[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
CARERS BACK TO WORK - Page 5 - Carers UK Forum

CARERS BACK TO WORK

Discuss news stories and political issues that affect carers.
109 posts
I started to reply but Charles has pretty much said what I was going to say and said it better, thank you Charles for putting it so well.
Hi Eun

Perhaps it is more a question of writing style and choice of phrases than denying people the right to express their opinion. One of the biggest problems on internet forums is the lack of facial expressions, hence the emoticons - but they're no real substitute for face to face conversation.

It's very easy to misinterpret another person's style of humour for example - I have read posts on here when I'm having a bad day and thought they were dreadful.
But then I read them again another time when I'm feeling more positive and the same post comes across completely differently and I can appreciate the humour properly.

It's the same with any post, whether it's meant to be funny or debating a serious point.
It's why I tend to read posts a few times before I respond, when I feel I've got the meaning correct, rather than leap in hot-headedly, perhaps having misinterpreted things. I still make mistakes but only minimally I hope.

When a posting is very forthright, shooting straight from the hip as it were, it tends to come across as very agressive, militant, angry, dismissive, etc (any or all of these) - that's why the majority of people react the way they do, and of course posts tend to be seen more favourably if the information in them is correct and accurate.

That's my personal view anyway for what it's worth - I feel more comfortable reading posts where the writing style is more moderate.
In fact I dislike some people's writing styles so much I skip over their posts and ignore them completely, so whatever message they're trying to make is lost on me because I don't read what they've got to say.

Helen x
I guess I am unique, and so are most of us. So I dont go along with any arguments that try to categorise carers into two, three or four groups. We just dont work that way.
In my family, at the moment, we have one disabled member on DLA: childrens allowance, higher rate care and lower rate mobility - quite a lot of money in total, and then he has the extra direct payments - this is really a very impressive package of financial support from the government. We also have three adults capable of being carers, all of whom work/study as well as sharing the care between us. So we tend to shuffle the Carers Allowance to whoever has the lowest income and fits the criteria: at the moment it is my daughter who is a p/t student and a p/t worker, both of which fall below the threshold, next year things will change again, as they do, she will move away to full time study and we will lose CA, even though we will be doing a tougher job between two, not three and having to find extra cash to support her Uni studies. Is that fair? Clearly not. Thats why I want CA and the benefits system radically reviewed, because it isnt fit for purpose. I don't need more money, I do want fairness, social justice.
In practice we all share the care around, I probably do the most care, timewise, but I can earn £100 in a good day so I am usually above the earnings threshold, and my wife earns at least that too. And I also have a fair occupational pension, so I dont really need to work if I don't feel like it. Yes, everything in our garden is fairly rosy, and we arent pleading poverty or asking for extra help. I sense that some other people who are really doing quite well are not being perfectly frank because they are concerned that they might get picked on. So, we need to figure out, if we have an individual in the family requiring constant care, (as we do) which benefits should be means tested, and which shouldn't? What is fair? What is income support, and what is carers allowance?

