Should there be an end period for the Dole?

SeaFields

My father, who is in his late 50's, was recently laid off. He has been working since he was 15, having completed an apprenticeship after "the intercert". He has been working for over 40 years in the pharmaceutical industry.

Does he deserve to have his dole taken off him if he cant get employment in the next few years? I don't believe so. By the time this economy is on the way up he will be in his early 60's. No company is going to give him the time of day.

This debate on the dole is too late. It should have went on back during the boom, when many people availing of the social welfare system, had no intention of ever working. Now that the celtic tiger party is over and many people are out of work due to the recession rather than by choice, lumping the employed into one large group and labeling them as wasters, scroungers is unproductive.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

syklops wrote: »

So basically you support benefit fraud and think there is nothing wrong with it?

Absolutely rediculous stupid straw man argument.

By your logic you support terrorism, organised crime and corruption... :eek:

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Weathercheck wrote: »

Depends on the situation.

Some people just can't get jobs.

Problem with the dole is that it is just too high.

It should just cover basic costs for fuel, eating, transport etc.

Dole should be around 100/120 euro p/week

Also increases incentives for people to get minimum paying jobs.

What needs to clamped down is the young scummers sucking the country dry.

Getting there 200 quid a week, living in there parents house heading to the pub, bookies most days spending 50euro a week on spliff and complaining about their lifes. Need to be given a kick up the arse.

Also pains me to think that some good lad could struggle through a partly full-time job, get his 300 a week and see this lazy f'er doing nothing.

Could you live off 100 a week? Highly doubtful, so why would you expect everyone else to?

stupidusername

DarkJager wrote: »

You are forgetting that a lot of people who are now unemployed are in the age of 50+. Ageism is still alive and well in most employers (I have seen proof of this myself), so the truth is many of these people may never work again. So lets say a person of 56~ loses his job and signs on the dole. He applies for numerous vacancies but just gets PFO letters back. In your theory, his dole is cut off after 3 years despite his lack of employment being caused by bad business ethics.This makes him 59 years old, 6 years away from his pension and without a single source of income. Do you see how flawed and badly thought out your idea is?

Firstly - it wasn't my idea. I didn't create this thread.
Secondly - Instead of just attacking me, maybe attack the other 99 people that voted Yes here.
Thirdly - When implementing a system such as this you can't take every individual case (and possible case) into account. All you can do is work it so it's fair for as many people as possible. Letting anyone claim the dole for an unlimited amount of time is not fair on anyone, especially the tax payers. Everyone on the dole could have a sob story but then where does it stop? Money has to be saved somewhere and this is a fair way to start.

Executive Steve wrote: »

The chap is probably 19 years old and posting it from his parent's house.

Is that meant to refer to me? If so it wasn't very clear at all. But then I suppose that's the way cowards deal with things. I'm a 26 year old woman, who has supported herself since leaving school, working all through college, and paying for everything myself. If you look at my original post in this thread, you'll see, I'm unemployed myself, so I'm not one of these people saying it because it'll only apply to everyone else.

Greyfox wrote: »

A bit of time?? 5 f**king years?? how the f**k is that a "bit of time"??? No wonder our country is gone to sh** when some people think this. OUR COUNTRY CANNOT AFFORD to pay someone to sit at home for 5 years scratching their ar**! It's simply not fair on all the poor sods with a morgage and kids that after spending at least 50 hours a week working and traveling to and from work they still cannot afford a decent social life, but sure nodody cares about hard working people earning well below the average wage.

Exactly. Nevermind the sad story that goes behind it, the state and it's people cannot be expected to support everyone indefinitely. It just plain and simply isn't financially viable.

admiralofthefleet wrote: »

i know a fella that has been on the dole since 1983, if he was cut off he would be on the streets because he wouldnt know how to live without it

:eek: Are you saying this in favour of this idea then or against it? Being allowed be on the dole for 27 years is precisely what's wrong with the system the way it is.

