# Wife giving up work ....



## bitethebullet (10 Aug 2022)

Hi, My wife is giving up her job next week but is paid montly so is due another pay cheque post termination. Should she sign on the day she finishes or how does it work? Thanks


----------



## gipimann (10 Aug 2022)

She should start her claim from her first day of unemployment, even if a salary payment is due after that date.  So if she finishes on Friday, her claim can start from the following Monday.


----------



## noproblem (10 Aug 2022)

Is everyone who gives up work entitled to sign on and what exactly do you sign on for?


----------



## Groucho (10 Aug 2022)

noproblem said:


> Is everyone who gives up work entitled to sign on and what exactly do you sign on for?



Everyone who meets the criteria* is.

And one normally 'signs on' for a jobseeker's payment (JA or JB).   If one isn't eligible for either, the signing on would be for PRSI credits.

*  effectively these are:  available for work;  looking for work and fit for work!


----------



## peteb (10 Aug 2022)

yeah but if you jack in a perfectly fine job you have to wait 3 months for any benefits.


----------



## noproblem (10 Aug 2022)

peteb said:


> yeah but if you jack in a perfectly fine job you have to wait 3 months for any benefits.


I suppose that's really what I wanted to know. Why give up a job and then expect to get paid from the goverment, or am I missing something?


----------



## Groucho (10 Aug 2022)

peteb said:


> yeah but if you jack in a perfectly fine job you have to wait 3 months for any benefits.



Which makes perfect sense to me!     Why should the State reward someone for deciding on a whim to quit a perfectly fine job?


----------



## huskerdu (10 Aug 2022)

She may not be entitled to a SW payment but she should register with SW the first week she is not in employment so she can get a credited PRSI  contribution,


----------



## Horatio (10 Aug 2022)

noproblem said:


> I suppose that's really what I wanted to know. Why give up a job and then expect to get paid from the goverment, or am I missing something?


Yes, the PRSI credit component is to also be considered alongside the welfare payment which his wife may or may not be receive.


----------



## Horatio (10 Aug 2022)

Groucho said:


> Which makes perfect sense to me!     Why should the State reward someone for deciding to quit a perfectly fine job?


Because the person in question may have made the appropriate PRSI contributions & may fit the defined criteria to avail of Social *Insurance.*

Like an insurance policy on your house or car, you pay into a policy via your premium & when bad circumstance befall you then you make a claim which will be assessed on the criteria.


----------



## Ceist Beag (10 Aug 2022)

This is something new to me. Mrs Beag stepped out of work a number of years back (for family reasons). She did not register with SW. Is she now at risk of having missed out on PRSI contributions or something?


----------



## Horatio (10 Aug 2022)

Ceist Beag said:


> This is something new to me. Mrs Beag stepped out of work a number of years back (for family reasons). She did not register with SW. Is she now at risk of having missed out on PRSI contributions or something?


Yes, she should register with your local Intreo office explaining the back dated period. Bring your documents.


----------



## Groucho (10 Aug 2022)

Horatio said:


> Because the person in question may have made the appropriate PRSI contributions & may fit the defined criteria to avail of Social *Insurance.*
> 
> Like an insurance policy on your house or car, you pay into a policy via your premium & when bad circumstance befall you then you make a claim which will be assessed on the criteria.



So if you decide to burn your house down, your insurance company will cheerfully pay out.   You certain about that?


----------



## Horatio (10 Aug 2022)

I'm certain they wouldn't pay you. You have described a notional case where the circumstances are known: The house was intentionally burned down.

I don't have the equivalent level of detail in the case the OP describes. I have no idea why his wife is giving up her job because he didn't write it in his post.

His wife will in all likelihood will need to furnish those details to the department of Social Welfare & they can then make an informed decision as to her entitlement or not.


----------



## Bluefin (10 Aug 2022)

I thought it was 9 weeks before you technically could receive your social welfare payment if you voluntary.. Let's be honest here this rule is seldom applied by most local welfare offices... If you have the prsi contributions paid, you receive your non means tested payment.. Imagine if a person was forced to resign due to their mental health.. Would you like to be the social welfare officer questioning a person about this.. I'd say way beyond their pay grade


----------



## Conan (10 Aug 2022)

If an individual is claiming Jobseeker, they must be available for and actively seeking employment (if under age 62). So it’s not quite as simple as giving up a job and immediately claiming Jobseekers. Equally if they only wanted to sign on for “credits”, the also have to satisfy the activation process.


----------



## gipimann (10 Aug 2022)

Horatio said:


> Yes, she should register with your local Intreo office explaining the back dated period. Bring your documents.





Ceist Beag said:


> This is something new to me. Mrs Beag stepped out of work a number of years back (for family reasons). She did not register with SW. Is she now at risk of having missed out on PRSI contributions or something?


