SW payments for commuions-WHY

Gyalist

Chucky the tree wrote: »

What other exceptional needs grants are there? Citizens.ie website doesn't give much




Does the confirmation count aswell? What about when you get your school graduation, debs night or college graduation?

I've heard of the CWO making payments for First Communion, Confirmation, and for Debs in one instance.

The Debs incident was outrageous in my opinion. It concerned two girls who dropped out of school just after Junior Cert because they were pregnant. However, they wanted to go to the Debs with their former schoolmates and they each received a payment towards their expenses. One of the girls boyfriend was granted temporary release from youth detention (he was convicted for his involvement in the violent robbery of a shop) to escort her to the Debs and he too got a payment from the CWO towards the cost of his outfit.

Arnold Layne

Ms. Pingui wrote: »

Arnold Layne wrote: »

I do not have a low opinion of people on Social Wellfare as most do not avail of these "exception payments" from our taxes. Nor is my opinion based on those who, through no fault of their own, have fallen on hard times.

I do, however, have a very low opinion of the 3.9 - 4.9% of those on Social Welfare that are long term recipients and have never paid any taxes to the state. I refer to the percentage range above as this is the percentage that did not work or seek to work when Ireland was in full employment.These are the people who have always worked in the "black economy" but feel that their earned money is for themselves to piss down the drain while the state must look after their children. I have had numerous dealings with this ilk over the past decade and have absolutely no regard for them.


I do not see why my taxes have to pay for these families while they have contributed nothing to society.

Take off your rose tinted glasses and look at the real world.

I have no regard for people like that either, but you said yourself it's only 3.9- 4.9% so
thats the minority. I don't think that nobody should be helped just because there is a small number of people that will abuse it.

The percentage I quoted relates to the amount of the workforce that did not work by choice, not the percentage on SW. Taking into account single dole heads, you would still have around 20000 families; hardly a minority

Arnold Layne

ejmaztec wrote: »

bluewolf wrote: »

grand
they can pay for it themselves so

The competitive parents do pay for it themselves, because they're the ones with the big wads.:P

Especially when the state is giving them the cash

LighterGuy

Jaysus! :eek:
Man, the amount of threads about the social welfare and what not is unreal.

Mike 1972

Seachmall wrote: »

There's a radical new concept going around with regards various issues in schools, the government and the Public Sector in general, it's called "addressing the issue".

If children are being bullied because of their clothes we should "address the issue", not throw money at it and hope it goes away.

I like your ideas but I cant see them catching on -In Ireland the notion of assigning responsibility for a problem to those who actually cause it is regarded as positively unconstitutional.

Gyalist wrote: »

I've heard of.

[citation needed]

Gyalist

Mike 1972 wrote: »

[citation needed]

Choose to believe it or not. This is not hearsay - I know the people involved.
I was a volunteer literacy tutor in the community at the time and it was told directly to me by some of the people involved.

3rdDegree

KTRIC wrote: »

Rabies wrote: »

The church should pay

Do you really want your 8 year old making his/her communion in a swim suit ??

I'm sure the priest would.

gurramok

Mike 1972 wrote: »

(Niether should uniforms but thats another matter entirely)

Jesus man, have you not seen the light? :P

If we have no uniforms in school, the bleein kids will be competing against each other for the latest River Island fashion kindly donated from our taxes :mad:

Hotblack Desiato

Gyalist wrote: »

I've heard of the CWO making payments for First Communion, Confirmation, and for Debs in one instance.

The Debs incident was outrageous in my opinion. It concerned two girls who dropped out of school just after Junior Cert because they were pregnant. However, they wanted to go to the Debs with their former schoolmates and they each received a payment towards their expenses. One of the girls boyfriend was granted temporary release from youth detention (he was convicted for his involvement in the violent robbery of a shop) to escort her to the Debs and he too got a payment from the CWO towards the cost of his outfit.

This country is doooomed. Not only do they live among us, they outbreed us..

Greentopia

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

It's turned into a grotesque fashion parade in recent years...

