life, economy would go down the toilet. So a little flexibility to parents should be on offer in the larger consideration of things.

stauntj

Markcheese wrote: »

There a bit of reality in there too though, if you have to drop the kids off at 9 and pick them up between 2 and 3 , knock off 2 hours commuting time (and it's cost ), and a potentially minimum wage job , you could we'll end up in minus territory , which may not be affordable ... I've made a good few assumptions in that ...

Your assumptions are all right.

mailburner

Markcheese wrote: »

There a bit of reality in there too though, if you have to drop the kids off at 9 and pick them up between 2 and 3 , knock off 2 hours commuting time (and it's cost ), and a potentially minimum wage job , you could we'll end up in minus territory , which may not be affordable ... I've made a good few assumptions in that ...

This is the real world for many sadly.
I sympathise with anyone in this position yet would be fully behind
them if they dropped out of employment for their kids betterment and their own.

Salary Negotiator

stauntj wrote: »

You understand that my kids will pay for your pension and later years and without this cycle of life, economy would go down the toilet. So a little flexibility to parents should be on offer in the larger consideration of things.

Assuming your kids actually go out and work.

Only a 50/50 chance based on their parents.

Sleeper12

stauntj wrote:

My wife is ready and willing for work full time hours in a town with a population of 5000 and a multitude of businesses. She is willing to do any job locally even though she has specialised training.

She is 100 percent entitled to pick & choose any job she wants. She can decide she only wants to work locally. However social welfare are perfectly correct in saying that she isn't really available for work if she's being so picky. I live in a city of a million yet people have to travel several hours every day to get to & from work. Social welfare is there to bridge a gap between jobs. It's not your buffer until you find your dream job.

With 5000 living so close by your wife can mind children in your own & earn up to 15k tax free.

GarIT

stauntj wrote: »

You understand that my kids will pay for your pension and later years and without this cycle of life, economy would go down the toilet. So a little flexibility to parents should be on offer in the larger consideration of things.

Most people barely pay for themseves. You must be paying €14,000 tax per year of your working life to break even any less and someone richer than you is subsidising you. JSA/JSB is a drain on the economy so it's not like this is an investment gaining the state loads later like you have tried to make out.


The "available for full time employment" rule is interpreted to mean available for any work at all regardless of any circumstances. I do beleive there should possibly be better spports for working families but at the moment there isn't, the rules are the rules unfortunately.


I currently earn €4 per hour and commute up to an hour and a half each way. The €4 figure is reached by using net salary (salary after tax) minus what I would get on the dole and minus commuting costs. It doesn't include what I could potentially get on HAP or losing the medical card. I could possibly be worse off working than not. I don't like the long commute or working for €4 an hour or not getting to spend as much time with my family but I don't like someone else paying for me and I hope in the long term I can increase my salary to make it more worthwhile.

Sleeper12

thenightman wrote:

Morons like you get these threads locked.

Calling posters morons tends to get them locked too
Just saying

Sleeper12

stauntj wrote:

So where does it say she has to jump into full time employment with a long commute even if it strangles our family? Let's help each other out not kick each other down I say. Some helpful suggestions on here also, tx.

Can you post the guidelines that states that she doesn't have to make long commutes?

It's not uncommon in Dublin for a family to leave at 7am, children dropped to creche and not picked up again till 6pm. Sometimes grand parents have to pick them up at 6pm because mammy & daddy have another hours drive.

thenightman

stauntj wrote: »

You understand that my kids will pay for your pension and later years and without this cycle of life, economy would go down the toilet. So a little flexibility to parents should be on offer in the larger consideration of things.

Likely won't be a state pension when I'm due to retire in 30 odd years time and it won't be comfortable to live on if it somehow does still exist. It's why I've been saving 30 a week in the credit union the last 3 years and plan on investing it when I've 10k saved, rinse and repeat.



Also, unless your children become very high earners they won't cover their own state pension through taxation, never mind mine. Plus factor in the children's allowance they receive for 18 years, free GP care etc. Your offspring aren't the economic heroes you think they are!

Sleeper12

Salary Negotiator wrote:

Assuming your kids actually go out and work.

Not likely with the example being set.

sallysue2

stauntj wrote: »

I understand a lot of people are hurting on here with long commutes and exorbitant childcare costs and it sucks when someone sitting on their arse claiming the dole reducing your paycheck.

If you can step back from that for a minute and logically look at the actual conditions listed for JA eligibility...my wife meets them all(as listed below)

So where does it say she has to jump into full time employment with a long commute even if it strangles our family? Let's help each other out not kick each other down I say. Some helpful suggestions on here also, tx.

To get Jobseeker's Allowance you must be aged over 18 and under 66. You must also:

Be unemployed (you must be fully unemployed or unemployed for at least 4 days out of 7)
Be capable of work
Be available for full-time work and genuinely seeking work
Satisfy the means test
Meet the habitual residence condition

I will answer your question. Your wife does not meet all conditions. As per your original post, she is reluctant to apply for jobs as she does school run. She also won't apply for jobs an hour away (which is NOT excessive). Therefor she is not available for full time work and genuinely seeking work. She does not satisfy all conditions for jobseekers. There is no leeway on this, she can't pick and choose, you have to be in a position to take any jobs within a reasonable distance (1 hour away is reasonable).