We need limits so people don't get the idea into their heads that the dole is meant to support them, their wife, their 4 children and their two dogs.

philologos

I would say no to an end time, but yes to making it compulsory to do either community service work, or to work for a charity during that time as a prerequisite to receiving dole payments.

I say this for a number of reasons:
1) If one is receiving money from the State one should be contributing something to the State in return.
2) Charities, often don't have enough resources to do the work they would like to do.
3) The work could count as considerable experience for the job applications process in order to get people back to work.
4) It would deter fraud to a certain degree. It wouldn't make the dole look like a cushy alternative to work, but actually something that would require work itself.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

doncarlos wrote: »

If you've applied for 300 jobs and not got an interview there must be something seriously wrong with either your CV or the jobs that you are aiming for

Wrong



Don't listen to crap like this, the poster has no idea what he/she is talking about.

Sheeps

They shouldn't cut people off, but they should make compulsory paid military service or something for people who have been on it for long periods of time with out getting a successful job. The military would sort out the wasters, and for the legitimate dole subscribers it would offer them a chance to retrain and possibly qualify themselves for a job in a different field after the military service.

murraymarmalade

mise_me_fein1 wrote: »

A lot of people complain about this and that these days but you'll find some people complaining that actually never worked.

I think now that we're having so many problems with finance in Ireland that we should have a cut off point for the dole. I mean if someone can't get a job after 5 years...why should they deserve anything. They're not contributing.

People that stay on the dole for life generally tend to be given a free house, while also receiving other benefits. I think this has to change to benefit our country's mentality. The "fair play to them if they can get away with it" has to end.

grand job,im with you on this.lets start at the top though,taking all tds 2nd jobs off them,limiting the amount of expenses they get etc etc and on it goes.
lets start taxing everyone who wants to hold an irish passport,now that might not be a bad idea either.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Sheeps wrote: »

They shouldn't cut people off, but they should make compulsory paid military service or something for people who have been on it for long periods of time with out getting a successful job. The military would sort out the wasters, and for the legitimate dole subscribers it would offer them a chance to retrain and possibly qualify themselves for a job in a different field after the military service.

Haha, good one, since most of the wasters are in the army in the first place

PirateGirl

i've been working since i was 11,every weekend till i could take up fulltime work, and im 26now and only now have i resorted to the dole- i work and get half dole cos my hours were ravaged...thank god for the dole thats all i can say!!! couldnt rely on it for 5years tho, geez.

philologos

PirateGirl wrote: »

i've been working since i was 11,every weekend till i could take up fulltime work, and im 26now and only now have i resorted to the dole- i work and get half dole cos my hours were ravaged...thank god for the dole thats all i can say!!! couldnt rely on it for 5years tho, geez.

Is that legal?

Overflow

I think a lesson could be learned from Norway. If you lose your Job you get unemployment benefit for 18 months after which time, if you have not found yourself a job, the norwegian equivalent of FAS will require you to take any job they offer you, which can be in any part of the country, doing anything from working in a shop to sweeping the streets. If you refuse to take it, your benefits are cut off.

If you are not educated, thus finding it hard to get a job, the government will pay for your education and place you in a suitable job, but this is rare as the norwegian education system is centered around giving every student a vocation, whether it be a mechanic, nurse assistant or what ever. So if they decide not to take their education to university level they are still employable straight out of school.

Of course its not perfect, you still get people who cheat the system, but its nowhere near the level it is in Ireland.

Sephiroth_dude

Overflow wrote: »

I think a lesson could be learned from Norway. If you lose your Job you get unemployment benefit for 18 months after which time, if you have not found yourself a job, the norwegian equivalent of FAS will require you to take any job they offer you, which can be in any part of the country, doing anything from working in a shop to sweeping the streets. If you refuse to take it, your benefits are cut off.

If you are not educated, thus finding it hard to get a job, the government will pay for your education and place you in a suitable job, but this is rare as the norwegian education system is centered around giving every student a vocation, whether it be a mechanic, nurse assistant or what ever. So if they decide not to take their education to university level they are still employable straight out of school.

