Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
One in nine children brought up in home with no working adult
Options
Comments
-
splinter65 wrote: »Absolutely nothing to stop a OPF claimant from getting a job 20 hours a week and claiming WFP as well as the OPF.
A lone parent can work 20 hours @minimum wage =€200, claim OPF of €221.50 and WFP of €66. That’s income of €487 per week for working 20 hours.
Also OPFP claimants with the youngest child aged < 7 don’t have to be available for work. They do have to engage with SW as regards training and education but all the courses and training are fitted around primary school schedules so it shouldn’t be a problem.
Only there is a couple of problems. For one - the massive availability of 20 hour jobs. ONLY NOT.
And even if by chance, a lone parent can find this miraculous holy grail of a part-time job that fits perfectly around their childrens' school times, and around all the school closures, and the mid term closures, and the 2/3 week christmas break, and the 2 week easter closures, the 8-12 week summer holidays - the fact remains that a one parent family still only has the earning capacity of one income. How many families do you know who could exist on €487 per week, and pay rent (at current rates) and childcare?
Especially as childcare does have to be factored into the cost. A cost that is not an issue when there is one at home with the kids while the other works full time.
You are utterly CLUELESS, here, if you think its that easy for lone parents to work and support their families.
Its laughable - people like you show no surprise when two parent familys say they can't afford for a second parent to go out and work, because of childcare costs and housing costs, yet someone who is doing it without the benefit of a second parent in the home to either do the childcare, or provide a second income, is frowned upon and shamed for not being able to do manage it on their own.
There is a reason why social welfare is described as a poverty trap for one parent families.0 -
As usual, the default response is "cut welfare" which is simplistic and would likely cause more problems than it solves.
The problem for many people on long term welfare (aside from a skills gap that the training services are generally unable to close) is the costs of returning to work.
Welfare is paid weekly whereas most jobs are monthly. That leaves at least a month in most cases where people have to pay for commuting costs, new clothes, lunch and their existing bills in the interim. For someone who has probably no or limited saving ability, that's a tough ask - especially if their net wage may be little more than they're surviving on now.
Additionally, there is the point that some people just will not work and will resort to criminality if their "income" is threatened. Welfare payments to an extent protect the rest of us from that too. That's not to say that abuse of the system should be tolerated, but the reality must be taken into account as well.0 -
Pawwed Rig wrote: »Civil service mileage rates are the maximum allowable before BIK kicks in. I work in a tax practice and they are far in excess of what any of the 500 or so companies I come across pay.
Pensions are phenomenal. Try and price how much a equivalent pension would cost were you to finance it yourself.
Holidays are out of this world when you include flexidays. Bear in mind the statutory minimum is 20 days. Including flexi days I have family members who come out with 40!
It is a mass delusion if you think you are hard done by. And performance management is a joke. You would want to be a complete cabbage to ever lose your job. The only way you could actually do this is to try very hard to be as useless as possible.
I won't even go into the popping back into work to clock out that seems to exist in certain sections.
I am pre-95. Which means my Pension will be the state pension, topped up. At current rates, I will probably get about 50 euro a week more, then someone who has never worked a day in their life and claims a non-con state OAP. Yep, thats my "phenomenal" pension - IF I make it to 40 years service.
Flexi days are not annual leave and are not counted as such. They are days that you make up by working up the extra hours. So its hours worked repaid to you. They are also capped at maximum 1 per flexi period of 4 weeks, so the max anyone can make up in flexi days is 13 per year. And so what if they do? They have to work those days up, in advance, before they can take them.
Annual Leave is also pro-rata - if you workshare you can be getting less then 20 days a year, so saying the minimum is 20 days is misleading.
It is a mass delusion to make out that Civil Servants have it as good as the myths that are passed around on these boards. Indeed, as I said, I've been listening to the same bull**** about how wonderfully cushy the CS has it for 30 odd years now. As I don't travel in my role I have never once had to claim mileage so its also disingenuous to claim that civil servants are coining it in by claiming expenses for this, that and the other - they are not.
