Future of CB-ESA & other Green Paper proposals not included in the UC & PIP Bill
I’m starting this thread with the permission of @Albus_Scope at @Community_Scope
The purpose of the thread is to focus of those areas of the Green Paper that were open to consultation until 30 June and do not form part of the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill that is currently making its way through Parliament.
The Green Paper solicited our views on the future of Access to Work and queried how the DWP could better define and utilise the various roles of Access to Work, the Health and Safety Executive, Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service and the Equalities and Human Rights Commission to achieve a cultural shift in employer awareness and action on workplace adjustments.
It proceeds to query how the DWP can support and ensure employers, including Small and Medium Sized Enterprises, to know what workplace adjustments they can make to help employees with a disability or health condition.
A major proposal of the Green Paper was that, following the scrapping of WCA, CB-Based ESA and CB-JSA will be merged into a single, time-limited Unemployment Insurance Benefit.
In my opinion, it is bizarre to place a young, healthy person in the same “box” as a person whose working has been wrecked by advancing disability and, barring miracles, will always been unfit to work.
First, there is a need to engage with a work coach. There is much talk in the Green Paper regarding “conversations” and how they can be designed and delivered so as to be “welcomed” by claimants. “Conversations”, however “welcome”, are not always possible for the most severely physically or mentally disabled people who have no prospect of employment.
Secondly, it is suggested that Unemployment Insurance will be time-limited. It is vaguely suggested that anyone who is not in work after the fixed period might be eligible for “other payments” under the Universal Credit system. A person with a several, lifelong disability, currently claiming CB-ESA (except for PIP), with no UC eligibility, and with no prospect of ever gaining employment will lose over £7,280 per annum. This is a vicious proposal that stands to impoverish a particular group of claimants. The most severely and perhaps progressively disabled people need a guarantee that they will be appropriately supported for an indefinite not a fixed period.
It is vague whether the proposal will eventually apply to all CB-ESA claimants or "only" new claimants in a two-tier system. Nonetheless, I believe these Green Paper proposals deserve as much consideration and support from the disabled community, here at Scope and elsewhere, as the amazing push that brought about concessions from the Government in the last hours Second Reading of the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill.
Green Paper
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/pathways-to-work-reforming-benefits-and-support-to-get-britain-working-green-paper/pathways-to-work-reforming-benefits-and-support-to-get-britain-working-green-paper#section-1--what-the-reformed-system-will-look-like
Comments
-
That was summed up perfectly, and the reality of it is terrifying. I’m shocked there hasn’t been more coverage on this in the media, and I’m yet to hear a single MP so much as mutter the word ESA.
4 -
I’ve written to my MP Louise Jones on this and expressed, why is it that the sick and disabled which have endured WCA’s similar to all PIP claimants, are being bundled together with regular jobseekers in this new limited time Employment Insurance benefit, which also sees a 50% cut in allowance. This will plunge the most vulnerable who cannot work in to abject poverty. I’m not holding my breath but I’ll post her reply if I get one. Up to now she’s been unsympathetic and towed the Starmer/Kendall line.
3 -
Well, the Unemployment Insurance Scheme hasn't reached White Paper stage yet. I assume they'll review the responses to the consultation.
2 -
Discussions about the "CUTS" need to be condensed. I'm finding it quite confusing.Sorry about that.
0 -
Me too.
0 -
Sorry to hear that @Brianbloggs and @luvpink unfortunately the current situation has so much information coming and going, that we've tried to break things off into different areas of the benefits so people don't get lost in just one huge discussion. So it should actually be easier to keep up to date on things now.
Scope will be releasing a short blog post this week which hopefully will help break things down a bit. Though as no information is set in stone, it's very difficult to advise people right now, my apologies.
4 -
My sister works as a paid carer for a number of young (18+) people who will NEVER work - they live at home with parents/in care homes. They don't have the mental capacity to fill shelves or anything else. At the moment, they, mostly receive ESA and PIP - How do you predict the government will cope with them ?
0 -
For your information, the Employment Insurance benefit has been copied from countries like France and Sweden. It's time limited in all countries that have this in place, and time limiting it is quite logical for a reason. It's not an indefinite on-going award or a job-seeking allowance.
0 -
Just to update everyone, our lovely media team have updated the Scope blog with some easy to read information. If you're unsure what's going on, I recommend having a read. 😁
4 -
In other European countries I believe their version of time-limited employment insurance has a payout that is a percentage of previous salary. So time-limited but at least you don't have immediate financial worries during the initial period when you need to focus on finding new employment.
0 -
Some of us on CB-ESA have had a short working life. Others were born disabled and never worked. We'll never be in employment. We can't claim IR-ESA or any means-tested support because we have in excess of £16000 in savings or other assets and therefore can't claim UC. There may be a few millionaires amongst us but for the majority the loss CB-ESA will be devastating. I believe @luvpink and @YogiBear share my financial fears.