Of course its not perfect, you still get people who cheat the system, but its nowhere near the level it is in Ireland.

Sounds like an interesting system.

naughto

syklops wrote: »

A complete over haul of the social system is whats needed. Ill give you an example. My gf got laid off last march. She has a masters degree and computer systems, and has always wanted to be a sys admin, but during the boom years all she could ever get was support jobs. She got laid off and went on the dole. Now that she had extra time on her hands she decided to try and get some experience, so she went to a couple of IT companies and asked could she intern as a junior sys admin. She said she would do any and all work that she was aked to do, including going for coffee for people if asked. In return she would get hands on experience with servers and learn some of the skills a sys admin has, at the end of which she could get a reference and it would be some relevant experience. Alot of the companies she spoke to were very keen on the idea and would give time off for her for interviews and the like, but the social welfare said she couldnt do it because to get Job seekers you have to be available for work at all times. If she wanted to continue getting the dole, she had to bin her intern idea and basically stay at home.

So the system doesnt reward people trying to better themselves. Instead it closes doors for them.

Thats what really irked me about bill cullens comment on prime time when he said people should go out and get experiences etc. while on the dole. It really irked me, because the system does not let you do that.

No there shouldn't be a cut off of the dole, the system needs a complete overhaul, and it needs to work for people not against them. The majority of people on the dole at the moment paid for it in the past and will pay for it again. Benefits fraud is a seperate issue, and therefore should be dealt with differently. Someone on the dole for 10 years unskilled, never contributed to the dole, who says they cant get any work should be given work to do, and if they dont do it, then their dole should be cut.

has your gf tried wpp1 throught fas iam not in favour of this as you will be working for nothing.
http://www.fas.ie/en/job+seeker/wpp/default.htm

Sapsorrow

Darlughda wrote: »

mise_me_fein1 wrote: »

Let's hope so.....I mean a complete end I would not want that but we're in a country were it's more convienient not to work than to do anything.

I know lots of people that don't work because it's not worth it.....they're quite content as it is...QUOTE]

Mise mé féin (Me Myself) Your username sums you up.

Go educate yourself. Better still apply for over 300 jobs over 5 years and not a chance of an interview, yet still keep going.

Find out what life is really like for the majority of people who are long term unemployed and absolutely ****ing hate it every day of their waking lives and would do anything to be in a job.

Do not lie. You do not know lots of people who are content they are ****ing accepting their situation and how dare you make such ignorant threads and make such assumptions about people who are struggling day to day?

Yep my fella just got work in a factory after 2 years looking for anything, he just worked seven 12 hour shifts in a row with one day off including commuting for 2 hours drive on top of that everyday and hasn't been happier in god knows how long. People don't realise how depressing being on the dole is, having no reason to get up in the morning, no spare cash to buy things you want, not being able to go on holiday cos you have to be available to sign on and more than anything what it does to your self-esteem and sense of worth.

miss_shadow

Maybe I'm wrong here but we're being screwed over by higher up people than people on the dole..

Ostrom

Jakkass wrote: »

I would say no to an end time, but yes to making it compulsory to do either community service work, or to work for a charity during that time as a prerequisite to receiving dole payments.

I say this for a number of reasons:
1) If one is receiving money from the State one should be contributing something to the State in return.

Pay related social insurance, for those whom have contributed, should be treated exactly as such. We aren't taking a handout from the state, we pay over our working lives as a hedge against circumstances beyond our control, as short term insurance. And the guy below talking about miltitary service? Jesus feckin christ its demoralising enough being made feel like scum for reclaiming your contributions, and its not as if 300,000 decided to down tools for fun over the past few years. Every joe on the street is able to disassemble the rudiments of the current crisis and we somehow manage to pin our troubles on welfare recipients?

grenache

What i don't understand is the governments unwillingness to introduce a type of work placement for social welfare recipients. i.e. you work for your dole, instead of sitting around drinking cans of linden village all day.

