# Revenue says that someone on Jobseekers can't do voluntary work? unpaid work?



## Demented1 (24 May 2013)

Hi. 

This morning someone from Revenue called to the site where I am building my own house. 

He had questions about the block layer so we answered them all, name, address, total cost of blocks, how much we had given to date. 

He asked who was doing the roof. My partner told him himself and my brother were there today putting up joists. My brother is on social welfare as he cannot get a job. There is no money to give my brother he was doing it as a favour so we could get the joists done so the block layer could finish up. We do not have a mortgage and we and my kids live with my parent as we were trying to do the house bit by bit. My brother and partner were putting up joists yesterday, my brother offered to help as a favour as he knows there is no money. 

The guy from revenue said even though money is not changing hands that you cannot help out on a job when on social welfare. My brother did voluntary work 2 days last week in his community and was told that is not allowed either? 

Now I am worried we have gotten my own brother into trouble without even realising. He is going to go in and speak to social welfare and see what the story is. We have closed up the site which is not a problem but I am worried now he is in trouble. They were doing the joists so the block layer could come back to finish the gables. My brother also helped two days a few months ago when my partner and his brothers were digging the foundations. 

Now have I got him in trouble by him helping us out? I feel awful that he was doing me a favour as he has a heart of gold and really would do anything for me and never ask anything in return and I accepted his help not knowing he wasn't allowed help out when no money was involved. 

I have receipts for everything, all the materials and the labour that we have paid the block layer, plumber etc. We just gave nothing to the family members.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (24 May 2013)

I am not an expert, but the test is that you must be available for work. It seems to me that your brother is available for work and his SW will not be affected. 

I don't think he needs to go into the SW office. I think it's unlikely that the Revenue will follow up on this.  But he might like to go into the SW office so that he  can stop worrying about it. 

Brendan


----------



## ClaireM (24 May 2013)

If someone on Jobseekers wants to do voluntary work they need to fill out a VW1 form and the request will be assessed.


----------



## Demented1 (24 May 2013)

He rang the local social welfare office and they said no he cannot do that and is meeting them this afternoon. He would have to sign off the days he was helping us out even though we would not be paying him. He is available for work and would love some as he is bored out of his mind with nothing to do. If he had a job he would not be helping us out or knowing him would help us out at weekends. 

I really do not care if he stops helping as long as I haven't put him in trouble with a favour. He is telling me it's no big deal and I have nothing to be sorry for but I feel awful. 

The revenue man told him he does not share information with social welfare but they have access to their files so that's why he contacted social welfare because he does not want to be in bother for something he genuinely did not know he was doing wrong. 

Also can someone tell my why revenue visited us? I would understand a social welfare inspector calling to check we weren't hiring anyone on social welfare but I don't understand revenue calling? 

We were approved for a mortgage of 112k BUT we had to go back to planning to make the house smaller, 1200 square foot to be approved or get a gift of 50k to keep going with the original planning along with our savings. Builders had quoted us 138k to build but the bank costed it at over 160k. So that is the reason we have no mortgage. We were told the other option rather than change plans was to go ahead with our savings and a personal loan the bank then gave us and come back to them when we ran out. So we were going to go back once the roof was on and the windows were in which in laws are helping us out with. 

We never wanted to go direct labour route but I have another brother who had his own business in the building advising us and architect overseeing everything so that's why in the end we went this route when we couldn't get the gift they wanted.


----------



## Demented1 (24 May 2013)

Is what he was doing for us classed as voluntary work though?

I know what he was at last week in his community was voluntary because there was about four of them did it to tidy up the place. For us social welfare said he has to do something with an X and an O. 

I am not worried about from here on out I will tell him not to worry about it he does not need to help. 

I am worried I have gotten him in bother for yesterday and this morning, even though this morning they hadn't actually done any work.