I always amazed by those who don't work in the CS who claim to know so much detail about what goes on there, including clock-in/out practices etc. I wish I worked in one of those offices because in all years served, I have yet to see anyone ever "pop back in" to clock out.0 -
As usual, the default response is "cut welfare" which is simplistic and would likely cause more problems than it solves.
The problem for many people on long term welfare (aside from a skills gap that the training services are generally unable to close) is the costs of returning to work.
Welfare is paid weekly whereas most jobs are monthly. That leaves at least a month in most cases where people have to pay for commuting costs, new clothes, lunch and their existing bills in the interim. For someone who has probably no or limited saving ability, that's a tough ask - especially if their net wage may be little more than they're surviving on now.
Additionally, there is the point that some people just will not work and will resort to criminality if their "income" is threatened. Welfare payments to an extent protect the rest of us from that too. That's not to say that abuse of the system should be tolerated, but the reality must be taken into account as well.
Also that the unemployment rate is 4.8%, (and how many are fraudulent?) so I think we've bigger fish to fry.0 -
runawaybishop wrote: »
Sick leave is heavily monitored. Excess days in a year means you fail probation or your increment is stopped. You can be let go for excessive sick leave.
As a matter or interest, how many days sick leave is considered excessive?
.0 -
Advertisement
-
its funny , from reading other threads on this site which espouse taxing inheritance or listening to any RTE programme where the opposition make suggestions as to how to raise more money from the tax payer in order to gather more funding .
everyone is ignoring the elephant in the room and this thread has illustrated it clearly
we have a spending problem in this country , not a tax problem
not one political party or even a single politician is suggesting we consider this glaring fact0 -
Irishphotodesk wrote: »They died and were unable to vote.
Welfare was brought in as a short term measure, if there was a proper root and branch analysis (of civil service pay structures and welfare payments) it would astound many of you.
Personally, I think it's about time a full review of various tax loopholes/dodges and extras our civil servants can claim, then move on to review the social classes and their payment system.
How many people out there believe a politician earning approx €80k a year should also be permitted to claim a new mobile phone every 12/18months, how many politicians should be in receipt of dry cleaning allowances, clothing allowances, not to mention claiming mileage to goto work, the system is a complete farce.
I see many people willing to bash the social class, yet many are ignorant of the many other drains on public finances.
I'm self employed and do not qualify for any benefits, I work 6 days a week and have been doing so for about 15years. My take home is about 37k a year.... I work my a$$ off to put food on the table for my family and yes, it pi$$es me off to hear of the many different types of people using the systems to maximize their personal situation, there are too many people lining their own pockets and too many blind eyes turned within the system.
A single politician earning 80k a week, paying rent on an apartment in Dublin, would be worse off than Margaret Cash. Why start with them?
A take home of 37k a year isn’t far off 70k gross for a public servant, given all the deductions, so you are better off than 90% of public servants, but if there is a group that can milk the system, the best is the self-employed.0 -
Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 22,386 CMod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 21075
Flexi days are not annual leave and are not counted as such. They are days that you make up by working up the extra hours. So its hours worked repaid to you. They are also capped at maximum 1 per flexi period of 4 weeks, so the max anyone can make up in flexi days is 13 per year. And so what if they do?
Annual Leave is also pro-rata - if you workshare you can be getting less then 20 days a year, so saying the minimum is 20 days is misleading.
It is a mass delusion to make out that Civil Servants have it as good as the myths that are passed around on these boards. Indeed, as I said, I've been listening to the same bull**** about how wonderfully cushy the CS has it for 30 odd years now. As I don't travel in my role I have never once had to claim mileage so its also disingenuous to claim that civil servants are coining it in by claiming expenses for this, that and the other - they are not.
Meanwhile in the real world you work up the hours and there is no such thing as flexi days. No overtime on salaries employment either. So a civil servant gets 13 more days off than a similar position outside. When you add in the extra hols you are up to 3 working weeks extra already.
