Exempt all pregnant women from benefit sanctions.

[chem1st]

I heard today from a person who runs a foodbank about a young Yorkshire woman who having had her benefit sanctioned had to walk multiple miles to a food bank.

 

The young women had been sanctioned for missing an appointment, due to somewhat predictable health complications.

 

The woman was heavily pregnant.

 

I can't believe pregnant women are being forced to attend appointments related to benefits when heavily pregnant, and that some of them are being sanctioned.

 

And it isn't just people on benefits, or who have lost them who are using food banks, many workers are having to do so too, zero hour contract workers are often plunged into poverty at short notice for example.

 

To think that pregnant women across the country are being forced to use foodbanks though is a real worry.

 

"People do not necessarily come to food banks because of benefit delays, they can have all kinds of problems that lead to them facing financial hardship."

 

But benefit delays did cause problems for Michaela and Thomas Solloway.

 

'Bridge the gap'

Their son Michael was born on 7 October, but they were unable to register his birth until 2 November because he was kept in hospital for a week and there was a backlog of registrations once he was discharged.

 

Birmingham City Council admitted there were difficulties, but said extra temporary staff had been taken on to deal with a rise in births and a change to the system which means births can now only be registered by appointment.

 

The Solloways had both lost their jobs and had £105 a week to live on.

 

Michaela said: "At one point we had £5 left and no food, electricity or gas."

 

She added: "There is no help to bridge the gap.

 

"There needs to be something in place while you are waiting to register the birth and waiting to receive benefits."

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-18017876

 

Surely pregnant women should be entitled to a certain level of non means tested benefits and exempted from any form of benefit sanction?

 

What do you think?

[Happ Hazzard]

Good idea, if you want lots of women on benefits to get pregnant. We already have too many children growing up on benefits.

[Funky_Gibbon]

Good idea, if you want lots of women on benefits to get pregnant. We already have too many children growing up on benefits.

 

Perhaps we should pay people enough not to have to claim benefits then since the majority of benefits that don't go to pensioners go to people who have jobs.

 

A better idea than trying to starve them to death at least.

[chem1st]

Good idea, if you want lots of women on benefits to get pregnant. We already have too many children growing up on benefits.

 

And the majority of 'their' benefits get paid to landlords directly and throughout the wider economy.

 

The government subsidises mortgages and landowners directly. And benefits to banks and landowners aren't capped unlike benefits for households of humans, and this is before we even take into account monopoly privileges enjoyed by the owners of banks and land.

 

Hows about some economic justice, people should be able to work unskilled jobs and afford to feed and house 10 without relying on benefits, due to technical advances, and still be lower class, lower earners.

[Rampent]

And the majority of 'their' benefits get paid to landlords directly and throughout the wider economy.

 

The government subsidises mortgages and landowners directly. And benefits to banks and landowners aren't capped unlike benefits for households of humans, and this is before we even take into account monopoly privileges enjoyed by the owners of banks and land.

 

Hows about some economic justice, people should be able to work unskilled jobs and afford to feed and house 10 without relying on benefits, due to technical advances, and still be lower class, lower earners.

 

Tops Dude

[Happ Hazzard]

And the majority of 'their' benefits get paid to landlords directly and throughout the wider economy.

 

The government subsidises mortgages and landowners directly. And benefits to banks and landowners aren't capped unlike benefits for households of humans, and this is before we even take into account monopoly privileges enjoyed by the owners of banks and land.

 

Hows about some economic justice, people should be able to work unskilled jobs and afford to feed and house 10 without relying on benefits, due to technical advances, and still be lower class, lower earners.

 

Why is that "economic justice"?

[biotechpete]

Presumably she lost her JSA as she was unable to prove that she was seeking work, which presumably she wasn't. So she was exactly the same as working pregnant women who would have to take leave if they were unable to work.

 

I'm not sure if this is already the case, but I think all people should be entitled to the same statutory pay, so if you're sick you can claim sick pay instead, and you can take 4 weeks leave a year and claim statutory holiday pay and pregnant women could decide when to take their statutory maternity leave etc. But I think JSA should be just that, a benefit paid to help seek work. If you're not seeking work, you can't have it.

[Dardandec]

....................................

[chem1st]

Presumably she lost her JSA as she was unable to prove that she was seeking work, which presumably she wasn't. So she was exactly the same as working pregnant women who would have to take leave if they were unable to work.

 

Benefits needs not be JSA, and sanctions can be given for missing appointments for multiple benefits, people on benefits are less likely to have a mobile phone and even less likely to have credit, making phone calls is prohibitively expensive and not always possible. People might find it cheaper and quicker to use stamps to notify organisations of a legitimate inability to attend an appointment, or wait untill they are able to use a phone.

 

I'm not sure if this is already the case, but I think all people should be entitled to the same statutory pay, so if you're sick you can claim sick pay instead, and you can take 4 weeks leave a year and claim statutory holiday pay and pregnant women could decide when to take their statutory maternity leave etc. But I think JSA should be just that, a benefit paid to help seek work. If you're not seeking work, you can't have it.

If people don't eat, they become sick very quick. Non means tested benefits for all make much more sense than means tested malnourishment morality to please a few.

 

People seeking work are expected to seek it work as a full time job. To be fair, they should get 4 weeks holiday per year.

Mundane tasks (work) in the form of a job entitles one to four weeks paid holiday per year in the UK.

 

Applying for work, is work, and should be seen as part of the working world in this world of precarious employment, zero hours contracts, multiple employers, fast turnover of industries and forms of employment etc. Re-training for employment is also a form of work.

 

---------- Post added 14-10-2013 at 23:43 ----------

 

Why is that "economic justice"?

 

Because in a true free market, wages would be easy to acquire, and effectively higher.

 

Idle land, allotment waiting lists, unemployment, lack of housing, planning restrictions, lack of currency and legality thereof, currency restrictions, vast inequality, hunger, foodbanks, malnourishment, absolute poverty, vast inherited wealth, overproduction and waste is what we have.

 

Economic injustice plain and simple.