She wants to stay at home and pick up kids from school? Great, of course she can choose to do that, but she can't claim jobseekers. That's the choice ye have. Someone else here suggested minding children, might be worth exploring.

GarIT

There's also the option of dropping the kids off at a creche, child minder or school +afteschool in the city which I know a lot of people doing.

splinter65

Cork_Langer1 wrote: »

Yes it does, some crank in the intro office can't make a person take a job that doesn't benefit their well-being or finances.

As I said apply for any job and provide proof of the applying for said jobs will keep them happy.

And this thread shows always say yes sir three bags full sir to anyone in intro, anything you say can and will be used against you.

You obviously don’t know anything about SW or any of the rules or regulations outside of the usual nonsense you hear in staff canteens and standing at the bar in your local.
On Jobseekers now for any length and you’ll be referred to JobPath. Yes you might be looking for jobs and applying for jobs and just being unlucky and not getting the jobs.
That used to be fine and you could continue getting your payment but not anymore.
JobPath will bring you in and do a forensic examination of your job searching and point out where your going wrong and “help” you to broaden your horizons in your pursuit of a job.
If you mention childcare issues or commuting problems at all they will report back to SW and you will be at risk of having your payment suspended or even cancelled.

stauntj

thenightman wrote: »

Likely won't be a state pension when I'm due to retire in 30 odd years time and it won't be comfortable to live on if it somehow does still exist. It's why I've been saving 30 a week in the credit union the last 3 years and plan on investing it when I've 10k saved, rinse and repeat.



Also, unless your children become very high earners they won't cover their own state pension through taxation, never mind mine. Plus factor in the children's allowance they receive for 18 years, free GP care etc. Your offspring aren't the economic heroes you think they are!

Ok fair point. It doesnt cover everything mind like vat or spending value of an additional person. The Germans went into negative population growth and sought to rectify it through immigration. A pure calculated move from what I'd see that tallies with the logic I've used.

Cork_Langer1

splinter65 wrote: »

You obviously don’t know anything about SW or any of the rules or regulations outside of the usual nonsense you hear in staff canteens and standing at the bar in your local.
On Jobseekers now for any length and you’ll be referred to JobPath. Yes you might be looking for jobs and applying for jobs and just being unlucky and not getting the jobs.
That used to be fine and you could continue getting your payment but not anymore.
JobPath will bring you in and do a forensic examination of your job searching and point out where your going wrong and “help” you to broaden your horizons in your pursuit of a job.
If you mention childcare issues or commuting problems at all they will report back to SW and you will be at risk of having your payment suspended or even cancelled.

No you won't, you're doing your usual scaremongering, if intro stop moneies it can only be your moneies and nothing you receive for your children, also if your monies are stopped you can appeal that decision while putting a claim into a CWO for a hardship payment.

As I said already, yes sir three bags full sir, anything you say, can and will be used against you.

Isn't the country at full employment sure

Markcheese

On that ,is there a distance that's considered reasonable to ask / demand a job applicant to commute , is an hour through traffic to Galway reasonable ? How about 3 hours to Dublin ?
Or a quick flight to London ?

Sleeper12

Markcheese wrote:

On that ,is there a distance that's considered reasonable to ask / demand a job applicant to commute , is an hour through traffic to Galway reasonable ? How about 3 hours to Dublin ? Or a quick flight to London ?

Well if a 1 to 2 hour commute means that you qualify for the dole then half of Dublin & the comuter belt should sign on tomorrow.

stauntj

splinter65 wrote: »

You obviously don’t know anything about SW or any of the rules or regulations outside of the usual nonsense you hear in staff canteens and standing at the bar in your local.
On Jobseekers now for any length and you’ll be referred to JobPath. Yes you might be looking for jobs and applying for jobs and just being unlucky and not getting the jobs.
That used to be fine and you could continue getting your payment but not anymore.
JobPath will bring you in and do a forensic examination of your job searching and point out where your going wrong and “help” you to broaden your horizons in your pursuit of a job.
If you mention childcare issues or commuting problems at all they will report back to SW and you will be at risk of having your payment suspended or even cancelled.

Job path aren't worth a sh*t.. After one week unemployed I ended up on their books. I spent 4 months unemployed after upskilling,updating cvs and constantly applying on multiple job sites with individually unique cover letters.

If you know what you are at, jobpath is at best a social outlet for your frustrations, at worst just another burden to a genuine jobseeker.

Also the contract for jobpath is close to finished and may not continue to my understanding. There was no forensic examination of my job search although maybe officer could tell I was searching like a man possessed.

I just thought I'd share the up to date reality of it...assuming job path service standardised across centres.

stauntj

GarIT wrote: »

Most people barely pay for themseves. You must be paying €14,000 tax per year of your working life to break even any less and someone richer than you is subsidising you. JSA/JSB is a drain on the economy so it's not like this is an investment gaining the state loads later like you have tried to make out.