Mrs Beag does not have to register with Intreo if she left work to look after your child(ren).  Homemaker scheme applies here, which disregards homemaking years when calculating pension entitlement.
More information here -





						Homemaker's Scheme
					

This scheme makes it easier for a homemaker to qualify for the State Pension (Contributory).




					www.citizensinformation.ie


----------



## Monbretia (10 Aug 2022)

No one knows whey the person in question left their job, it's not as simple as leave job/don't get payment.   You can indeed sign on and may even be entitled to your JB immediately depending on reason you left, it's not black and white.


----------



## bstop (10 Aug 2022)

Monbretia said:


> It's not black and white.


It is fairly complex. It's well worth reading the Operational guidelines for Jobseekers Benefit before you apply. You will then have a good understanding of what is required and expected from you when you apply. Basically if you know what is expected you be in a better situation to answer any questions in a way that will be acceptable to the deciding officer.


----------



## Ceist Beag (10 Aug 2022)

gipimann said:


> Mrs Beag does not have to register with Intreo if she left work to look after your child(ren).  Homemaker scheme applies here, which disregards homemaking years when calculating pension entitlement.
> More information here -
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks gipimann, as per that information we don't need to do anything as her claim for Child Benefit is treated as an application to be registered as a homemaker, good to know we haven't messed up here!


----------



## noproblem (10 Aug 2022)

An interesting post, learn something new every day.


----------



## fayf (10 Aug 2022)

It is 9 weeks,





						Operational Guidelines: Jobseeker's Benefit
					






					www.gov.ie


----------



## Gordon Gekko (11 Aug 2022)

It’s a disgrace if the OP’s wife gets a cent from the State.

I’ve never heard the like of it. The clue is in the thread title…“giving up work”.

Social Welfare should be there for people who are let go or who can’t work.


----------



## Clamball (11 Aug 2022)

Gordon Gekko said:


> It’s a disgrace if the OP’s wife gets a cent from the State.
> 
> I’ve never heard the like of it. The clue is in the thread title…“giving up work”.
> 
> Social Welfare should be there for people who are let go or who can’t work.


As stated several times in the thread, just because you register and start to sign on it does not mean you will be paid any social welfare.  There are numerous reasons why people give up work - maybe there was a physical move to another county?  Who knows but that would not disbar the person from signing on for prsi credits, and drawing down jb or ja whichever they may become entitled to wether immediately, after 9 weeks or 9 months.


----------



## fayf (11 Aug 2022)

The individual circumstances, need to be considered here. 

The SW rules, often get a lot of stick, and there will always be gaps, but, they have to cover all eventualities, in so far as is possible. There are cases where some people have no choice to give up work, e.g. an intolerable situation at work, there are provisions for bullying/harrasment in the operational guidelines. There are provisions for gross misconduct- where the conduct led to dismissal, and 9 weeks of payments are withheld, While these reasons doesent sound like the case here, when the rules have to encompass so many different scenarios, there are enivitable gaps. And while thats the case, those gaps are there, in order to cover multiple and very diverse scenarios.

When you are in receipt of JB, or JA, one has already signed up, to be actively looking for employment and engaging proactively with getting reemployment, via training if necessary etc, if you refuse point blank, to engage, then SW can cease the payment.


----------



## bitethebullet (11 Aug 2022)

The place she works in is terrible and she's leaving for her own peace of mind. She's moving into a different career so it's JSB for the interim until she finds work,  which she should have no trouble finding.


----------



## ashambles (11 Aug 2022)

Nobody jacks in a perfectly fine job.  A red flag for any workplace is when people aren't just leaving for another job - they're leaving for no job.

Who'd take a massive pay cut - to get back a fraction of the PRSI they've paid in. (If you work for one year at 55k you've paid enough PRSI to pay the full amount of job seekers benefit).

Rule would be justifiable if the benefit was say 80% or your salary for a couple years like it might be in a country with real social insurance.  But when it's basically non-means tested dole for 9 months - nope.


----------



## Groucho (11 Aug 2022)

bitethebullet said:


> The place she works in is terrible and she's leaving for her own peace of mind. She's moving into a different career so it's JSB for the interim until she finds work,  which she should have no trouble finding.



So, not leaving on a whim as your OP implicitly suggested.

In that case, she should inform the SW inspector of her work situation (ideally supported by any medical evidence that may be available) in which case SW have the discretion to waive the 9 week delay.


----------



## ClubMan (11 Aug 2022)

Groucho said:


> So, not leaving on a whim as your OP implicitly suggested.


I didn't think that the original post suggested that at all.
But obviously lots of people here wanted to jump the gun/to conclusions on the basis of their own prejudices.