Do we fit any kind of standard stereotype model for carers? No - and are we poor? No. So please dont expect me to go along with any generalised statements about carers that dont reflect my own situation. We carers are amazingly diverse. So, we need policies that reflect that diversity.
You say that Excalibur but the whole point of the debate is that many carers are having to go along with the policy on Carers ie what suits you I could probably tap into, well at least a bit of it but it doesn't reflect my position, equally this business of we are all carers sounds fine but there are huge differences and I think the unrest is because there seems to be more progress around carers and work which is great but those that can't work feel CA needs looking at more seriously, surely the leaders debate is a good example of that, no mention of an increase and nor will there be.
Vicky, I think they are all terrified of what would happen if they raised CA to a fair rate, say £250 a week or more, millions of us would leave the workforce, me included. The fact is, they cant afford us to do this - and as taxpayers neither can we!
We are like Atlas, holding up the entire welfare state. Its about time we got proper recognition for what we do, not just pats on the back. But I still think that should be about providing respite care, enabling us to go to work and providing incentives to work for disabled people and carers, rather than cash handouts. If we have cash, lets give cash to everyone as a basic non-means tested social wage for all and still encourage and enable carers to work, part time, whatever. Because being a carer full time at home is fundamentally bad for your health. The only party that supports a social or citizens wage for all is the Greens.
I would also raise the retirement age to 80 plus - or even abolish it entirely. There are lots of fit older people who are excluded from work. My dad (now 90) worked until he was 85, as a part time music reviewer for the local paper. He earned a few quid, and he got free tickets for himself and my mum. But he was still taking an active part in the economy, and that kept him young!
Well maybe I am naive but I just can't see this mass exodus from work with everyone finding a convenient disabled friend or relative, but even taking that on board an increase less than £250 a week would not be sniffed at because we are a merry mile from that figure now, really what we do get is tokenistic at best imo.
On the subject of retirement I agree and disagree, obviously it seems crazy if people can work and want to work over the retirement age that they should not do that but on the other hand don't we need to make way for the young, there is much discussion now about mass immigration, housing etc but what are the young to do if more and more people are going to be carrying on working beyond retirement, there will be so many adults living at home with mum and dad for longer and longer, still I suppose ready made carers Image
That was good I mad my argument and then proved it wrong in one post, not an easy trick you know.
Ha, we have that in common , I have also been known to make a post and change my mind half way through. I sometimes think that the only way to know what you really think is to be forced to write it down.
This whole job creation thing is very odd. I am in my mid 50's and I set up our carnival society in 2003 with two friends as a bit of fun, our start-up capital was £45 raised from busking, our first year turnover was £4000. Now we are registered as a Social Enterprise (CIC) and employ paid staff. Tonight I approved £5,000 of expenditure on a single band, and we expect to turnover £100,000 this year. This is supporting lots of real jobs, musicians, clowns, ice cream vendors, stilt walkers, dancers, crafters, you name it - if we are turning over £100K then you better believe that at least £500k is being made in turnover by all the folk we contract with. If each job is worth £25k, then we have created 20 jobs this year alone. And we do it for a laugh.
In 2005, I went to Ghana at my own expense to audition native dancers and musicians, in 2007 they came to my town to perform. I might have spent the same money on a package holiday, but it was a lot more fun roughing it in the dark heart of Africa, and I also lost a stone, which was useful and gratifying.
I'm a carer. And I help create jobs, and wealth, not because it is a good thing to do, and not because I make money out of it, but largely because it amuses me and relieves the boredom. We are all going to die sometime, and we cant take it with us, so what is the point of accumulating money anyway?
Carers need to wake up, there is a big wide world out there, and it is calling.
But some carers are in no position to go out and work. I'm aware of carers who, even with a high level of support, can in no way even consider the possibility of working. Yet they are in desperate financial straits due to their caring situation - truly a no win situation.

For those carers, there are no choices. And there has to be something better.
But some carers are in no position to go out and work. I'm aware of carers who, even with a high level of support, can in no way even consider the possibility of working. Yet they are in desperate financial straits due to their caring situation - truly a no win situation.

For those carers, there are no choices. And there has to be something better.
For me, this has to be post of the month .
MMMMMMMMMMM - now let me try and uderstand all this.........
I am not supposed to expect a decent and fair level of CA because I didn't fight in a war that was over before I was born and I am supposed to wake up because there's a world out there ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!! Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

Now then ..........

As a carer who is unable to work due the extent of my caring role I expect - Nay I DEMAND - a fair level of CA that reflects the work I do and the fact that I am contributing to the overall effect that saves this country a small fortune in care costs.

As a carer I expect CUK to support the needs of carers - and that includes fair level of CA - and I am not the only one who expects that - though it seems at times that the people who shout us down if we dare mention it are the people who are fortunate enough to be able to go out to work an so are in less need of the money.

As a carer I do not differentiate between different groups of carers - we are all carers - however I am shocked that it is withing this forum that those who cannot work are repeatedly marginalised by others - it is they who are creating the seperate groups!

Eun - you are right - there seems to be an unwritten rule that we are only allowed to suggest what fits with the real minority! Image

IF I were able to work and combine this with my caring duties then I would do so - the extent of my caring duties prevents me from working and I will not aapologise to anybody for this - nor will I beat myself up for not fighting in a war that was over before I was born.

I will keep on demanding a fair level of CA and if peope want to target me and question my right to breathe as a result of that opinion then they can carry on - doesn't bother me at all !

As a carer who is unable to work I am not alone - all of us in this situation deserve better deal that involves a higher rate of CA and a fexible approach to respite for those who need /want / are able to use it - if respite is not the answer for some people then they should not be penalised as a result - the only real answer is a higher income so we can be fairly recompensed for the work we do and organise the help that suits us - and not be dictated to by people who think we should be grateful for a pittance and a system that is organised around THEIR needs whilst ignoring the rest of us.
109 posts