A friend of mine told me an amusing story about a first holy communion she attended at a church down in Tipp. a few years ago mid-Celtic Tiger lunacy-

The ceremony proceeded as per usual until the time came for the little girls to line up to receive the host. One of them must've had fibre-optic lights attached to the head-dress by the proud Daddy, because at the annointed time just as one little Britney got the wafer on her tongue...well didn't the whole feckin thing light up like a Christmas tree! :eek:

Because nothing speaks of the gravitas of receiving the body of christ like fairy lights :pac:

micropig

Greentopia wrote: »

A friend of mine told me an amusing story about a first holy communion she attended at a church down in Tipp. a few years ago mid-Celtic Tiger lunacy-

The ceremony proceeded as per usual until the time came for the little girls to line up to receive the host. One of them must've had fibre-optic lights attached to the head-dress by the proud Daddy, because at the annointed time just as one little Britney got the wafer on her tongue...well didn't the whole feckin thing light up like a Christmas tree! :eek:

Because nothing speaks of the gravitas of receiving the body of christ like fairy lights :pac:

I've seen a little one turn up in a playboy decorated limo:D

Freddie59

Greentopia wrote: »

A friend of mine told me an amusing story about a first holy communion she attended at a church down in Tipp. a few years ago mid-Celtic Tiger lunacy-

The ceremony proceeded as per usual until the time came for the little girls to line up to receive the host. One of them must've had fibre-optic lights attached to the head-dress by the proud Daddy, because at the annointed time just as one little Britney got the wafer on her tongue...well didn't the whole feckin thing light up like a Christmas tree! :eek:

Because nothing speaks of the gravitas of receiving the body of christ like fairy lights :pac:

Creamers.

Mod note, user banned. AH charter: "Zero tolerance will be shown to posts containing racism or discrimination. This includes the travelling community."

Greentopia

micropig wrote: »

I've seen a little one turn up in a playboy decorated limo:D

Dead classy :cool:

Freddie59

micropig wrote: »

I've seen a little one turn up in a playboy decorated limo:D

Sweet Jesus. (No pun intended).

Greentopia

Freddie59 wrote: »

Creamers.

Reckon so.

LighterGuy

and whats wrong with people collecting this payment!? :rolleyes:
Geez, its only a few hundred euro.

you're all a bunch of begrdugers!!!!!!

K-9

TheZohan wrote: »

It should be mandatory for kids to make their communion and confirmation in school uniform.

That would be the school actively getting involved in the ceremony though, they do anyway by devoting teaching time to it, but that's a step away from secularism, when we should be stepping towards it.

AH answer, that would be an ecumenical matter.

ProudDUB

ejmaztec wrote: »

My kids made their communion in England, and there was hardly any expense at all (certainly no need for a handout). I couldn't believe it when I arrived here, to see how much money was being thrown at it by competitive parents, kids dressed to the nines, and then their being dragged around the neighbours' and the relatives' houses for a cash donation.

Yep. It is way over the top here, and for all the wrong reasons. My sisters two girls go to a private school the US. They have a very strict policy regarding FC outfits, especially for the girls. A few months before the big day, letters go out to the parents (that they have to sign and send back saying that that they agree to it) reminding them of the policy. Another letter goes out just before the big day reminding parents of the policy.

Basically, girls are allowed wear a white dress, a plain white cardigan, plain white shoes or sandals. They may put a white ribbon or slide in their hair, but anything fancy such as veils, head dresses, coronets, hair extensions are banned. All jewelry is banned except for the medal. All accessories such as handbags, the lacy parasol, the white coat, the special prayer book, hymnal etc etc are banned. I've met the principal of the school. There are teachers posted at the door of the church, and anyone who tries to sneak something flashy in has it gently taken away from them, just as non uniform items are during the school day. Any parent stupid enough to do the limo crap would be sent away with one hell of a flea in their ear. They do this to focus the kids attention on the reason for the ceremony, not getting tarted up for it, or their parents need to show off to each other.

It works a treat and my sister has a much easier time of it (as do the other parents) both from a financial point of view as well as organizational one. There is a public elementary school near her that has a large Hispanic community. The FC get ups on some of the kids there would blow you away, which is a shame as the parents there can afford can least afford it. It all may seem a tad over the top and controlling, but a lot of the kids at my nieces school are from poorer backgrounds, and are there on a parish scholarship. I bet you don't hear them complaining !

micropig

Freddie59 wrote: »

Sweet Jesus. (No pun intended).

