life on the dole

[tielan]

I've found why I haven't been paid.

Apparently although I don't have to do the 'payment requirements' right now - proving that I've applied for jobs upon jobs upon jobs - I haven't actually 'reported on my income' for the last couple of months, which you have to do every fortnight in order to be paid. I called up the office and got it fixed in about 20 minutes.

Also: in a chat with US friends yesterday, I realised that what Australians think of as unemployment is not quite the same as what Americans think of as unemployment.

eg. The Aussie dole is paid for (I believe) by income tax and available to anyone at what is pretty much a flat rate. If I was earning $15K a year and now am collecting the dole, I'm paid the same amount as someone who was earning $150K a year before they lost their job and started collecting the dole.

The thing is, after one has been earning $150K a year, one doesn't want to live on the flat rate they offer. I'd much rather be working full time (actually, I'd much rather be working part-time) and being paid considerably more than 'living on the dole'. It's humiliating and mildly frustrating (and while the official jury is out about whether or not it's intended to be humiliating and mildly frustrating, my take is YES, IT ABSOLUTELY IS INTENDED THAT WAY) and all for Not Very Much.

Of course, to get a job, there need to be jobs available. Also, jobs that pay enough to be worth giving up the hours that they require one to give up in exchange for money. Which no conservative politician has ever recognised in the history of humanity.

Also, apparently you have to actually 'lose your job' to get American unemployment - retrenchment, redundancy, etc., while I think all you need here is simply not to have a job.

Comments

[alexseanchai]

I am not eligible for American unemployment because I quit my job. Working in the state government office that makes my state of previous residence such an attraction in terms of home jurisdiction for American companies was soul-destroying and I couldn't figure out how to work slowly enough it wasn't hands-destroying, and living within an easy drive of my parents' house was mental-health-destroying, but those are not relevant factors. I quit; that's all that matters.

I wasn't eligible for American unemployment the time I got fired, either. I might have been after the job in the department store stock room ended, since that was a seasonal job (the year-round employees needed more hands in order to deal with the lead-up to Christmas) and therefore nothing I could have done or refrained from doing would have kept me employed there longer.

Oh, and the states rushing to reopen the economy fastest are the ones that are morally opposed to raising taxes (and also they already made it really legally difficult to raise taxes) and that would go bankrupt fastest if expected to pay out unemployment for a longer lockdown. If someone can't wait tables because the restaurant she works at isn't allowed to open, that's not her fault, so she's eligible for unemployment; if the restaurant is allowed to open, then her choices are go back to work or don't, and in either event she is no longer eligible for unemployment.

*waves universal-basic-income flag*

[tielan]

Yeah, a UBI would at least mean people wouldn't starve.

It would also change the power structure throughout the workplace: bad companies, bad employers, bad managers would never be tolerated. Employees might have to be treated as...gasp...people.

And the dirty work that's hard and harsh? To get people to do it, they'd have to be paid commensurate with the effort and time.

There are not many countries where the idea wouldn't uproot the fabric of society's sense of superiority, and the US isn't one of them. (Australia probably isn't one either, sadly.)

[weaselett]

The UK seems to be somewhere in the middle with unemployment benefit

The UK rules are...weird these days - if you quit a job, you can't claim, (bro had to quit a job because they dropped the pay - meant he was earning just over the cost of getting to work)
if you were in work and made redundant/fired you are only entitled to benefit for six months
if you have never worked and are under the age of 18 at the beginning you get it until you get work
if you have never worked but are over the age of 18 - you can't get it

oddly - if you are working less than 16 hours a week, you can get unemployment benefit though

Universal credit in theory covers some of the gaps - but only to a limited extent
(if you live with parents and don't have a formal legal tenancy agreement and at least one of your parents is working - you can't claim universal credit. If you live with a housemate and they are earning you may not get it(randomly household income is the measure for it, not personal).

But yeah - our system is definately designed to be hard to use/discourage it's use unless you really enjoy lots of forms and waiting.

[tielan]

So...if you apply for an unemployment benefit before you're 18, you get it after you're 18, even if you don't work?

I'm not sure what Universal Credit is. It sounds like a UBI, but also...not...

[weaselett]

if you don't stop claiming it from being under 18 - you just keep getting it until you get a job - so long as you prove you're looking

Universal credit is the current not quite yet universal system, that has all the benefits you can claim as one - housing, job seekers, tax credits etc - but it retains a 'temp' job seekers that is based on personal money and job situation alone as universal credit is household based.

basically the UK system is a mess currently because they decided to change it to make it more frustrating and make more people want to work. (And they trailed it in the north and started 'rolling it out' southwards)

I am not convinced that not finishing sorting it isn't a part of that plan mind