----------



## gipimann (24 May 2013)

Here are the operational guidelines on voluntary work for jobseekers, taken from welfare.ie

*Voluntary Work *

_A jobseeker who engages in voluntary work within the State may continue to be entitled to a jobseekers payment provided that, in engaging in the voluntary work, they continue to satisfy the statutory conditions of being available for and genuinely seeking work. _
_Examples of voluntary work in which jobseekers may engage include_

_helping the sick, elderly or persons with a disability _
_assisting youth clubs, church groups, sports groups, cultural organisations, local resident associations _
_The groups involved may be nationally organised groups or local voluntary or community groups._
*Aims of the Voluntary Work Option*

_The aim of the Voluntary Work Option is twofold, namely – to encourage voluntary organisations to involve jobseekers to the greatest extent possible in their existing activities by creating new opportunities for voluntary work and to inform jobseekers of their freedom to involve themselves in voluntary work and to encourage them to do so. _
*Applying for the Voluntary Work Option*

_The jobseeker or the voluntary organisation/group involved should request an application form VW 1 from the Local Office. The completed application form should be sent to the Local Office and a Deciding Officer will determine whether the customer may take up the work in question without affecting entitlement to the jobseekers payment._
*Decisions in relation to Voluntary Work*

_In considering an application, the Deciding Officer will determine whether the work concerned is voluntary within the meaning of the scheme and whether the jobseeker would continue to satisfy the statutory conditions for getting the jobseekers payment. The Deciding Officer will need to be satisfied that the jobseeker is available to take up employment, if offered it, and that they are making genuine efforts to find work. This applies whether the voluntary work is full or part-time._
_While it is not possible to lay down hard and fast rules as to what constitutes voluntary work the position should be clear in most cases. Factors to be taken into account will include:_

_the type of work involved, _
_the aims and standing of the voluntary body, _
_the weekly hours worked, _
_amount of any payment received by way of out-of-pocket expenses _
_The voluntary work would normally involve only a few hours a day or a few days a week but full-time involvement in voluntary activities would not necessarily be ruled out. However, there should be no implication of Job Replacement or Cheap Labour. Any payment for the voluntary work should generally be limited to out-of-pocket expenses such as travelling expenses or meal allowances._


----------



## gipimann (24 May 2013)

Demented,
Your latter posts crossed with mine above - the guidelines above may answer your question as to whether the work done on your house qualifies as voluntary.


----------



## Demented1 (24 May 2013)

Sorry my heading was changed when it was moved. I didn't think what he was doing would be classed as voluntary. 

Thank you for the information. 

We were not stopping him being available for work. He said to us he would give us a hand putting up the joists so that the block layer could finish up with the gables. 

I am really just nervous that i have gotten him in trouble with social welfare when he was doing me a favour. He doesn't seem to mind but it's me feels terrible.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (24 May 2013)

HI gipimann

That is very helpful, but in practice if an unemployed person tidies up his local area , will the SW Inspector be interested? 

If an unemployed freind of mine helps me to do the garden, is he really supposed to report that he was not available for work for that afternoon? 

Brendan


----------



## callybags (24 May 2013)

I think revenue/social welfare are being overly pedantic in this case.

Once they established that it was a self-build then that should have been the end of it.

The rediculous thing is that the brother could be in trouble now having received nothing for helping out, yet he could have sat on his backside for the day and been given €100 by his sister and that would be fine.

Does a 19 year old lad living at home really have to notify social welfare and say "Today I cut the grass and my mother gave me a tenner"?

Jobsworthness* gone mad!  

* I may have made up that word.


----------



## DB74 (24 May 2013)

What is the definition of being "available for work" anyway? Unless your friend has signed a legal contract to spend the day helping you in your garden then there is nothing to stop him to walk away if a paid position becomes open on that day.


----------



## Demented1 (24 May 2013)

My brother could walk away at any time if he did get work. He is in his late 40's. If i had known he wasn't allowed i would told him to forget about it. I would understand if we had him at the site all day every day and getting him to do a mountain of work and taking away from him taking up employment. He says to me he will do as they say and sign off for whatever day he gives us a hand. But then if i was to give him a few bob to cover what he would be losing out on would i then become an employer. It's crazy because it was just a favour. He was actually losing money by helping me because he used a bit of petrol. I just feel awful that i have now put him in this position because of yesterday and this morning.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (24 May 2013)

callybags said:


> Jobsworthness* gone mad!
> 
> * I may have made up that word.



Hi cally

I must say I hadn't heard it before, but it is used occasionally, oddly enough usually in relation to public servants. 


> Even though the Audi is over line, there is clearly more than enough  room for another car to park to its right. To penalise the Audi driver  is sour faced jobworthness.