----------



## Bluefin (11 Aug 2022)

ashambles said:


> Nobody jacks in a perfectly fine job.  A red flag for any workplace is when people aren't just leaving for another job - they're leaving for no job.
> 
> Who'd take a massive pay cut - to get back a fraction of the PRSI they've paid in. (If you work for one year at 55k you've paid enough PRSI to pay the full amount of job seekers benefit).
> 
> Rule would be justifiable if the benefit was say 80% or your salary for a couple years like it might be in a country with real social insurance.  But when it's basically non-means tested dole for 9 months - nope.


A very nieve response... Who knows how she was suffering at work. The bravest thing to do is to jump ship and find an alternative work path. Fair play to her


----------



## ashambles (11 Aug 2022)

Bluefin said:


> A very nieve response... Who knows how she was suffering at work. The bravest thing to do is to jump ship and find an alternative work path. Fair play to her


Are you reading that I made a point which disagrees with that?

Just to clarify though, I both have zero problem with her leaving and zero problem in her being eligible for the benefit. In also believe this benefit should be vastly improved - at the very-very least increase it to 12 months like it was before 2013.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (11 Aug 2022)

She should receive zero social welfare.

If she’s not happy, she should find another job and move to it.

The State shouldn’t be picking up the tab here.


----------



## Groucho (11 Aug 2022)

ClubMan said:


> I didn't think that the original post suggested that at all.
> But obviously lots of people here wanted to jump the gun/to conclusions on the basis of their own prejudices.



Presumably you haven't the foggiest notion about the meaning of the word "implicitly" - but not to worry, as you grow up your vocabulary will probably improve.


----------



## ashambles (11 Aug 2022)

Gordon Gekko said:


> She should receive zero social welfare.
> 
> If she’s not happy, she should find another job and move to it.
> 
> The State shouldn’t be picking up the tab here.


She will receive zero social welfare as it's social insurance.

However you need to have 5 years of contributions, so if you're on 55k you'll have paid 40,000 euro to get back 8000.
It's a long way from the state picking up the tab.

There's a reason why we've income tax and PRSI. One redistributes wealth, the other is supposed to buy you as an individual social insurance.


----------



## ClubMan (11 Aug 2022)

Groucho said:


> Presumably you haven't the foggiest notion about the meaning of the word "implicitly" - but not to worry, as you grow up your vocabulary will probably improve.


I didn't think that the original post suggested implied that at all.
But obviously lots of people here wanted to jump the gun/to conclusions on the basis of their own prejudices. 

Hope that passes your pedantic vocabulary checks...


----------



## Gordon Gekko (12 Aug 2022)

I am genuinely shocked that people who voluntarily walk out of their jobs get paid Jobseekers Allowance.


----------



## Purple (5 Sep 2022)

ashambles said:


> If you work for one year at 55k you've paid enough PRSI to pay the full amount of job seekers benefit


That's just not true. If you are a single person earning €55k you'll pay €2,200 a year in PRSI. That's €42.30 a week. That covers all sorts of things including your State pension and all of that €42.30 wouldn't even fund your State pension.


----------



## Purple (5 Sep 2022)

ashambles said:


> However you need to have 5 years of contributions, so if you're on 55k you'll have paid 40,000 euro to get back 8000.
> It's a long way from the state picking up the tab.


Where did you get those figures from? 5 years payments is €11,000.


----------



## Groucho (6 Sep 2022)

Purple said:


> Where did you get those figures from? 5 years payments is €11,000.



He's probably throwing PAYE and USC into the pot - and maybe even the cost of the TV licence!     After all, it's all going to the gubberment, one way or another!


----------



## Purple (6 Sep 2022)

Groucho said:


> He's probably throwing PAYE and USC into the pot - and maybe even the cost of the TV licence!     After all, it's all going to the gubberment, one way or another!


PRSI and USC are around €4k a year. That's €20k over 5 years, still half the figure quoted. 
The total payroll deductions in tax, USC and PRSI for a single person earning €55k is around 28%. The marginal rates are very high and a disincentive to working more but the overall deductions are low enough. 
Someone on €26,500 only has €3,725 in deductions. That's 14%. That's very low. 

Low and middle income earners are under taxed in this country. High earners are relatively over taxed. The Middle might be squeezed but the State isn't doing the squeezing, not directly anyway. 

We also have a very generous welfare system, as can be seen by this thread. I'm not saying that we should change any of that but the facts are the facts, no matter how upset people are with the world around them.


----------



## ashambles (6 Sep 2022)

Purple said:


> PRSI and USC are around €4k a year. That's €20k over 5 years, still half the figure quoted.
> The total payroll deductions in tax, USC and PRSI for a single person earning €55k is around 28%. The marginal rates are very high and a disincentive to working more but the overall deductions are low enough.
> Someone on €26,500 only has €3,725 in deductions. That's 14%. That's very low.
> 
> ...



PRSI paid per PAYE employee is 11.05% + 4%.