I never said civil servants were coining it on mileage. You asked for an example and I provided one which demonstrated the advantages people in the civil service enjoy as compared to those outside.
Work sharing you mentioned - another benefit not available to many people.
Paid maternity and paternity leave - another benefit not available to many people.
Can you honestly tell me that there is noone in your office/department that is dead weight?0 -
The scary thing is how many of those 1 in 9 kids will go on to perpetuate the womb to tomb hand out to the government to feed them and their many children. They have zero chance in life, they see no work ethic, no reason to get up and go out to work everyday and no value in doing so.
The real elephant here is that a lot of life long dole recipients actually never wanted to work, and never will. Those who try the least benefit the most from our system, and we need to address that and change the system.0 -
Pawwed Rig wrote: »Meanwhile in the real world you work up the hours and there is no such thing as flexi days. No overtime on salaries employment either. So a civil servant gets 13 more days off than a similar position outside. When you add in the extra hols you are up to 3 working weeks extra already.
You usually do get overtime in the private sector in more junior jobs. You don't at managerial levels. Similarly in the public sector more junior levels can get flexible, but management do not.
I've worked in public departments, big 4 consultancy, and international banks. Public sector is not that cushy, new pensions are crap and while there is definitely some deadweight I've seen dead weight in the private sector too. My experience in the public sector is that now its easy enough to manage poor performers out because they can get more money elsewhere.
So why does anyone work in the public sector? Genuinely, you get satisfaction out of thinking you're job might be of some benefit. Especially if coming from huge companies where you are a cog in the wheel and your job will prob be outsourced within a couple of decades. You also tend to get out on time, by and large.
Job security and worklife balance were one of the biggest wins for society in the twentieth century. Now some people scoff at them and see them as anti progressive. Go figure.
Edit - just to add, there are still some private sector firms that offer flexi time and it used to be common. It is "real world", as is public sector. And it's simply time in lieu on a formal basis, I have mates in factories who get time in lieu. You'd be horrified if you saw the standard perks on the continent :-) There's another reason American companies like coming to Ireland, we have taken on their culture to capitalism better than others0 -
Advertisement
-
Pawwed Rig wrote: »Meanwhile in the real world you work up the hours and there is no such thing as flexi days. No overtime on salaries employment either. So a civil servant gets 13 more days off than a similar position outside. When you add in the extra hols you are up to 3 working weeks extra already.
I never said civil servants were coining it on mileage. You asked for an example and I provided one which demonstrated the advantages people in the civil service enjoy as compared to those outside.
Work sharing you mentioned - another benefit not available to many people.
Paid maternity and paternity leave - another benefit not available to many people.
Can you honestly tell me that there is noone in your office/department that is dead weight?
Pawwed Rig, if you have crappy working conditions, then take it up with your own employer or the WRC instead of whining on about the public service.
But you may be surprised that many of the things you perceive as amazing benefits, are not available to all. Things like work-sharing and flexi time are privileges, they are not rights and not all civil servants (or public servants) can avail of them.
Or better yet, if you think the grass is so green on this side of the fence, give up that aul private sector job and get a civil service job yourself, there is loads of recruitment going on at the moment.
I'm done indulging bull**** questions from people who haven't got a realistic clue, and are still buying into all the old myths that were outdated 20 years ago.0 -
I am a secondary school teacher, teaching for many years. In recent years I have become more and more concerned with the increasing number of students who seem to have no interest in gaining an education. Their whole aspiration is a life on the dole as that is the life that they are being brought up in.
It is part of my job to sometimes give extra tuition to students either individually or in a small groups (to those students that are in the bottom 10% of their class group). The majority of the kids are represented by those described above. When speaking to these kids it becomes clear that education is not valued in their households, money does not seem to be an issue, the same students have 55inch tvs in their bedrooms that they are watching till the early hours of the morning. They come into school too tired to function, have behaviour issues and parents do not take any interest.