But, of course, unfairly. 
Woman slams parking warden for "unfair" ticket in Bourne End


----------



## Demented1 (24 May 2013)

Does anyone know why revenue called in the first place anyway? Is there some bigger issue. The only labour we have got so far was the block layer and the plumber and i have receipts for any monies paid to them. The block layer does not get the last payment until the gables are finished and what has been paid to people is clear to see on bank statements. We have paid VAT on all materials and have all receipts. Is there something else we could be doing wrong that we have revenue call?


----------



## Demented1 (24 May 2013)

And another thing while i am paranoid. Down the line another brother and brother in law have offered to skim and scratch (i think thats it) the outside on the weekends. Again no payment. They are not on social welfare as they are employed themselves. Is that ok?


----------



## mandelbrot (24 May 2013)

Demented1 said:


> Does anyone know why revenue called in the first place anyway? Is there some bigger issue. The only labour we have got so far was the block layer and the plumber and i have receipts for any monies paid to them. The block layer does not get the last payment until the gables are finished and what has been paid to people is clear to see on bank statements. We have paid VAT on all materials and have all receipts. Is there something else we could be doing wrong that we have revenue call?


 
Revenue call into building sites to ensure that the contractors carrying on the works are registered for tax and paying income tax, VAT, RCT etc.

In other words they want to ensure that the people being paid the €100k+ that you're spending are declaring it for tax purposes, rather than operating in the "shadow economy".


----------



## Demented1 (24 May 2013)

I meant to say the revenue guy said it's not like he was walking a dog for us so it is different that he was doing a roof. My brother did roofs in england for 15 years and had been working on the buildings here when he moved back. So the revenue guy saw it as a skilled job and not the likes of walking a dog for someone. The revenue guy said he used to be a social welfare inspector himself and that it is not allowed but to double check himself. He believed there was no money changing hands but it is not allowed. He was very nice so i am not giving out about him. I am just kind of surprised that you can't help someone while on social welfare and i am annoyed with myself that i have brought all this on my brother when he could of just stayed at home and said tough crap do it yourselves.

So it is checking up on them and not us is it? We gave him the name of the block layer like he asked and the total cost and what has been paid to date. He never asked about the plumbing or anything else. Just who did the blocks and who is at the roof. So least then it's not something we have done to make him call?

My partner and i are not clued up on social welfare at all. I didn't even apply for maternity benefit on my two kids, i went back to work when they were a week and 3 weeks old even though i would of got more on maternity. It never crossed my mind that someone on jobseekers could not do something for free. I thought you would sign off if you were getting paid for work but if you were getting nothing you could do it. I should have looked into it i know. I wouldn't mind getting myself in trouble but not when i have got someone else in bother. 

I will update later


----------



## callybags (24 May 2013)

No- nothing you did.

Myself and my father were getting dormer windows put into a holiday house and we hired a carpenter to do the timberwork. He had a helper with him.

The four of us were up on the roof when I noticed the helper mutter "Oh f**k" and disappear through the hole in the roof into the house. Next think I saw him off up the fields behind the house, just as an ordinary looking car pulled up outside. Turned out it was the social welfare doing a check once they saw work going on.

Carperner was fully compliant and helper was never caught.


----------



## oldnick (24 May 2013)

-Revenue  have every right and really should check out people working at the types of jobs you describe.

Building work is one of the biggest sources of black labour. Not only does black labour deprive the nation of much needed revenue, it makes the rest of us pay more.

More important it causes genuine tax-compliant craftsmen to go  out of business. They just can't compete with the cash-in-hand builders (I use the term "builder" to encompass all types of crafts).

Now, it is often the excuse of these people to claim they're "just helping out" their friend, brother, etc.  And it's only natural -and the duty - of the Revenue guy to check the veracity of those statements. Otherwise any cash-in-hand nixer could get away with it for ever.

I'm only saying all this because ,as much as  your own situation seems crazy -genuine professionals working for nothing - Revenue's interest is based on common sense and much needed control of the black economy.

It doesn't solve your problem but may better help you understand it.


----------



## Demented1 (24 May 2013)

I do understand that as it is what put three of my own brothers out of business, that and one guy they done work for who did them over. 

I can understand them coming in to check up everything is legit. I am just a bit surprised that a family member can't do you a favour if claiming social welfare and i may have got someone in bother for it. 

Thanks everyone. Will update later as to what they say in case anyone ever googles and has the same issue


----------



## gipimann (24 May 2013)

Brendan Burgess said:


> HI gipimann
> 
> That is very helpful, but in practice if an unemployed person tidies up his local area , will the SW Inspector be interested?
> 
> ...