There should be put in place a work scheme that forces dole scroungers (able bodied persons who've been drawing social welfare all their lives) to perform their civic duty and actually contribute to society for a change - cleaning streets, cutting lawns, removing graffiti, etc.

syklops

naughto wrote: »

has your gf tried wpp1 throught fas iam not in favour of this as you will be working for nothing.
http://www.fas.ie/en/job+seeker/wpp/default.htm

Thanks for that, but in the end she got offered a job in the Czech republic so we moved.

Antonio Warm Limousine wrote:

Absolutely rediculous stupid straw man argument.

By your logic you support terrorism, organised crime and corruption...

A poster put up a story of a guy he met at a party that was happy to live on the dole for good and was happy with his lot. Your response was

Antonio Warm Limousine wrote:

Sure lets change everything because of your one encounter with some random guy who's happy with what he has. Fcuking unbelieveable...

First off, if you are on job seekers benefit or job seekers allowance and you are not looking for a job then that is fraud.

You obviously don't have a problem with him committing fraud. How in your mind that equates to me supporting terrorism and organised crime is beyond me.

Secondly, you and I both know there is not just one random guy who is scrounging off the government there are hundreds if not thousands. That is why things need to be changed. It needs to be improved and it should be easier to get the dole if you have been recently made redundant, it should also be easier to get college education(not half arsed fas courses) if you have been out of work for more than a year. If you have not worked since you came out of school, it should be very difficult to get dole.

Ostrom

grenache wrote: »

What i don't understand is the governments unwillingness to introduce a type of work placement for social welfare recipients. i.e. you work for your dole, instead of sitting around drinking cans of linden village all day.

There should be put in place a work scheme that forces dole scroungers (able bodied persons who've been drawing social welfare all their lives) to perform their civic duty and actually contribute to society for a change - cleaning streets, cutting lawns, removing graffiti, etc.

Because the resources required to vet, monitor and implement such a scheme would render it unworkable, and cost many times more the amount currently absorbed by 'dole scroungers'. This whole debate is pointless until a reliable audit is performed, although James Wickham of the ERC has managed to knock a few estimates from the Migrant Careers and Aspirations data.

For the rest of us, our 'civic duty' has been performed, above and beyond. Our taxes and contributions have been paid.

Sapsorrow

Do people honestly believe that most people on social welfare sit around drinking cans all day? Get a grip ffs most poeple on the dole are normal decent sound people who for one reason or another are down on their luck or whatever. I'm not denying there's lazy bums on it but people shouldn't generalise too much. I wonder how many of our mums and dads had to sign on in the past when things got bad in the 80s where they lindin village drinking bums too?

phill106

PirateGirl wrote:

i've been working since i was 11,every weekend till i could take up fulltime work, and im 26now and only now have i resorted to the dole- i work and get half dole cos my hours were ravaged...thank god for the dole thats all i can say!!! couldnt rely on it for 5years tho, geez.

Jakkass wrote: »

Is that legal?

Yes. If you work for instance only 3 days in a given week, you can claim the dole for the other 3 days. They count the week as being 6 days, so whatver you would be entitled to if you were fully unemployed, would be divided by 6, then multiplied by the number of days worked. Only works if you work 3 or less days a week. Work 4 days one week, and u get nothing that week.
Doing it myself, as only can get p/t work.

dennyire

phill106 wrote: »

Yes. If you work for instance only 3 days in a given week, you can claim the dole for the other 3 days. They count the week as being 6 days, so whatver you would be entitled to if you were fully unemployed, would be divided by 6, then multiplied by the number of days worked. Only works if you work 3 or less days a week. Work 4 days one week, and u get nothing that week.
Doing it myself, as only can get p/t work.

You sure about that?

I work 3 days a week but only get 2 days dole.

