On 30 Nov, 13:43, melanie.fullw...@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
> On 30 Nov, 09:36, mogga  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:38:00 -0800 (PST), "mart2...@hotmail.com"
>
> >  wrote:
>
> > >And how would the government tackle the cost of housing?
> > >Most properties are not owned by them. Most rents are not set by
> > >council or government.
>
> > >Martin  <><
>
> > Fair rents should be enforced.
> > For my street it's 85 quid a week decided by the rent officer. Council
> > charges 75 and private landlords who keep buying the houses round here
> > charge 135-160.
>
> > If rents were set and fixed at a more sensible level then house prices
> > would not have risen massively and caused the boom and bust senario
> > we're about to see.
> > --http://www.freedeliveryuk.co.uk
>
> I'd never be able to get a mortgage on NMW! I couldn't afford to rent
> privately either - have to rent a council/housing association. I think
> it costs about £35 per person a week on food alone, and then there's
> the cost of running a car................nightmare!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Back when I started work, I could never have got a mortgage on my
starting wage either.
But a few years, and one promotion, later, managed to get a mortgage.
NMW is a starting wage, not an end wage.

If you don't like it, get a job paying more than it. There seem to be
loads of jobs advertised higher than NMW.
A lot of the NMW stuff are unskilled jobs. Even cleaners round here
usually get paid more than that. Shop staff often get a bit more.

A car is a luxury. They drain money like anything. Very useful though,
saves carrying a load of shopping back home on the bus.
Being without a car is cheaper, having one gives a lot more freedom to
travel, shop and activities.
Can be good if a portion of the car expenses are business expenses, so
reduce tax burden.

£35 is a fair bit for food. I spend only a little more than that on
food for 3 adults.
Cooked meal most nights though we use a chippy once or twice a week.

Martin  <><

wrote in message 
news:18ad3540-3b57-4b09-942f-fe23f63c791d@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
On 2 Dec, 19:03, "Niteawk"  wrote:
> "Robbie"  wrote in message
>
> news:5rgbr5F1413mpU1@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Niteawk wrote:
>
> >>  wrote in message
> >>news:6dc38dc4-77e6-4f9d-8980-c4b343d38bcb@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>> I agree with you that sometimes it seems as though the staff are
> >>> winding you up for the fun of it. Maybe to make their dull lives
> >>> exciting perhaps? I do sympathise about the abuse that some of them
> >>> have to take; and it shouldn't be.
>
> >> Why? the only time they get abuse is when they screw up and fail to
> >> recognise or ignore who they are dealing with. You leave a man with 3
> >> children to feed without money for food and see what happens, I have 
> >> seen
> >> it ;) you are asking for trouble. Like any job you can make life easy 
> >> or
> >> hard for yourself. If I worked for the DWP, I would make sure that 
> >> people
> >> I dealt with got paid, thats all you have to do to avoid any
> >> unpleasantness. Its of no interest to me why they are out of work or 
> >> what
> >> they are doing to find work, all I have to do is verify their details 
> >> so
> >> I can access their claim and sort it. Its a very easy job to do isnt 
> >> it,
> >> a trained chimp could do it.
>
> >> But you are always going to come into contact with some jobsworth who
> >> wants to humiliate you and deals with claimants in a manner like its
> >> their money and they are paying you out of their own pocket. They are 
> >> the
> >> ones who cause the trouble, so be it on their heads. They deserve all 
> >> the
> >> hassle they get IMO.
>
> > If only the trouble was always because a payment hadn't been made...
>
> True, you lose peoples details before they even get started, some people
> have to make several claims before they can get benefit.
>
>
>
> > Why don't you get a job at a JC+ if you think it is so easy?
>
> I have applied for a Revenues and Benefits assessor post, will they give 
> me
> the job? no I dont think so, most if not all of these jobs are filled
> internally or given to a friend of a friend. ;)
>

Really?
Or is that just what you'd like people to think?

Really, its true. I have worked for several LA's in the past, some on a temp 
basis and I have seen what goes on.



I daresay there are internal promotion boards. But that does reduce
the staff at the grades below.
Which means sometime they have to recruit externally.


All jobs like this are offered internally before they are advertised to the 
public, in fact they are only advertised to the public as a point of law 
under equal opportunities rules and to be seen as PC etc. I have seen jobs 
like this advertised weeks after the job has gone.