 
The SW inspector may be interested in the "local area clean-up" scenario if it suggests that the volunteers are facilitating job replacement by the authority responsible for cleaning up the area (e.g. the council), especially if the volunteers are organised.

Although not my area of expertise, my opinion isthat SW have no interest in a person who's helping you to do the garden who gets a couple of pints as thanks, and they would not be expected to sign off. It's no different than the person spending the afternoon doing his own garden.

If, however, the person started helping others in the estate to do their gardens, and then starts doing the gardens for them and gets a few quid for his efforts, where does this stop being a "neighbourly act" and start being "black economy work"? Therein lies the difficulty.

As oldnick said, I'm sure that the "I was only helping out" excuse has been used by some who are deliberately working for cash-in-hand and signing on, so Revenue and SW have to investigate them very seriously. I'm not suggesting for one minute that this is the situation in Demented's case, I'm just making a general point.


----------



## FioBi (24 May 2013)

I am surprised that you answered any questions if a revenue inspector just turned up out of the blue and starting asking questions. I dont believe you were obliged to answer anything. 

I know you were happy to answer questions as you believed yourself to be fully compliant but most revenue inspectors dont just turn up out of the blue.They carry out inspections as a result of a tip off or because something you have done has caused you to appear on an inspection list. (could simply be as a previous poster said that you are building a house and they looked at planning permissions etc..) 

How did they know you would be there that day? Surely you are entitled to a minimum notice period of an investigation taking place?

I would expect SW inspections to be unexpected but a revenue inspection is different. I wonder are they asking on some sort of tip off?


----------



## Demented1 (24 May 2013)

He just turned up about ten minutes after they went into the site. They hadn't even actually started. He parked outside and walked in and my partner just answered what he asked. He did say he was from revenue before he asked anything but my partner just answered what he asked and when he asked and my brother answered then when he wanted a word with him. 

I could understand if he was on some randoms persons house because then you would know there is something wrong. But i also understand that he could be doing it for me and me paying him but we aren't. 

Anyway. He went in. They weren't very helpful and didn't really care. Said it was nothing to do with them (??) but it's not allowed. That you cannot work for nothing for anyone including a family member and that if he wants to do it then he could register as self employed and come off the social welfare even though we'd be giving him nothing. So i spoke to him when he came out and said what about if we gave him money to do the joists so they builder can come back as was planned could he sign off for the hours he would be with us. He phoned them. No he cannot sign off for days like that either. 

I am lost. I don't understand it. So he can't do it for free and we cannot pay him and he sign off for the few days either. 

Citizens advice said the information the social welfare gave is wrong. Social welfare are saying you can't but basically they are not interested. And revenue say he can't. 

As for revenue calling to a site. I would presume anyone like that would be entitled to enter and ask what they want to make sure everything is legit? Either way we didn't think we had anything to hide so when he came in my partner was happy to talk to him and answer his questions and so was my brother when he then talked to him. Why would they not be allowed ask anything? 

There is nothing anyone could report us to revenue for as far as i am aware.


----------



## Annie51 (24 May 2013)

If the blocklaying is not complete yet, what has the plumber done?


----------



## Demented1 (24 May 2013)

He had to put in the pipes before the floor was poured why?


----------



## mandelbrot (25 May 2013)

FioBi said:


> I am surprised that you answered any questions if a revenue inspector just turned up out of the blue and starting asking questions. I dont believe you were obliged to answer anything.
> 
> I know you were happy to answer questions as you believed yourself to be fully compliant but most revenue inspectors dont just turn up out of the blue.They carry out inspections as a result of a tip off or because something you have done has caused you to appear on an inspection list. (could simply be as a previous poster said that you are building a house and they looked at planning permissions etc..)
> 
> ...



Stop scaremongering.

Revenue routinely visit sites like this. They are fully entitled to enter, to make enquiries, and to require all reasonable assistance. See Section 904 TCA 1997.

A few relevant excerpts:
"An authorised officer may at all reasonable times enter a premises on suspicion that relevant operations (construction, forestry or meat processing) are or have been carried on there or that there are records located there."
"The authorised officer may require records to be supplied by appropriate persons."
"An authorised officer can require all reasonable assistance in going about his/her work."
"A penalty of €4,000 applies for non-compliance with the provisions of this section."