My thoughts on social welfare is that in a booming economy such as we are apparently in no one under the age of 26 should be handed unemployment benefit (disability benefit yes). These young people need to get a taste of employment to see how good it can actually be both financially and mentally.
I find it so insulting that we are handing unemployment benefit to abled bodied 18-25 year olds while now telling people that have been working 40+ years that they need to work till age 67 to get a state pension.0 -
X111111111111 wrote: »Some people are just unemployable. I've interviewed plenty of them and I wouldn't give them a job in a fit.
You throw your food waste down the toilet but expect us to believe you interview people?0 -
Only there is a couple of problems. For one - the massive availability of 20 hour jobs. ONLY NOT.
And even if by chance, a lone parent can find this miraculous holy grail of a part-time job that fits perfectly around their childrens' school times, and around all the school closures, and the mid term closures, and the 2/3 week christmas break, and the 2 week easter closures, the 8-12 week summer holidays - the fact remains that a one parent family still only has the earning capacity of one income. How many families do you know who could exist on €487 per week, and pay rent (at current rates) and childcare?
Especially as childcare does have to be factored into the cost. A cost that is not an issue when there is one at home with the kids while the other works full time.
You are utterly CLUELESS, here, if you think its that easy for lone parents to work and support their families.
Its laughable - people like you show no surprise when two parent familys say they can't afford for a second parent to go out and work, because of childcare costs and housing costs, yet someone who is doing it without the benefit of a second parent in the home to either do the childcare, or provide a second income, is frowned upon and shamed for not being able to do manage it on their own.
There is a reason why social welfare is described as a poverty trap for one parent families.
Your “clueless” jibe has made me smile. “People like you” too. Such arrogance. You have no idea who I am or what I do. But anyway...
I’ll address your points one at a time.
Childcare.
I never said it was easy to get a 20 hour job that fit around your childcare issues. It’s not easy. That’s why since last November we now have very heavily subsidized childcare.
https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/education/pre_school_education_and_childcare/national_childcare_scheme.html
Rent
If your in social housing/privately renting and getting HAP then your rent is means tested and you’re not paying any more then you can afford. Loads of 2 parent families have no more then €478 and pay their rent and manage. I’ve no clue what point your trying to make.
Once again, when your OPF ends when your youngest child is 7 then you are moved on to jobseekers transition. This doesn’t involve you being available for full time work. It does however mean that you can use the time while your kids are in school to upskill or train or get a 3rd level education with a view to getting a full time job when your youngest is 13 and in school until 4pm.
https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/Jobseekers-Transitional-Payment.aspx
It’s this notion of being expected to retrain/upskill that appears to have annoyed you. Why is that?0 -
80k a week? Where do.i sign up for the next election???A single politician earning 80k a week, paying rent on an apartment in Dublin, would be worse off than Margaret Cash. Why start with them?
A take home of 37k a year isn’t far off 70k gross for a public servant, given all the deductions, so you are better off than 90% of public servants, but if there is a group that can milk the system, the best is the self-employed.0 -
A single politician earning 80k a week, paying rent on an apartment in Dublin, would be worse off than Margaret Cash. Why start with them?
A take home of 37k a year isn’t far off 70k gross for a public servant, given all the deductions, so you are better off than 90% of public servants, but if there is a group that can milk the system, the best is the self-employed.
Have you wrote the above inebriated? What politician is on 80 k a week? I know Dara Murphy FG was pulling the piss but surely not at this level. Secondly 37 k take home from a 70k gross? Come on you can do better than this. Although since you mention the self employed who are willing to provide their own employment and up to recently their own safety net ( sick pay, unemployment benefit etc) your bias as a former CS worker becomes apparent.0 -
splinter65 wrote: »Your “clueless” jibe has made me smile. “People like you” too. Such arrogance. You have no idea who I am or what I do. But anyway...
I’ll address your points one at a time.
Childcare.