I thought also was based on 6 days and queried it but they said no...just entitled to 2 days

danbohan

Bootsy. wrote: »

Has nobody considered that if the dole was cut off after a certain period, it's very likely the crime rate would go through the roof?
People have to get money from somewhere to survive... muggings, burglaries, theft, drug dealing??? It's called 'Social Welfare' for a reason and as a society we're lucky to have it.

the problem is that certain people have been ''getting money to survive'' in this country for generations and never contributing , personally i know a four generation family that never worked

dole should be time limited , food-stamps after 2 years

Sapsorrow

danbohan wrote: »

the problem is that certain people have been ''getting money to survive'' in this country for generations and never contributing , personally i know a four generation family that never worked

dole should be time limited , food-stamps after 2 years

As far as that logic goes though the ones you're referring to are probably the last ones you want to cut off for fear of what they'd start resorting too. Food stamps isn't gonna stop a scumbag robbing houses so he can have a flat screen telly, go drinking or buy a new pair of nike airs in fairness. It's a sacrifice we have to make to protect ourselves from crime. Since the recession loads of houses around me have been burgled (and a pharmacy in the town, a supermarket and dairygold of all places at knife point! this is only in less than a year now) it's almost like scumbags take the recession as an excuse (that incluses the suddent rise is dumping househould waste and rubbish I've seen) so can you imagine how they'd react to only getting food stamps! :eek:

Antar Bolaeisk

efla wrote: »

Because the resources required to vet, monitor and implement such a scheme would render it unworkable, and cost many times more the amount currently absorbed by 'dole scroungers'. This whole debate is pointless until a reliable audit is performed, although James Wickham of the ERC has managed to knock a few estimates from the Migrant Careers and Aspirations data.

For the rest of us, our 'civic duty' has been performed, above and beyond. Our taxes and contributions have been paid.

I wonder would it really absorb that much resources once it's all properly set up. They could at least try it out on a small scale first, offer all those who wish to partake in the scheme a bonus to their weekly dole payment for the duration of the trial and implement the trial where there is going to be the highest number of test candidates.

Also, with regards to vetting people, for the most part they could be doing very unskilled labour, for example how difficult would it be to clean gum off a street. With regards to monitoring there could be a new appointment of some form of overseer at each of the dole offices who's task it is to monitor the work, if it isn't up to a certain standard then there's a reduction in the dole, simple as that.

I certainly think some form of trial should be run to see if a scheme like this could be viable and, if it were ever to get up and running then the potential savings would surely balance if not outweigh the potential costs.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

syklops wrote: »

A poster put up a story of a guy he met at a party that was happy to live on the dole for good and was happy with his lot. Your response was

OP wants to punish everybody because of the faults of a few. Makes sense? No, no it doesn't.

First off, if you are on job seekers benefit or job seekers allowance and you are not looking for a job then that is fraud.

No shít sherlock... Nobody is disbuting that either, are they?

You obviously don't have a problem with him committing fraud. How in your mind that equates to me supporting terrorism and organised crime is beyond me.

I obviously don't have a problem with fraud because why? I didn't join the witch hunt? I didn't give my opinion either way about fraud, you drew up your own conclusions. Well done on making a balls of it.

Obviously you have no problem with people commiting terrorism and organised crime... I am simply applying the same logic you used. It's simple really.

Secondly, you and I both know there is not just one random guy who is scrounging off the government there are hundreds if not thousands.

There sure is, but they equate to a tiny percentage, and you are ok with punishing the other, lets say, 425K people?

That is why things need to be changed. It needs to be improved and it should be easier to get the dole if you have been recently made redundant, it should also be easier to get college education(not half arsed fas courses) if you have been out of work for more than a year. If you have not worked since you came out of school, it should be very difficult to get dole.

Plenty of instances where your ideas are flawed. What if the unemployed just graduated with a level 8? Nobody will pay for their level 9, and they are too qualified to go back to start another course.

Why should somebody who just left school be treated any differently? It is just as difficult for them to get a job than anybody else, they lack the qualifications and experience needed for most jobs out there. They are simply unemployable.