----------



## Joe_90 (25 May 2013)

> Carperner was fully compliant and helper was never caught.



I would question how the carpenter was fully compliant when the employee who he had had on his books, paying PAYE, PRSI and CIF pension ect had such an issue with either Revenue or Social Welfare.

Clearly the employer did not inform the inspector that his properly registered employee who had nothing to hide just legged it up the fields.


----------



## callybags (25 May 2013)

I understand what you are saying. My post was what happened but was also a bit young in cheek.

Obviously he wasn't fully compliant a evidenced by the disappearance of the helper, but SW man went away happy. 

This was back in the early 90's when compliance was optional


----------



## Demented1 (25 May 2013)

I do not know what to do about this at all. I have been thinking about it all night. There does not seem to be a way to get him to do it for free like he offered and there does not seem to be a way i could pay him for a few days work and him not receive social welfare those days now either.


----------



## Demented1 (25 May 2013)

Also thank you for the clarification mandelbrot. I had told my partner that apparently he need not have answered anything and he said if anyone else comes in when we restart he would refuse so it's good to know to tell him to just answers any official that ever enters. Who else are self builds likely to get a visit from?
He said the guy was a nice enough fella, got a bit ratty when my brother said he was on social welfare all right but then went on to tell them it was the tidiest site he had been on in a long time and complimented the block layers work saying it was the best he had seen on any site and he had been on many and off he went. 

Bit of a pain now though not being able to get the block layer back Monday to finish his part and be done with that aspect of it.


----------



## oldnick (25 May 2013)

Demented - you chose the right name for yourself !

I think you are getting too worked up about this. I know that some people who are not used to officialdom can easily get upset when faced with someone from any govnt dept quoting rules and saying its against regulations.

It seems nobody on this thread knows the solution to this insanity. I get the opinion that none of the posters, including me, have ever come across a situation where a couple's relatives are helping out for nothing -and getting into trouble for doing so.

I may be wrong but the concept of voluntary work as per the quoted extracts is not meant to include one's brother,partner ,son or anyone else in the family giving free time to help one with work on one's property.
However, officials cannot think outside what is written. So they quote the rules without regard to how in some cases (like yours) they make no sense.
It's usually up to their seniors (or the courts) to make sense of the rules.

However, I udnerstand that you don't want to have the bother of fighting this and you may decide to stop using their help. That would be such pity. Allowing some official to stop a brother or partner helping you is obscenely wrong.

Sorry, I'm waffling  because I don't know the answer yet I see how worried you are about a situation that frankly should be reported to the media or T.D.

For officials to cause you such distress is disgusting and I wish you all the best.


----------



## Demented1 (25 May 2013)

Thanks Nick. 

It seems no one anywhere knows the correct answer but all i can go by is the social. My brother is really good with anything to do with carpentry and to say to him now look forget it you can't help seems unfair on everyone. My young daughter suddenly got seriously ill out of nowhere and we are paying private and that is where our shortfall for the time being is with paying labour. So at the moment we cannot pay for help on labour for the roof and why i wanted the block layer all finished and cleared up as the last 9k for materials is being paid next week also and that would have us up to date and see where we are at once we have my daughters results and hopefully diagnosis and then see where we go from there money wise/house wise. 

I am going to get something in writing with the solicitor to name the family member's that have helped out so far and that they have helped for free. There has been 4 family member's that have done bits here and there. 

It just seems unfair that we can no longer help each other out here and there. But that's life.


----------



## Padraigb (25 May 2013)

I don't see a real problem here other than one public servant taking too restricted a view of the situation. Your brother was not doing "voluntary work" in the sense for which the rules were drawn up: he was doing a favour for a family member. It can reasonably be presumed that if paid work became available, he would take it.


----------



## oldnick (25 May 2013)

+1. 
They really should continue doing what they were doing.


----------



## ajapale (25 May 2013)

I think there is a distinction between _*voluntary work*_ and _*unpaid work*_ and have added "unpaid" work to the title.


----------



## Demented1 (25 May 2013)

Thanks. I never put the heading of voluntary on it. That just came on it. I didn't think it would have came under that but anyway it is still not allowed so makes no difference. 

Thank you everyone for the advice. I appreciate it.


----------



## Bronte (28 May 2013)

Demented1 said:


> . That you cannot work for nothing for anyone including a family member and that if he wants to do it then he could register as self employed and come off the social welfare even though we'd be giving him nothing.
> 
> .