The "available for full time employment" rule is interpreted to mean available for any work at all regardless of any circumstances. I do beleive there should possibly be better spports for working families but at the moment there isn't, the rules are the rules unfortunately.


I currently earn €4 per hour and commute up to an hour and a half each way. The €4 figure is reached by using net salary (salary after tax) minus what I would get on the dole and minus commuting costs. It doesn't include what I could potentially get on HAP or losing the medical card. I could possibly be worse off working than not. I don't like the long commute or working for €4 an hour or not getting to spend as much time with my family but I don't like someone else paying for me and I hope in the long term I can increase my salary to make it more worthwhile.

Hope it works out for you later.

stauntj

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Well if a 1 to 2 hour commute means that you qualify for the dole then half of Dublin & the comuter belt should sign on tomorrow.

Is it fair to hold Dublin and rural areas to the same rules regarding commute(which dont actually exist except with those taking some sort of moral high ground)

Professionally, dublin pays better and with it comes a ****ty commute. Those who choose to stay in rural areas value quality of life with a low commute even if it means facing min wage.

So there are trade offs here on both sides which means its really comparing apples and oranges and standardizing rules doesnt fit in the same way a standardised minimum wage doesnt fit nationally from donegal to dublin.

Wouldn't you agree?

Sleeper12

stauntj wrote:

Is it fair to hold Dublin and rural areas to the same rules regarding commute(which dont actually exist except with those taking some sort of moral high ground)

What are you suggesting? Dublin people are supposed to have a lower standard of family life that rural Ireland? And on top of that working Dubs should pay for the social benefits of people not willing to put as much into providing for their own family?

You have to winding me up here?

Cork_Langer1

Cork_Langer1 wrote: »

Scare mongering bull****e by the lot here.

Just say now that your wife is now available for full time work, and apply for any job, provide that proof of job applying to the intro office, if a job doesn't financially benefit your family don't accept it.

And thus, why people get pissed off about the social.

I have kids, I work shifts including nights. Can I quit and get other people to pay for everything?

Away With The Fairies

thenightman wrote: »

The conditions of JSA is that you are available for full time work. Not local work or work that suits whatever specific circumstances you deem acceptable. I understand your frustration, and you have my sympathy, but those are the terms she signed up for.

You won't get much sympathy here either but I wouldn't take it personally, boards loves a good welfare recipient bashing!

I work with people who commute from Dundalk, Wexford and Tullamore to Dublin daily who have kids and pay childcare + cost of commute. Just the way the world has gone, unfortunately.

If your wife wants to continue receiving a payment she'll have to satisfy DSP that she is looking for full time work, and not just work in your immediate locality on her own terms.

But she is looking for work and is meeting that condition to get JSA. Where does it say in the rules that they have to find work on the other side of the country if that's where the jobs are? That's ridiculous.

Salary Negotiator

Sleeper12 wrote: »

What are you suggesting? Dublin people are supposed to have a lower standard of family life that rural Ireland? And on top of that working Dubs should pay for the social benefits of people not willing to put as much into providing for their own family?

You have to winding me up here?

It’s obvious what he thinks.

That he and his family should continue to get handouts because they value quality of life more than others.

stauntj

stauntj wrote: »

Job path aren't worth a sh*t.. After one week unemployed I ended up on their books. I spent 4 months unemployed after upskilling,updating cvs and constantly applying on multiple job sites with individually unique cover letters.

If you know what you are at, jobpath is at best a social outlet for your frustrations, at worst just another burden to a genuine jobseeker.

Also the contract for jobpath is close to finished and may not continue to my understanding. There was no forensic examination of my job search although maybe officer could tell I was searching like a man possessed.

I just thought I'd share the up to date reality of it...assuming job path service standardised across centres.

Isn't that what you are supposed to be doing anyway? Your unemployed, exactly what in your bosy schedule is preventing you from applying for jobs every single day?

Away With The Fairies

Sleeper12 wrote: »

Can you post the guidelines that states that she doesn't have to make long commutes?

It's not uncommon in Dublin for a family to leave at 7am, children dropped to creche and not picked up again till 6pm. Sometimes grand parents have to pick them up at 6pm because mammy & daddy have another hours drive.

Some people don't have the help of grand parents.

Markcheese

Markcheese wrote: »

On that ,is there a distance that's considered reasonable to ask / demand a job applicant to commute , is an hour through traffic to Galway reasonable ? How about 3 hours to Dublin ?
Or a quick flight to London ?

My family lives in Spain. I work in Dublin.

I commute weekly. It's the decision we made as a family having engaged in grown up talk.

Perhaps I should just quit and go on the dole and just stay in Spain until they call me for interview?

Sleeper12

Salary Negotiator wrote:

That he and his family should continue to get handouts because they value quality of life more than others.

It's shocking. We've rared a generation of "I'm entitled" people not willing to earn their own way in life. Social welfare is a brilliant idea to get you through the tough times in life but it makes me ill to see some let other hard working parents, willing to get up early and provide for their own children, provide for their children when they aren't prepared to put any effort in themselves.

We are slowly turning into a nation of self entitled, lazy people. People give out about emmigrants. At least they are thankful & very hard working for the most part