I never said it was easy to get a 20 hour job that fit around your childcare issues. It’s not easy. That’s why since last November we now have very heavily subsidized childcare.
https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/education/pre_school_education_and_childcare/national_childcare_scheme.html
Rent
If your in social housing/privately renting and getting HAP then your rent is means tested and you’re not paying any more then you can afford. Loads of 2 parent families have no more then €478 and pay their rent and manage. I’ve no clue what point your trying to make.
Once again, when your OPF ends when your youngest child is 7 then you are moved on to jobseekers transition. This doesn’t involve you being available for full time work. It does however mean that you can use the time while your kids are in school to upskill or train or get a 3rd level education with a view to getting a full time job when your youngest is 13 and in school until 4pm.
https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/Jobseekers-Transitional-Payment.aspx
It’s this notion of being expected to retrain/upskill that appears to have annoyed you. Why is that?
What annoys me is the notion that you think you have all the answers. You don't.
Right, so since NOVEMBER (i.e. one month ago) we have subsidized (not fully paid) childcare, so everything should be all right now and there should be thousands of part time jobs waiting? And training courses? :rolleyes:
Why is it that you are so down on one parent families?
Why are you not equally down on all the two parent families who work the system by opting for one of them to stay at home fulltime, therefore capping their own incomes at a level where they pay less tax, can claim HAP, WFP, and all with the added bonus of all their childcare needs met by the parent at home?
Lone parents don't have that choice.
As an aside, the government at the time had to backtrack and hastily introduced Jobseekers Transition when they realised they ****ed up by originally just cutting lone parents off at the knees when their children were age 7.0 -
“its funny , from reading other threads on this site which espouse taxing inheritance or listening to any RTE programme where the opposition make suggestions as to how to raise more money from the tax payer in order to gather more funding .
everyone is ignoring the elephant in the room and this thread has illustrated it clearly
we have a spending problem in this country , not a tax problem
not one political party or even a single politician is suggesting we consider this glaring fact”
The place is a banana republic! Like you say , there is a serious spending problem. Look at the insane money spent to rent the new apartments as social housing only in Dundrum. Rte a black hole. Fai the same. Just don’t increase funding , the pay and perks will still be obscene, even with whatever Mickey Mouse pay cuts they might get. Initially I was in favor of water charges, I think very differently now. What would we have , the usual suspects paying for it all and “ de vulneable “ I.e fifty percent of the population paying nothing as usual and getting another fiver on top of whatever else they were going to get thrown on top of their welfare? Spare me. In the absence of any sort of a reasonable lpt, I’d actually be up for abolishing it and usc over several budgets. Needless to say this would be paid for by a hopefully growing economy...
There is an attitude here of taxes good , spending good. That’s because most contribute FA to the system. Better having less taxes and less wasteful spending. Having a marginal rate of fifty percent that hits low earners is a scandal. Bend over backwards with obscene welfare, I don’t know why. To keep Margaret cash and co from emigrating ? Lol. At the same time , massive numbers of skilled Irish stay abroad , due to rip off housing and cost of living and marginal tax rate.
Ffg morons and all the rest of them , their priority is keep Margaret cash living the good life. As if that class would ever vote fg. Shows you what spineless rats that are. They’d be doing a lot better support wise now , if they’d actually have looked after the early risers!0 -
Hadn't thought of it like that before
13B increase in expenditure and for what?
Public Transport is still over crowded, it's hadn't fixed health or housing.0 -
Stop children allowance after 3 kids.
Stop this a Christmas bonus bulls**t for people on the dole. 279 million is spent on that alone.
Both of those small changes will push down the spend0 -
Advertisement
-
Shefwedfan wrote: »Stop children allowance after 3 kids.
Stop this a Christmas bonus bulls**t for people on the dole. 279 million is spent on that alone.
Both of those small changes will push down the spend
I'm not sure the over 3 kids is costing us that much.
Would be better to have CA targeted at people who need it.
e.g means test or put it into taxation0 -
I'm not sure the over 3 kids is costing us that much.
Would be better to have CA targeted at people who need it.
e.g means test or put it into taxation
3 is just a number to stop the Margaret cash of Thai world firing out 7 which in turn will fire out another 7.