 
Do the social welfare rules actually state this? Or is the guy in social welfare making it up as he goes along. 

Gipimann who is the expert on this posted up some of the rules on voluntary work, but nowhere does it say a family member is not allowed to do work for nothing for a relation.


----------



## Gervan (28 May 2013)

One wonders how far down this goes. Say your mother is on jobseeker's benefit and a daughter leaves a child with mother for the afternoon while taking another child for hospital appointment. Surely this can't be illegal?
Isn't there some phrase about "natural love and affection" that allows us to be kind to our family members?


----------



## AlbacoreA (28 May 2013)

Kind of a grey area isn't. If you want be pedantic about it hes not working for free. The State is paying him. The only thing I can think of is similar to this, would be creating an intern work experience position, that would enable him to retain his payments and work. I don't know the rules around that though.


----------



## mandelbrot (28 May 2013)

AlbacoreA said:


> Kind of a grey area isn't. If you want be pedantic about it hes not working for free. The State is paying him. The only thing I can think of is similar to this, would be creating an intern work experience position, that would enable him to retain his payments and work. I don't know the rules around that though.


 
What if he only does it on a Sunday, or in the evenings outside of "normal" working hours...


----------



## AlbacoreA (28 May 2013)

Why would that make a difference? Otherwise in theory you could take Sunday and evening/night time work, and still claim a payment. The problem where is that its too difficult to tell the difference between someone helping out a family member and working on the black market. The issue being its too hard, or costly in time and resources to police it. 

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/e...nts_and_work/jobseekers_benefit_and_work.html


----------



## Time (28 May 2013)

Sunday is a free day as far as SW are concerned. You can certainly work on Sunday and claim your full dole for the other 6 days.


----------



## AlbacoreA (28 May 2013)

Time said:


> Sunday is a free day as far as SW are concerned. You can certainly work on Sunday and claim your full dole for the other 6 days.



From my link earlier...



> Sunday work and jobseeker's payments
> *From 21 February 2013 Sunday *working is taken into account for Jobseeker's Benefit. You must be unemployed for 4 out of 7 consecutive days (including Sunday). If you work on Sunday you are considered to be employed for 1 day and 1/5th of your normal rate of Jobseeker's Benefit will be deducted from your weekly payment.
> 
> Even though the social welfare employment week now takes Sunday into account you are not considered unemployed for 7 days. You are considered to be unemployed for 6 days out of the 7-day social welfare employment week. This means that for each week that you are fully unemployed 6 days are deducted from the days remaining on your Jobseeker's Benefit claim.
> ...


----------



## Time (28 May 2013)

Ah things have changed.


----------



## mandelbrot (28 May 2013)

Someone just made an interesting observation to me - there were a very vocal group of protesters outside a particular tax office this morning. If any of those people are unemployed, could spending the day protesting be deemed not being available for and seeking work...?!

Likewise the guy who chained himself to the tax office in Dublin last week - he was hardly available for and seeking work, was he...


----------



## Time (28 May 2013)

If you were to enforce the SW rules rigidly there would not be enough inspectors to deal with all the inquires they would have to make.


----------



## AlbacoreA (28 May 2013)

I can foresee the MIB from revenue recruiting you mannie ... just look into the light....


----------



## AlbacoreA (28 May 2013)

Time said:


> If you were to enforce the SW rules rigidly there would not be enough inspectors to deal with all the inquires they would have to make.



Indeed, I assume that's the reason for these rules witch aren't that sophisticated. Just broad strokes.


----------



## callybags (28 May 2013)

.... 


> Sunday work and jobseeker's payments
> *From 21 February 2013 Sunday *working is taken into account for Jobseeker's Benefit. You must be unemployed for 4 out of 7 consecutive days (including Sunday). If you work on Sunday you are considered to be employed for 1 day and 1/5th of your normal rate of Jobseeker's Benefit will be deducted from your weekly payment.
> 
> Even though the social welfare employment week now takes Sunday into account you are not considered unemployed for 7 days. You are considered to be unemployed for 6 days out of the 7-day social welfare employment week. This means that for each week that you are fully unemployed 6 days are deducted from the days remaining on your Jobseeker's Benefit claim.
> ...


 
My head hurt reading this. 

Why in the name of all that's holy did they have to put "including Sunday" when making reference to 7 consecutive days.