wrote in message 
news:22dc748f-785a-4011-b717-3922e2b99082@e1g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On 2 Dec, 21:01, "Niteawk"  wrote:
>>  wrote in message
>>
>> news:93d20bcd-8ed3-492d-b057-0f498bf7645c@o6g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 2 Dec, 17:58, "Niteawk"  wrote:
>> >>  wrote in message
>>
>> >>news:6dc38dc4-77e6-4f9d-8980-c4b343d38bcb@e4g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> >> > I agree with you that sometimes it seems as though the staff are
>> >> > winding you up for the fun of it. Maybe to make their dull lives
>> >> > exciting perhaps? I do sympathise about the abuse that some of them
>> >> > have to take; and it shouldn't be.
>>
>> >> Why? the only time they get abuse is when they screw up and fail to
>> >> recognise or ignore who they are dealing with. You leave a man with 3
>> >> children to feed without money for food and see what happens, I have 
>> >> seen
>> >> it
>> >> ;) you are asking for trouble. Like any job you can make life easy or
>> >> hard
>> >> for yourself. If I worked for the DWP, I would make sure that people I
>> >> dealt
>> >> with got paid, thats all you have to do to avoid any unpleasantness. 
>> >> Its
>> >> of
>> >> no interest to me why they are out of work or what they are doing to 
>> >> find
>> >> work, all I have to do is verify their details so I can access their
>> >> claim
>> >> and sort it. Its a very easy job to do isnt it, a trained chimp could 
>> >> do
>> >> it.
>>
>> >> But you are always going to come into contact with some jobsworth who
>> >> wants
>> >> to humiliate you and deals with claimants in a manner like its their
>> >> money
>> >> and they are paying you out of their own pocket. They are the ones who
>> >> cause
>> >> the trouble, so be it on their heads. They deserve all the hassle they
>> >> get
>> >> IMO.
>>
>> >> .
>>
>> > They also get abuse when they don't do what people want. Even when
>> > they cannot do what people want.
>>
>> > For every jobsworth there's also going to be someone who insists on
>> > having things done their way.
>>
>> Which brings us back to where we started. People like that should not be 
>> on
>> JSA but they are stuck with it by ignorant JC/ND staff. This is just 
>> another
>> example of how the system fails people, dealing with mentally ill people
>> when they should not be on JSA at all. Put them on disability and get 
>> rid,
>> thats what should happen. If you think you can get people like that into
>> work then you are crazier than they are.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Should not be on JSA?
> Why? Is there another unemployment benefit they can claim instead?


I was referring to mentally ill claimants not recognised by or ignored by JC 
staff and forced to claim JSA. They complain about getting abuse from 
customers, of course they will get abuse from customers like this.

wrote in message >

> Seems to be a fair bit of screw them on both sides. Plus a good chunk
> of trying to do the rigfht thing on each side too.
>

I dont think so, a very high percentage will be signing on for the first 
time ever. Plus a fair percentage will not be out of work for long, you cant 
say these people have a screw them attitude. Maybe you can, this proves what 
some of us have been saying, you tar everyone with the same brush.

Niteawk wrote:
> 
>  wrote in message >
> 
>> Seems to be a fair bit of screw them on both sides. Plus a good chunk
>> of trying to do the rigfht thing on each side too.
>>
> 
> I dont think so, a very high percentage will be signing on for the first 
> time ever. Plus a fair percentage will not be out of work for long, you 
> cant say these people have a screw them attitude. Maybe you can, this 
> proves what some of us have been saying, you tar everyone with the same 
> brush.
> 

it does work both ways...


-- 
Robbie

"Robbie"  wrote in message
news:5rlfmkF151r30U2@mid.individual.net...
> Niteawk wrote:
>>
>>  wrote in message >
>>
>>> Seems to be a fair bit of screw them on both sides. Plus a good chunk
>>> of trying to do the rigfht thing on each side too.
>>>
>>
>> I dont think so, a very high percentage will be signing on for the first
>> time ever. Plus a fair percentage will not be out of work for long, you
>> cant say these people have a screw them attitude. Maybe you can, this
>> proves what some of us have been saying, you tar everyone with the same
>> brush.
>>
>
> it does work both ways...
>
>

Oh no it does not, there is a big difference, you lot make the rules and 
call the tune, like I said before, its down to you and how you treat people.

Niteawk wrote:
> 
> "Robbie"  wrote in message
> news:5rlfmkF151r30U2@mid.individual.net...
>> Niteawk wrote:
>>>
>>>  wrote in message >
>>>
>>>> Seems to be a fair bit of screw them on both sides. Plus a good chunk
>>>> of trying to do the rigfht thing on each side too.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I dont think so, a very high percentage will be signing on for the first
>>> time ever. Plus a fair percentage will not be out of work for long, you
>>> cant say these people have a screw them attitude. Maybe you can, this
>>> proves what some of us have been saying, you tar everyone with the same
>>> brush.
>>>
>>
>> it does work both ways...
>>
>>
> 
> Oh no it does not, there is a big difference, you lot make the rules and 
> call the tune, like I said before, its down to you and how you treat 
> people.

The staff don't make the rules. And as for "its down to you and how you 
treat people" - how do you want to be treated when you eventually find a 
job? I bet you wouldn't want to be treated like shite? Why should DWP 
staff be treated any different? Or are the DWP staff fair game?
-- 
Robbie