No idea how you would stop these lovely mammies from firing babies out if you tell them they can’t afford them
They seem to all love children0 -
I am a secondary school teacher, teaching for many years. In recent years I have become more and more concerned with the increasing number of students who seem to have no interest in gaining an education. Their whole aspiration is a life on the dole as that is the life that they are being brought up in.
It is part of my job to sometimes give extra tuition to students either individually or in a small groups (to those students that are in the bottom 10% of their class group). The majority of the kids are represented by those described above. When speaking to these kids it becomes clear that education is not valued in their households, money does not seem to be an issue, the same students have 55inch tvs in their bedrooms that they are watching till the early hours of the morning. They come into school too tired to function, have behaviour issues and parents do not take any interest.
My thoughts on social welfare is that in a booming economy such as we are apparently in no one under the age of 26 should be handed unemployment benefit (disability benefit yes). These young people need to get a taste of employment to see how good it can actually be both financially and mentally.
I find it so insulting that we are handing unemployment benefit to abled bodied 18-25 year olds while now telling people that have been working 40+ years that they need to work till age 67 to get a state pension.
Growing culture of delinquency and what's more, it has legions of apologists in media and academia0 -
Shefwedfan wrote: »3 is just a number to stop the Margaret cash of Thai world firing out 7 which in turn will fire out another 7.
No idea how you would stop these lovely mammies from firing babies out if you tell them they can’t afford them
They seem to all love children
Right, but I think they're few and far between so we wouldn't really save anything.
Not sure if you have kids, but CA nor the additional child payment on a normal weekly social welfare payment wouldn't come near the amount required to raise a child.
I'm not defending her ilk.
Or the size of the payment.
Just saying.
The "problem" if it was easy to fix it would be fixed.0 -
Right, but I think they're few and far between so we wouldn't really save anything.
Not sure if you have kids, but CA nor the additional child payment on a normal weekly social welfare payment wouldn't come near the amount required to raise a child.
I'm not defending her ilk.
Or the size of the payment.
Just saying.
The "problem" if it was easy to fix it would be fixed.
I have 3 and 4th on way. I know child allowance doesn’t come near paying but you have to start somewhere
I’m not saying either of the two options I posted would solve the problem but it would be a start to throw all the money into the black hole.
At this rate by the time my children go to work it will be 5% of population working and rest sitting on dole.
People who work and have houses budget and consider how many children to have. Those on the dole don’t, we are growing a country full of useless f**k with a load of useless f**k children0 -
-
Yeah it’s pretty insane. The life long parasites pumping them out , often while they themselves are still children. Many workers leaving and won’t return or hold off or don’t have kids or hold off and it’s too late. We are a country lead by scum for the benefit of scum!
Also means testing the ca is a farcical suggestion. Who do you want to cut it from ? “ de rich” on 100k combined as a couple ( what’s that after tax? 70k? If even ) their the working poor in Dublin if they have a big mortgage. They should make childcare free. Stop children’s allowance. Give working couples a few thousand cash bonus on birth of he child !
If the proposal was to means test if for those on two hundred k plus , that would be a different matter. But I still wouldn’t agree with it ! That income is already overtaxed for the **** or non existent services it gets you here. What they going to do with it every budget ? Throw it at the legions of Margaret cash and the fifty percent of the country deemed “ vulneable “ spare me !
They should means test the child allowance right. Based on what the parents paid in. Reward the people you want to have kids !0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
Idbatterim wrote: »Go on. Suggest one ... humor me !
Why, asking like that as soon as I put the figure on it you'll give me a story of why they couldn't afford it.
Anyway.
I imagine I'm good example of someone who shouldn't get it.
Two "decent" salaries.
Two youngish kids. Mortgage, child care etc.
There's no real reason or need for me to get the payment.
To save on multiple fronts we could do away with it altogether.
Depends what problem you're trying to solve.
If it's getting rid of career parents to balance the books
Forget about it.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
Advertisement