Where I come from it's not possible to have 7 consecutive days not including a Sunday.


----------



## Demented1 (28 May 2013)

We haven't heard anything since and no more callers as far as partner is aware. It's being built on the farm he works on so he would of seen anyone most likely.


----------



## mandelbrot (28 May 2013)

callybags said:


> ....
> 
> 
> My head hurt reading this.
> ...


 
Because previously Sunday was always disregarded, so for the specific purpose outlined you would not include Sunday when counting consecutive days of unemployment. Or something.


----------



## mandelbrot (28 May 2013)

AlbacoreA said:


> I can foresee the MIB from revenue recruiting you mannie ... just look into the light....


 
You can't foresee things that have already happened, that's called hindsight... and who said it's a light? It's a 24-hour brainwashing session in conjunction with a cocktail of psychotropic drugs... I thought everyone knew that.


----------



## AlbacoreA (28 May 2013)

Maybe I used to know that....


----------



## Bronte (29 May 2013)

ajapale said:


> I think there is a distinction between _*voluntary work*_ and _*unpaid work*_ and have added "unpaid" work to the title.


 
Maybe you should also change the title from Revenue to Social Welfare, as it's not revenue rules but social welfare rules.


----------



## ajapale (29 May 2013)

Bronte said:


> Maybe you should also change the title from Revenue to Social Welfare, as it's not revenue rules but social welfare rules.



I thought about that but the op referred to a revenue site inspection so I left it.



Demented1 said:


> Hi.
> 
> This morning someone from Revenue called to the site where I am building my own house.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bronte (30 May 2013)

ajapale said:


> I thought about that but the op referred to a revenue site inspection so I left it.


 
Yes I get that but it was not revenue's business as far as I can tell. And the trouble only started with the OP contacted social welfare. And in his post No 4 he mentioned that the revenue guy said that he cannot share information with social welfare.

Demented, I suggest you listen to a pod cast of Pat Kenny earlier this week.  They were talking about the fact that revenue are calling to building sites to see that everyone is legit.  And it's good they are doing that.


----------



## stevemac182 (30 May 2013)

This thread is everything that's wrong with the country, in a nutshell. Demented, get your brother back on site for heaven's sake. If another inspector comes around let your brother tell him he came down for a chat about the match last night, whatever. When two brothers cannot help each other build a house without a load of insignificant questions and one losing out on money, it's plain wrong. At what level of all those rules and regulations quoted does common sense kick in? The courts? Really?

I realise that buildings need to be inspected and maybe I'm naive about the level of deception taking place but surely if a carpenter on a self-build is proven as a brother of the owner's this cannot be termed "voluntary work". Not in the real world anyways. If the government put as much effort into generating work for your brother rather than questioning him about his helping his own flesh and blood in an area of his expertise, it would be time better spent.

Madness!


----------



## AlbacoreA (30 May 2013)

Back in the 80's the road outside the dole office used to be lined with builder vans and taxi dropping people off and collecting them from the sites. I expect it stems from that.


----------



## Jim2007 (30 May 2013)

Padraigb said:


> I don't see a real problem here other than one public servant taking too restricted a view of the situation. Your brother was not doing "voluntary work" in the sense for which the rules were drawn up: he was doing a favour for a family member. It can reasonably be presumed that if paid work became available, he would take it.



Of course there is a problem!  If this kind of "free work" was allowed, what would stop someone signing on the dole, working on building their house, or their brother's house or whatever and signing off once it's do, thus the taxpayer ends up financing part of the house!  

Or how about working behind the bar in the family business a couple of afternoons a week so dad can but his feet up - for free of course since the son is on the dole - is that OK too?


----------



## mandelbrot (30 May 2013)

It's a question of degrees really, isn't it - in your first example above that's clearly not on, but what about if he's already got no job, and his brother phones him and asks to help him lift a generator or other equipment on or off a trailer for 15 minutes - should he sign off then? 

Or if having unloaded the trailer, he decides to stay for another half an hour and help his brother with some other heavy lifting, should he sign off then?

Or if it gets to lunchtime and he's still arseing around the place because it beats the hell out of Jeremy Kyle, should he sign off then?

It's the absolute definition of a grey area IMHO.


----------



## Jim2007 (30 May 2013)

Oh there will always be a good reason, but if one gets caught then one should not be surprised it the powers that be take a different line....


----------