Mister men

Could'nt the government sort out a food voucher programme (Aldi,Lidl,Tesco) for people who are on the dole long term instead of giving them cash. This way they would be encouraged to get a job instead of scronging off the state long term and spending the day in the bookies and pub.

moonpurple

in reply to OP
there is the death certificate

This is properly more a rant than anything else, I started college 2 years ago after spending 6 months on job seekers as a result of my place of employment going under. When I went into the social welfare office to see what I was entitled to I was told by the woman there I was entitled to nothing. So for the past two years I have lived off what little savings I had and help from my parents, though I did discover yesterday that I was in fact entitled to back to education the entire time but that's another story.

Was out in town a few weeks back with one lad who is forever going on about how hard it is to survive in college and when I paid 14 euro for a blu ray he practically flipped, lecturing me on how I was wasting my money while at home his family skimped and saved in order to get by. The same lad has no qualms about spending over a hundred euro a week on weed and heading out drinking every other week, going to gigs, etc.

He and his wife receive the grant, back to education, rent allowance, children's allowance, etc yet is constantly crying poverty. I pointed all this out to him and he flipped out saying the only reason he was on the dole was because 9 years ago he decided his kids deserved a better enviroment to grow up in and as he couldn't afford to buy a house he instead left his job and went on the dole so as to qualify for a council house outside Dublin.

While he has in the past worked he seems to think that it is the states job to ensure the he and his family are taken care while he contributes nothing. It's people like him who give all on the dole a bad name.

PirateGirl

Jakkass wrote: »

Is that legal?

yes silly, its jobseekers allowance,they make up the hours you dont get so you make the same as the dole...

senordingdong

I think we should all quit our jobs and sign on.

I think the dole should be increased ten fold.
Then it should be taxed ten fold.

Infinite money!

Problem?

philologos

PirateGirl wrote: »

yes silly, its jobseekers allowance,they make up the hours you dont get so you make the same as the dole...

How can you be on jobseekers allowance when you already have a job?

Or is it when you earn less than the dole? - Links would make it a lot more convincing. It sounds very dodgy at first read.

stovelid

I've said this before but I think everybody that complains about the amount of dole or the entitlement period should put their money where their mouth is and sign an affidavit saying that no matter how much your circumstances change, you will give half of your dole away to charity and voluntarily sign-off after one year, job or no job.

Then I'll respect such absolutist views.

Oh and the above scenario is based on not living at your ma's too.

omahaid

stovelid wrote: »

I've said this before but I think everybody that complains about the amount of dole or the entitlement period should put their money where their mouth is and sign an affidavit saying that no matter how much your circumstances change, you will give half of your dole away to charity and voluntarily sign-off after one year, job or no job.

Then I'll respect such absolutist views.

I'd sign it if it was 10 years. I think that if I was looking for a job for ten years I would find one or leave the country.

Eircom_Sucks

Australias system is if you lose your job you have 28 days to find a new one or leave the country , that should be applied to all the foreign nationals , sure why go home when some of them earn more on our dole than they would working for 2 weeks in their respective countrys

i personally know a guy of 35 who has never worked a day in his life , nothing physically wrong with him , just a lazy c*unt and drinks cans of beer all day and smokes weed , and i know that sounds great to alot of losers but theres 1000's like him sponging , how do they get it for so long is my question

syklops

Eircom_Sucks wrote: »

Australias system is if you lose your job you have 28 days to find a new one or leave the country , that should be applied to all the foreign nationals , sure why go home when some of them earn more on our dole than they would working for 2 weeks in their respective countrys

i personally know a guy of 35 who has never worked a day in his life , nothing physically wrong with him , just a lazy c*unt and drinks cans of beer all day and smokes weed , and i know that sounds great to alot of losers but theres 1000's like him sponging , how do they get it for so long is my question

So because a guy who is afraid of work sponges off the system, foreign nationals who WERE working should be kicked out of the country? Great logic :rolleyes: