Ingeus seem to think that my fortnightly signing on at the Jobcentre is separate. My contract is with the Jobcentre and not Ingeus.

They (Ingeus) expect 3 jobs applied and declared to the Jobcentre and then as many jobs as they say I must apply for and declare applications to them on paper unless I want to be reported to the Jobcentre for possible sanctions.

Are they allowed to force me to make many, many applications far in excess of what my Jobseeker Agreement stipulates? I always exceed the mininum requirements for activity that the Jobcentre expect of me.

Has anyone made a request for info on this to DWP Central FoI Team regarding this?

The work programme provider is seperate to the JCP, you JSAg is only valid for 13 weeks maximum and when you migrate to the Work Programme you have an action plan set up in it's place. This is the agreement that you have to stick to whilst you contiinue to sign for JSA and you are supposed to take it to the JCP on your signing day to show what you were required to do for the previous fortnight and what you actually did from the plan.

If it is in your action plan that you must apply for 3 jobs and you fail to do that they can refer your claim to DMa as an entitlement doubt this can be for a period for anything between 2 and 26 weeks and is the discretion of the WP not JCP.

At your fortnightly signing you are required to sign the declaration on form ES24JP to state that you have met the conditions for JSA by being actively seeking and available, have declared any changes in circumstances that may affect payment of JSA and also that you have declared any paid or unpaid work in the period you are signing for.

There's been no mention of an Action Plan as yet. I won't be signing it as it's not a requirement for receipt of JSA. I will however, take reasonable steps to find work/improve chances.

Today I was told that the jobs I've applied for and told the Jobcentre about, don't count. I have to apply for as many jobs as Ingeus say. I don't have a choice. Figures of 10 or 15 were mentioned.

The question is, is just sticking to my JSAG enough? Can they force me to apply for jobs with threat of sanctions?

Your JSAg is no longer valid when you migrate to work programme.

I signed a new JSAG the week before induction onto the WP.

I still need advice wrt being forced to apply for arbitary numbers of jobs.

What is wrong with applying for the jobs, if they are not in your field you probably wont get an interview, and if it is you may get a job. TBH if you are unemployed how hard is it to spend your time during the day looking for and filling out job applications?

JSA is what it says Job Seekers Allowance, so seek for jobs if that is what you have to do

What is wrong with applying for the jobs, if they are not in your field you probably wont get an interview, and if it is you may get a job. TBH if you are unemployed how hard is it to spend your time during the day looking for and filling out job applications?

JSA is what it says Job Seekers Allowance, so seek for jobs if that is what you have to do

There are a few problems with this, though. I mean yes, of course people claiming Jobseekers Allowance should be seeking jobs, and the vast majority are. But the question, really, is whether or not the providers offer a service that is in any way helpful, because every moment you spend jumping through their hoops is one moment less spent on productive jobseeking.

Then there's the cases where the provider tries to coerce a jobseeker into work that is of dubious legality. We had one guy complain that they were trying to force him to work for a company looking to pay the apprentice rate NMW (£2.25 ph or so) on the basis that he would be an "Apprentice" door to door salesman. What's that all about?

What is wrong with applying for the jobs, if they are not in your field you probably wont get an interview, and if it is you may get a job. TBH if you are unemployed how hard is it to spend your time during the day looking for and filling out job applications?

JSA is what it says Job Seekers Allowance, so seek for jobs if that is what you have to do

Why apply for jobs you're not qualified to do, when you could be doing other productive job seeking related stuff?

As you are now with the work programme your JSAg is not what you need to be following so it will be the action plan set by the Provider, your JSAg is only valid for a maximum of 13 weeks up to the point of being referred to the Work Programme so this JSAg is no longer valid (even if it was agreed the week before you were referred).

Your provider should be working with you to determine what a sensible level of job search should be but the expectation is now that you are part of the work programme you are expected to apply for all jobs that you are qualifed to do and capable of doing.

What is wrong with applying for the jobs, if they are not in your field you probably wont get an interview, and if it is you may get a job. TBH if you are unemployed how hard is it to spend your time during the day looking for and filling out job applications?

JSA is what it says Job Seekers Allowance, so seek for jobs if that is what you have to do

I'll give an you example. I'm on the Work Programme. Every two weeks I have to visit the WP provider and 'look for work' on the computer in front of them. As I have already applied for more than 50 jobs in the last two weeks, I will find nothing new to apply for. My WP agent is not happy with this and brands me as 'lazy'.

The next time I don't apply for any jobs for two weeks. When I visit the WP office I apply for 10 jobs. The agent is happy and thinks I am a good boy.

See what the problems is? I am discouraged from doing my own homework as it is not monitored by the agent and I end up applying for less jobs and eventually this is not helping.

What is wrong with applying for the jobs, if they are not in your field you probably wont get an interview, and if it is you may get a job. TBH if you are unemployed how hard is it to spend your time during the day looking for and filling out job applications?

JSA is what it says Job Seekers Allowance, so seek for jobs if that is what you have to do

For starters, it's making HR officers' lives hell as they still have to process the job applications forms that land on their desk by the THOUSANDS of people being forced to apply for jobs they have no chance of getting simply so they can still get their JSA. My sister-in-law is an HR manager and when they advertised for ONE highly specific job, she got nearly 3000 applications in 2 days, out of which under 10 were from people who had the relevant qualifications.