5 -
From what you tell me @Wibbles the young people of 18+ will be able to claim the different disability/ health components of UC in their own right unless they are ineligible for UC because they have in excess of £16000 in assets in their own names.
Having known young people as disabled as this, I should imagine their eligibility for PIP or its replacement would at the very highest level.
I'm not here to predict anything— merely to look at the "forgotten" areas of the Green Paper, including CB-ESA.
0 -
You misunderstood me if you think I agree with the planned change. I most definitely don't! I was merely responding to on an earlier comment that other European countries have time limits on non-means tested employment insurance. If there is a time-limit it would at least be better if it was more than a pittance. A time-limit at the current rates seems the worst of both worlds!
0 -
I am worried about the Contribution ESA. I worked for 30 years before I became Chronically Ill (counted as disabilities) and lost my job. At present there is no possibility of me returning to work since I am deteriorating and picking up other chronic illness diagnoses. A time limited insurance won't mean that I am well enough to return to work and we can't get UC. We are not rich by any means and losing this will devastate us. I have emailed my MP several times and also attended a consultation with her and her team. Most people on my table assumed that it wouldn't affect those in support group or existing claimants but it doesn't say that. Its all a big mess.
1 -
I didn't assume you are in agreement with the Green Paper proposal. The systems in other counties have been discussed since the PIP Green Paper of the Sunak government that ended shortly after Labour took power.
0 -
That's right.
In France, where I've lived myself, it's regressive and cannot exceed 75% of your previous daily salary. The allowance is a maximum of €294.21 gross per day.
In France, unlike here, you've peace of mind while you're on employment insurance.
0 -
I claim a very small stipend from a PPP, along with NS-ESA.
The terms in my PPP take into account my overall income and state that my PPP will not be reduced if I claim Incapacity benefit.
Which is part of the value proposition of the policy, leading me to believe I can claim Incapacity benefit, (replaced by NS-ESA) simultaneously with my PPP.
The terms in my PPP make a distinction between means tested and non means tested benefits. Informing me that my overall income would be affected if I were to claim UC instead of incapacity benefit.
(They marketed the benefit of being able to claim non means tested Incapacity Benefit, simultaneously with the PPP)
The policy clearly states it will pay out up to 50%, of your final 12 months earnings.
Acknowledging fluctuations of the amount you might receive from the PPP. In other words, you might get much less than 50%. (Which can very easily occur when you get serious illness, or for other reasons. These PPPs were marketed to self employed people, for instance whose income fluctuates drastically)
Leading people to believe that they can combine PPP with NS-ESA.
I would argue that the the removal of NS ESA and its replacement with a means-tested benefits undermines the value of the policy and it is a risk that the insurer should reasonably have foreseen.
I have not got a legal opinion on this yet.
I did send these points to one of the co founders of DPAC in an email.
I was told that DPAC had spoken to a barrister, who thought that scrapping CB ESA would be something they may be able to challenge, (but that this could only happen when the green paper is final and the white paper comes out, if they could find someone who would lose CB ESA and who qualifies for legal aid)
I asked her why the barrister believed it would be something that could possibly be challenged, and she told me that it was because we would probably be the only country in Europe that doesnt have a medical retirement scheme, for working people, who become ill and disabled and she compared it to private pension schemes for MPs which include provisions for medical retirement, and a lack of provision for disabled or ill workers could breach human rights obligations, and that other European countries provide medical retirement options, so removing CB ESA might stand out as uniquely harsh or regressive.
(At least that was the gist of my understanding)
But until plans are finalised they will not be sure what can and cannot be legally challenged.
- The Lady from DPAC also mentioned that the solicitor Carolin Ott from Leigh Day mentioned anyone affected by this particular issue could get in touch with her: cott@leighday.co.uk
3 -
I'm very concerned Zipz. Something will probably be sneaked through the radar. The focus has been on PIP and UC.
1 -
I should have said under the radar. Apologies, I'm all over the place after these last few days.
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 15.3K Start here and say hello!
- 7.2K Coffee lounge
- 89 Games den
- 1.7K People power
- 117 Announcements and information
- 24K Talk about life
- 5.8K Everyday life
- 414 Current affairs
- 2.4K Families and carers
- 868 Education and skills
- 1.9K Work
- 526 Money and bills
- 3.6K Housing and independent living
- 1K Transport and travel
- 626 Relationships
- 1.5K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.4K Talk about your impairment
- 863 Rare, invisible, and undiagnosed conditions
- 923 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2.1K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.2K Autism and neurodiversity
- 39.5K Talk about your benefits
- 6K Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
- 19.6K PIP, DLA, ADP and AA
- 8.3K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.7K Benefits and income