Same communion little girl in

http://www.wanadoo.co.uk/images/editorial/generalarticle/entertainment/Celebs/Gossip/jordan_wedding_carriage_se05_re_170.jpg


I won't name places buy a town in louth where Fionn mac Cumhaill caught the Salmon of Knowledge

billybudd

I would rather that money went to the children who really need it, the ones placed in the care of the HSE rather than to parent/s who spend €30 euro on a dress and the rest in tesco alcohol section for ''party'' afterwards.

micropig

LighterGuy wrote: »

and whats wrong with people collecting this payment!? :rolleyes:
Geez, its only a few hundred euro.

you're all a bunch of begrdugers!!!!!!

Don't mind them they're bitter!!!!!!:D:D:D:D:

phasers

Ive heard of a couple of local schools trying to bring in policies that all kids wear plain robes that they rent from the school/church for a few quid, but there was uproar amongst parents. Little Rihanna has to have her horrible tacky gown or they won't be able to show off to the neighbours :rolleyes:

Helix

ejmaztec wrote: »

It doesn't seem to sinking in does it?

I'm talking about this from the child's point of view, as I've already explained. As far as the child is concerned, it's essential to him or her, largely to do with how big a thing is made of the day by the school, the church and the parents.

I don't think it's essential, you don't think it's essential, but a child in his or her small world would worry themselves into a frenzy if they thought that they looked like the odd one out.

As I've said several times in this thread, it's the fault of competitive parents, clothing shop-keepers and anyone else trying to milk the occasion for every penny they can get.

it is sinking in, but its a nonsense point

do parents get money to buy little johnny an xbox? do they fcuk

why should they get money from the taxpayer to dress them up for their communion?

answer: they shouldnt

SerialComplaint

Greentopia wrote: »

A friend of mine told me an amusing story about a first holy communion she attended at a church down in Tipp. a few years ago mid-Celtic Tiger lunacy-

The ceremony proceeded as per usual until the time came for the little girls to line up to receive the host. One of them must've had fibre-optic lights attached to the head-dress by the proud Daddy, because at the annointed time just as one little Britney got the wafer on her tongue...well didn't the whole feckin thing light up like a Christmas tree! :eek:

Because nothing speaks of the gravitas of receiving the body of christ like fairy lights :pac:

And you believed your friend?:eek:

Julie London

Compulsary sick days for public servants- WHY?

The social welfare bill here, is not the reason we are in this state. Greed and corruption is.

And i speak comfortably from having never been on the dole. Me and my husband both work, always have. But do i begrudge my taxes footing a communion outfit or 11 compulsary sick days per year for public servants?
Children whoes parents are on social welfare should not suffer whether the parents are genuine or not.

SerialComplaint

Julie London wrote: »

Compulsary sick days for public servants- WHY?

And you believed the Sunday Independent? :eek:

Julie London

My sister in law is a nurse. she gets 11 compulsary sick days. even she thinks its mental

ejmaztec

Helix wrote: »

it is sinking in, but its a nonsense point

do parents get money to buy little johnny an xbox? do they fcuk

why should they get money from the taxpayer to dress them up for their communion?

answer: they shouldnt

I didn't actually say that they should, so your reply seems nonsensical in the circumstances.

Mountainsandh

Bannasidhe wrote: »

My nieces made their communions in Switzerland - in the hyper Catholic canton of Valais - but the rule there is school uniform covered with a plain white robe - rather like the ones gospel choirs wear or academic robes. No meringue dresses, no fake tans, no trashy bling.
All the kids wear the exact same and the school organises it.

I see no reason the same couldn't be done here...

Same in France, you can wear the robe, they give you a loan of it if you want, or for people who like to be a bit more modern, you can wear white, that is, any white clothing you like. Like the little girl in this pic, I didn't like dresses so I chose to wear a white shirt and trousers. (am French)
My little girl will be doing her first communion in a few years, and doesn't like dresses. I couldn't give a toss (and she doesn't really so far, she's in her own little world) about what others think, and if she prefers to be different, like the little girl in the Ikea ad (what a brilliant ad !) then so be it, she'll get to wear whatever she likes, in the reasonable price range.
No wonder our small shops in towns are charging 250 euros a dress, when they know all along that there's an allowance to back that up.