So an employee on 55k has 15.05% paid into PRSI fund every year, 8277 euro a year.  Yes of course,  that's between you and employer but that's what's going in.


----------



## Purple (6 Sep 2022)

ashambles said:


> PRSI paid per PAYE employee is 11.05% + 4%.
> 
> So an employee on 55k has 15.05% paid into PRSI fund every year, 8277 euro a year.  Yes of course,  that's between you and employer but that's what's going in.


That's an employers cost. It includes a Health Levy of 4 or 5% and a training Levy of 0.7%. That's not a contribution towards the employees social insurance. As far as I know it also covers redundancy payments where the employer doesn't have the means to pay them.


----------



## Steven Barrett (6 Sep 2022)

Gordon Gekko said:


> I am genuinely shocked that people who voluntarily walk out of their jobs get paid Jobseekers Allowance.


Can you explain how someone can run their own business, sell it for a nice sum, retire and then get a redundancy payment from said company? I've never understood that.


----------



## Groucho (6 Sep 2022)

Steven Barrett said:


> Can you explain how someone can run their own business, sell it for a nice sum, retire and then get a redundancy payment from said company? I've never understood that.



The benefits of employing a crafty financial advisor, I suppose.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (6 Sep 2022)

Steven Barrett said:


> Can you explain how someone can run their own business, sell it for a nice sum, retire and then get a redundancy payment from said company? I've never understood that.


Because they were made redundant…


----------



## ashambles (6 Sep 2022)

Purple said:


> That's an employers cost. It includes a Health Levy of 4 or 5% and a training Levy of 0.7%. That's not a contribution towards the employees social insurance. As far as I know it also covers redundancy payments where the employer doesn't have the means to pay them.




The social insurance fund in 2021 was funded by employers PRSI at 8.8B, employees at 3.2B, self-employed 0.7B.

The SIF that funds jobseekers benefit is funded in the main by employers PRSI.  If someone prefers to believe otherwise - that's fine with me.


----------



## Groucho (6 Sep 2022)

ashambles said:


> PRSI paid per PAYE employee is 11.05% + 4%.
> 
> So an employee on 55k has 15.05% paid into PRSI fund every year, 8277 euro a year.  Yes of course,  that's between you and employer but that's what's going in.



So when you wrote _"If you work for one year at €55k you've paid enough PRSI to pay the full amount of job seekers benefit"_ above, what you really meant was that if you work for one year at 55k then *your employer and you have, between you,* paid enough PRSI to pay the full amount of job seekers' benefit.   

Thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## Purple (6 Sep 2022)

ashambles said:


> The social insurance fund in 2021 was funded by employers PRSI at 8.8B, employees at 3.2B, self-employed 0.7B.
> 
> The SIF that funds jobseekers benefit is funded in the main by employers PRSI.  If someone prefers to believe otherwise - that's fine with me.


I don't think anyone believes otherwise. The issue is that some people seem to think that the social insurance fund just funds the pensions of those who pay into it.
Those who believe that and assume their contributions are funding their pension or the full amount of their Job Seekers Benefit etc are clearly very wrong.


----------



## Steven Barrett (6 Sep 2022)

Gordon Gekko said:


> Because they were made redundant…


It's not in the spirit of the law...


----------



## ashambles (6 Sep 2022)

Purple said:


> The issue is that some people seem to think that the social insurance fund just funds the pensions of those who pay into it.


In terms of pensions it does only fund the COAP pensions of those who pay in.

Clearly the payout rate has little to do with what people pay in - which is the point you're making maybe? 

If you want a JB where it makes sense to restrict it to people laid off, then make it a proper JB based on salary. Fix the JB first, then the eligibility for it.

E.G Germany it's up to 67% of salary for two years, up to a cap of 84,000 euro p.a. , i.e. our max JB is 4.5% of the max German one, we pay less social insurance here - but not 22 times less.


----------



## Purple (7 Sep 2022)

ashambles said:


> In terms of pensions it does only fund the COAP pensions of those who pay in.


In theory, but;


ashambles said:


> Clearly the payout rate has little to do with what people pay in - which is the point you're making maybe?


Exactly. The PRSI most people pay, along with the PRSI their employers pays, isn't enough to fund their contributory old age pension and all of the other things it is supposed to fund.  


ashambles said:


> If you want a JB where it makes sense to restrict it to people laid off, then make it a proper JB based on salary. Fix the JB first, then the eligibility for it.
> 
> E.G Germany it's up to 67% of salary for two years, up to a cap of 84,000 euro p.a. , i.e. our max JB is 4.5% of the max German one, we pay less social insurance here - but not 22 times less.


I agree completely. It is ridiculous that it is not linked to what a person has paid in. It's also ridiculous that long term rates are the same as short term rates.


----------

