Can they do this?


R

Robert

I'm not long unemployed after working with an agency for a while, so am
claiming job seekers allowance. My agency got me two short shifts totalling
12 hours last week. I'd heard that as long as any hours worked were under 16
a week, it wouldn't affect my benefits. But today when signing on, I told
them about working these shifts, and was told that the amount of my pay for
these shifts (just over £70) less £5 would be deducted from my next benefit.
Is this correct, can they actually do this? This means all I got extra for
taking on the two shifts is equivalent to just £5. In fact it wouldn't
matter how much you get paid, if this is right, they'll deduct the whole lot
(less £5) off your next benefit. I'm actually worse off by doing these
shifts, as it cost me a lot more than the £5 in petrol to get there and
back! So if this is right, no one would benefit by taking on any work under
16 hours a week, 'cos all you'll get is a fiver, so what would be the point?
(16 hours or more means they'll sign you off benefits altogether, you're
classed as working). To be on job seekers allowance means you're to be
available for, and actively seeking work. So on my two day of employment I
wasn't. But I WAS on the other three days that week. So surly I should get
my allowance for those days? The benefit works out at around £14 per day, so
wouldn't it be fairer if all I lost is £28? Not the £67 that they intend to
take. I thought the government wants people to work? If this is correct
there's no incentive to take on any work under 16 hours, after your
travelling costs, you'll be WORSE OFF.
 
Ad

Advertisements

I

Iain

Robert said:
I'm not long unemployed after working with an agency for a while, so
am claiming job seekers allowance. My agency got me two short shifts
totalling 12 hours last week. I'd heard that as long as any hours
worked were under 16 a week, it wouldn't affect my benefits. But
today when signing on, I told them about working these shifts, and
was told that the amount of my pay for these shifts (just over £70)
less £5 would be deducted from my next benefit. Is this correct, can
they actually do this? This means all I got extra for taking on the
two shifts is equivalent to just £5. In fact it wouldn't matter how
much you get paid, if this is right, they'll deduct the whole lot
(less £5) off your next benefit. I'm actually worse off by doing
these shifts, as it cost me a lot more than the £5 in petrol to get
there and back! So if this is right, no one would benefit by taking
on any work under 16 hours a week, 'cos all you'll get is a fiver, so
what would be the point? (16 hours or more means they'll sign you off
benefits altogether, you're classed as working). To be on job seekers
allowance means you're to be available for, and actively seeking
work. So on my two day of employment I wasn't. But I WAS on the other
three days that week. So surly I should get my allowance for those
days? The benefit works out at around £14 per day, so wouldn't it be
fairer if all I lost is £28? Not the £67 that they intend to take. I
thought the government wants people to work? If this is correct
there's no incentive to take on any work under 16 hours, after your
travelling costs, you'll be WORSE OFF.
What you could also do is ask the Jobcentre to calculate whether it is worth
your while doing a particular job. They should give you the means to do
this.

I have found this also - things are made difficult when you start declaring
part time work. The system is not geared well towards people who do declare
their part-time work.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top