I didn't know about that payment, and am shocked tbh. Like has been said countless times above, it's that and other silly allowances that should be cut, not the numbers of SNAs in schools.

SerialComplaint

Julie London wrote: »

My sister in law is a nurse. she gets 11 compulsary sick days. even she thinks its mental

Somebody is not being truthful here. There is no compulsory sick leave in any public sector body.

If you identify what hospital or what sector she works in, I'll get a copy of the contract/terms and conditions to prove that this is not true.

Julie London

SerialComplaint wrote: »

Somebody is not being truthful here. There is no compulsory sick leave in any public sector body.

If you identify what hospital or what sector she works in, I'll get a copy of the contract/terms and conditions to prove that this is not true.

No im not going to identify the hospiatl. she is a phychiatric nurse in the south. and put it this way staff ring in and say they wont be in and to take a compulsary day. If you dont believe it thats your business. But im no liar and neither is she.

SerialComplaint

Julie London wrote: »

put it this way staff ring in and say they wont be in and to take a compulsary day.

Now I'm confused. What is your definition of 'compulsory'?

The general definition would be something that is required, mandatory, obligatory. Something the person has no choice in.

When you say 'compulsory sick leave', most people would interpret this as meaning that she HAS to take 11 sick days each year. Is this what you're saying?

I Heart Internet

FYI - The church's statement on the matter

http://www.catholicbishops.ie/2012/02/02/cco-statement-faith-significance-sacraments/

Seachmall

Julie London wrote: »

No im not going to identify the hospiatl. she is a phychiatric nurse in the south. and put it this way staff ring in and say they wont be in and to take a compulsary day. If you dont believe it thats your business. But im no liar and neither is she.

As far as I'm aware you're given sick days that don't carry over if you don't take them, which I believe is pretty standard through out.

If people consider them compulsory then that's a whole other issue that needs to be dealt with.

Greentopia

SerialComplaint wrote: »

And you believed your friend?:eek:

As she isn't someone given to telling porkies and I didn't rule it out as being that unlikely (given the fact that such tackiness and bling as stretch limos, dresses bought from New York and London, 7 year olds getting fake tans and manicures are part of the occassion for some )... yes. Yes I did.

Why, know my friend well and can refute her story?

Monife

Julie London wrote: »

Compulsary sick days for public servants- WHY?

The social welfare bill here, is not the reason we are in this state. Greed and corruption is.

And i speak comfortably from having never been on the dole. Me and my husband both work, always have. But do i begrudge my taxes footing a communion outfit or 11 compulsary sick days per year for public servants?
Children whoes parents are on social welfare should not suffer whether the parents are genuine or not.

Are you stupid? There is no such thing as compulsory sick days in the working world.

kelle

Julie London wrote: »

Compulsary sick days for public servants- WHY?

The social welfare bill here, is not the reason we are in this state. Greed and corruption is.

And i speak comfortably from having never been on the dole. Me and my husband both work, always have. But do i begrudge my taxes footing a communion outfit or 11 compulsary sick days per year for public servants?
Children whoes parents are on social welfare should not suffer whether the parents are genuine or not.

I've worked for the public service (frontline) since 1993 and I've never heard this nonsense!

SerialComplaint wrote: »

Somebody is not being truthful here. There is no compulsory sick leave in any public sector body.

If you identify what hospital or what sector she works in, I'll get a copy of the contract/terms and conditions to prove that this is not true.

True, I'd love to know where this is supposed to be happening!

mossyc123

Monife wrote: »

Are you stupid? There is no such thing as compulsory sick days in the working world.

Everyone knows that nurses have sick days that they are expected to take.

No sick note required, just a phone call.

Not compulsory but then again neither is annual leave!

They are de facto holidays.

Seachmall

mossyc123 wrote: »

Everyone knows that nurses have sick days that they are expected to take.

No sick note required, just a phone call.

Not compulsory but then again neither is annual leave!

They are de facto holidays.

Sick days aren't "de facto holidays".

If you want time off you take your annual leave, if you're sick you take sick days.

You're only expected to take sick days if you are sick, they're not there to extend your annual leave...

Scram

lazygal wrote: »

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/struggling-families-communion-payment-slashed-182303.html

wtf is this nonsense? Payment for families for commions? Why should the taxpayer pay for this kind of non-essential spending?

