Protest against benefit changes

[TeaFan]

I don't mean to be insensitive, but is cancer with a terminal prognosis treat in the same way as a disability? And do you fall within that group?

Many cancers these days are treatable and not a death sentence, the treatment can make you very ill, but you aren't disabled at any point in the strict sense of the word.

 

I'm also confused, you said they refused you ESA, but then paid you £64/week under ESA.

 

The arthritis bit presumably doesn't make you unable to do any work, hence I'd guess it probably wasn't relevant.

 

You work in IT, right?

[I1L2T3]

Hmmmm. There seems to a cross-party willingness to work on this one. The current system is chaotic, badly targeted, poor value, poorly managed and unfair. It's a disaster. IDS seems to have grown as a politician and is a deep thinker and seems determined to tacle the mess. No point in protesting for the sake of it - let them all work together to see what can be done. And for Labour supporters we have to realise this revamp may actually improve things.

[Tradescanthia]

I don't mean to be insensitive, but is cancer with a terminal prognosis treat in the same way as a disability? And do you fall within that group?

Many cancers these days are treatable and not a death sentence, the treatment can make you very ill, but you aren't disabled at any point in the strict sense of the word.

 

I'm also confused, you said they refused you ESA, but then paid you £64/week under ESA.

 

The arthritis bit presumably doesn't make you unable to do any work, hence I'd guess it probably wasn't relevant.

 

The lung cancer was operable and left me with a 50/50 chance of 5 or more years survival, so was never actually termed as 'terminal'. Lung lobe removal is very damaging, leaves you very weak [at 60 plus years old] and the arthritis is a thing which usually follows lung cancer due to circulatory problems arising. The 'arthritis bit' is VERY painfull and debilitating but the ATOS examination would not recognise that.

My ESA was stopped after 6 months despite my specialist consultants disagreeing with their findings. ATOS stopped it, that was the £64 per week mentioned.

I hope you never have to deal with these criminals yourself. Hundreds of people suffering from various cancers have had or are having the same probs. Macmillan are permanently fighting our cases for us, but the law is the law. Had I been given a terminal prognosis of LESS than 6 months life expectancy I would then have been given the miserable £64 back.

Had my claim been based on a diagnosis of DEPRESSION, then I would not have had a problem. The law is an ass..............

[TeaFan]

The lung cancer was operable and left me with a 50/50 chance of 5 or more years survival, so was never actually termed as 'terminal'. Lung lobe removal is very damaging, leaves you very weak [at 60 plus years old] and the arthritis is a thing which usually follows lung cancer due to circulatory problems arising. The 'arthritis bit' is VERY painfull and debilitating but the ATOS examination would not recognise that.

My ESA was stopped after 6 months despite my specialist consultants disagreeing with their findings. ATOS stopped it, that was the £64 per week mentioned.

I hope you never have to deal with these criminals yourself. Hundreds of people suffering from various cancers have had or are having the same probs. Macmillan are permanently fighting our cases for us, but the law is the law. Had I been given a terminal prognosis of LESS than 6 months life expectancy I would then have been given the miserable £64 back.

Had my claim been based on a diagnosis of DEPRESSION, then I would not have had a problem. The law is an ass..............

 

This is the problem. The government (the last one) simply re-defined 'fit for work'. It hasn't made the slightest difference to peoples' actual ability to find or hold down work, they've just been reclassified by the state as fit for work when previously they were not.

 

If the government decided that next year they would make A levels twice as hard to pass so that half as many people passed as this year, would that mean that standards of teaching and pupil ability had slumped? Of course not, it just means the bar has been raised. In the case of ESA, they've simply raised the bar of the medical assessment, it doesn't necessarily mean that those who fail it are fit for work.

[Wildcat]

This is the problem. The government (the last one) simply re-defined 'fit for work'. It hasn't made the slightest difference to peoples' actual ability to find or hold down work, they've just been reclassified by the state as fit for work when previously they were not.

 

If the government decided that next year they would make A levels twice as hard to pass so that half as many people passed as this year, would that mean that standards of teaching and pupil ability had slumped? Of course not, it just means the bar has been raised. In the case of ESA, they've simply raised the bar of the medical assessment, it doesn't necessarily mean that those who fail it are fit for work.

 

The sad thing in a way is many may well be fit for work, but fit for work with the sort of caring employers willing to make the reasonable adjustments that are few and far between. Indeed one of the quangos targeted by the ConDems are Remploy that employ people with disabilities. The Govt closed the York centre a few years ago because no one would take it on. It is now a worker run cooperative.

 

The sad thing is employers don't make the reasonable adjustments they should a few sick days above the average and you tend to be out on your ear. Fit for work does not necessarily mean employable. The fact of the existence of the Disability discrimination act is little if any protection from such decisions. Tribunals are reluctant to tell employers how to run their business and what may seem reasonable to us, is often justifiable when compared with the business interest especially in a poor economy where they want productivity maximised.

[ricgem2002]

David Cameron has announced he intends to make it more difficult to claim benefits.

 

From next Monday the forms will be printed in English.:o:o:o:o:o

and whats the going rate for translators :hihi:

[Bassman62]

and whats the going rate for translators :hihi:

 

Apparently more than I ever got paid.:hihi:

[ricgem2002]

Apparently more than I ever got paid.:hihi:

there might be some thing in this translation lark you d never be out of work

[mossdog]

The sad thing in a way is many may well be fit for work, but fit for work with the sort of caring employers willing to make the reasonable adjustments that are few and far between. Indeed one of the quangos targeted by the ConDems are Remploy that employ people with disabilities. The Govt closed the York centre a few years ago because no one would take it on. It is now a worker run cooperative.

 

The sad thing is employers don't make the reasonable adjustments they should a few sick days above the average and you tend to be out on your ear. Fit for work does not necessarily mean employable. The fact of the existence of the Disability discrimination act is little if any protection from such decisions. Tribunals are reluctant to tell employers how to run their business and what may seem reasonable to us, is often justifiable when compared with the business interest especially in a poor economy where they want productivity maximised.

OK I agree with most of what you say!Not all employers are what you would wish,but equally neither are employees.The country is £4.8 TRILLION in debt and sinking further! Lets not keep talking about how we would divide the few bob that's left,but how we can earn the money as a nation to pay for Socialist ideals which are admirable in lots of cases if we can afford them!

My leaning is to reduce the tax consuming public sector to certainly less than the private tax creating sector,and secondly and very importantly to introduce a 20% tax rate across the board!

Public sector employment like university education has ballooned massively out of control and is becoming a financial drain at the present time.If things were different and we could afford it,then maybe I would be arguing differently.However I do not think that the majority of posters on here realize the gravity of the financial holocaust about to hit this nation!

[craigmason]

If these students with there degrees and a levels cannot find work how is somebody with no skills or qualifications going to find a job?