I didnt know there was a payment like this, in fact i read the article i seen twice for fear it was a mistake.

Bloody church should pay for it.

Temptamperu

Seachmall wrote: »

Sick days aren't "de facto holidays".

If you want time off you take your annual leave, if you're sick you take sick days.

You're only expected to take sick days if you are sick, they're not there to extend your annual leave...

thats not how teachers see it.

I know of a teacher who timed her pregnancy to fall at the start of september so she would get the 2 months of then another 3 months tacked on for baby minding. And shes not the only cute whore who treats the holiday/sick/maternity like this so I can imagine it across the bored.

LordSutch

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

It's turned into a grotesque fashion parade in recent years as well as an excuse to throw a party. The sacrament itself is wasted on the children anyway as they're too young to properly comprehend its meaning.

In my view nobody should receive any of the sacraments until they're of an age to make an informed and conscious decision to either join the Church or decline to do so.

Agreed^ Communion at fourteen years of age or older would be much better, as per Anglican teaching, seven is far too young, and I guess the little kids have no idea what's really happening, apart from all the dressing up, presents, sweets cakes etc etc . . .

SerialComplaint

Temptamperu wrote: »

thats not how teachers see it.

I know of a teacher who timed her pregnancy to fall at the start of september so she would get the 2 months of then another 3 months tacked on for baby minding. And shes not the only cute whore who treats the holiday/sick/maternity like this so I can imagine it across the bored.

Maternity leave is not sick leave.

mossyc123 wrote: »

Everyone knows that nurses have sick days that they are expected to take.

No sick note required, just a phone call.

Not compulsory but then again neither is annual leave!

They are de facto holidays.

Ah the old 'everybody knows' argument. I guess that is much more effective than having to produce any actual evidence or facts. So let's review the facts.

1) There is no compulsory sick leave in the working world
2) There is limited uncertified sick leave in many organisations - both public and private. In the public sector, the usual limits are;
- no more than two consecutive days uncertified
- no Friday/Monday uncertified
- more than four uncertified in any 12 month period generates a warning
- seven uncertified days means that the privilege of uncertified sick leave is withdrawn, and all sick leave has to be certified.

All standard, sensible management procedures to find the right balance between avoiding abuse of leave and having sick people dragging themselves into the office (or worse, into the hospital) and infecting all around them.

Geuze

For information:


These payments come under the heading of Exceptional Needs Payments, part of Supplementary Welfare Allowance (SWA):

http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Schemes/Sup...s/default.aspx

Expenditure is as follows:

SWA = 951m

of which Exceptional Needs Payments = 70m

http://www.welfare.ie/EN/Policy/Rese.../2010stats.pdf


Back to school clothing and footwear = 77m

Geuze

More info:

Some more details on Exceptional Needs Payments:

Housing = 27m, esp new furniture and rent deposits

Clothing = 14.5m

Prams / buggies / cots = 2.1m

opinion guy

Temptamperu wrote: »

thats not how teachers see it.

I know of a teacher who timed her pregnancy to fall at the start of september so she would get the 2 months of then another 3 months tacked on for baby minding. And shes not the only cute whore who treats the holiday/sick/maternity like this so I can imagine it across the bored.

a) maternity leave is not sick leave
b) whats the problem here ? its 2012. Women are entitled to chose when they will and when they won't have babies. Get over it.
c) the only reason men don't time with their partners for this stuff is because the law only gives them 3 days paternity leave - something that needs to change ASAP

Geuze

Note that these payments are really nothing to do with the Church.

The church is focussed on the sacrament, not the clothes.

It's the parents who are focussed on the clothes.


They are a political response to low-income households, and a political desire to make transfers to some families, who are deemed by some criteria to be in need.

I Heart Internet

Scram wrote: »

Bloody church should pay for it.

Why?

micropig

Next time I see a communion going on, I'm going to give any children, with their normal everyday clothes on €50, as they're the only one who are thinking about the true meaning of the ceremony

Seachmall

Geuze wrote: »

They are a political response to low-income households, and a political desire to make transfers to some families, who are deemed by some criteria to be in need.

Which does not in anyway justify providing them money for non-essential clothes.

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Why?

If the parents feel it's essential they should be turning to the church for the costs as it is church business.

However I don't think the church should pay either, the parents should.