Secondly it depends on whether they are legitimate job applications or workfare ones. If OP is being made to apply for certain jobs simply so the agency can charge fees each time to the State that's very wrong indeed.

I can see the issues against it but my argument is rightly or wrongly if you need to do somthing to get your jsa do it, all it means is spending your time and thats the one thing you have got.

IMO the whole thing is a waste of time Ingeus and the like are a waste of time and are really only interested in getting their money, not the people they are supposed to be helping, and to be perfectly honest in an ideal world everyone would be capable of applying for their own jobs without the "Help" of these type of companies, because that is all they are, private companies that are out to make money as all private enterprise should.

So I still say if thats what you have to do, do it and hope you find a suitable job yourself sooner rather than later so you dont have to apply for pointless ones that you are either over or under qualified to do.

But why waste your own time doing that, when you could be doing some more useful? if there are no jobs out there, there are no jobs.

if there are no jobs out there, there are no jobs.

We have a system that promotes jobs that no one in their right mind would take on the basis that they won't ever pay a living wage, and subsidise these jobs with working tax credit, it's ridiculous.

For starters, it's making HR officers' lives hell as they still have to process the job applications forms that land on their desk by the THOUSANDS of people being forced to apply for jobs they have no chance of getting simply so they can still get their JSA. My sister-in-law is an HR manager and when they advertised for ONE highly specific job, she got nearly 3000 applications in 2 days, out of which under 10 were from people who had the relevant qualifications.

 

Secondly it depends on whether they are legitimate job applications or workfare ones. If OP is being made to apply for certain jobs simply so the agency can charge fees each time to the State that's very wrong indeed.

Given that 80% of jobs are never advertised, and that accessing a job is based on who a candidate knows and not what they know, it must be frustrating for Personnel Clerks (or any rebranded HR Manager) to go to the trouble of coordinating a Recruitment Round (including advertising a vacancy, and sifting through the plethora of applications received), including inviting candidates to the interview, and sending rejection letters out, to then discover that the successful candidate was simply recommended to the job by the Manager concerned.

But, if an organisation aggressively promotes its commitment towards "Equal Opportunities and Open Competition in Recruitment", it has to go to the facade of wasting time on a spurious recruitment round, and for candidates invited to attend the interview.

I really dont agree that there are no jobs, there are jobs they are just not always easy to find, I have worked on commision only and I know people who make a very good living on commision only jobs, so I wouldnt class them all as pseudo jobs.

It all comes down to what you are prepared to do if you need x amount of money and the only way to get it is in a job that pays less than NMW then do it if you have to, not everyone can walk into a job that pays 20k + for 20 hrs a week.

I still say if applying for all the rubbish jobs is what your provider wants you to do then do it, i do not believe for 1 minute that anyone not working spends 8 hours a day every day looking for work, so if you have to go to the work provider 1 or 2 days a week or whatever so what think of it as a very boring job but it means you still get your benefits.

I really dont agree that there are no jobs, there are jobs they are just not always easy to find

It all comes down to what you are prepared to do if you need x amount of money and the only way to get it is in a job that pays less than NMW then do it if you have to, not everyone can walk into a job that pays 20k + for 20 hrs a week..

I still say if applying for all the rubbish jobs is what your provider wants you to do then do it,

i do not believe for 1 minute that anyone not working spends 8 hours a day every day looking for work,

I really dont agree that there are no jobs, there are jobs they are just not always easy to find, I have worked on commision only and I know people who make a very good living on commision only jobs, so I wouldnt class them all as pseudo jobs.

It all comes down to what you are prepared to do if you need x amount of money and the only way to get it is in a job that pays less than NMW then do it if you have to, not everyone can walk into a job that pays 20k + for 20 hrs a week.

I still say if applying for all the rubbish jobs is what your provider wants you to do then do it, i do not believe for 1 minute that anyone not working spends 8 hours a day every day looking for work, so if you have to go to the work provider 1 or 2 days a week or whatever so what think of it as a very boring job but it means you still get your benefits.

I agree on a couple of points. One is that there are some jobs available, although competition is fierce - the fact that vacancies show up doesn't necessarily say very much if there are 50 applicants for every job. I also agree that, if a provider makes requirements then the best thing to do is waste your time by fulfilling them in order to safeguard your benefits.

I do not agree, however, that jobseekers should accept jobs with employers who are blatantly flouting the law by offering less than NMW. To do so would merely encourage this sort of criminality. You cannot be sanctioned for refusing less than NMW. I'd further encourage jobseekers to report these employers to HMRC's NMW enforcement people.

The type of jobs that end up paying less than NMW are the self employed/commision only type of jobs i am not suggesting that you should work for an employer who is for example only offering 4.00 per hour. the NMW is another one of my bug bears as I really do beleive that more employers (certainly at the lower/unskilled end of the market) are quite happy to only offer NMW as that is all they have to do, whereas previously they would have had to offer more or employees would have negociated their wage as there would have been more competition to get the better employees.

I used 20k for 20 hrs just as a sort of throwaway comment, but there are jobs that pay a decent wage they just take a bit of hunting down, i think what I was trying to say was that I think you do what you need to do, to get what you need. When i had my own business at one time I think we worked it out that we were earning 50p an hour at one time, not good, but i have done really bad jobs in the past because I needed to earn the money, yes it was better to do 10hrs for 100.00 rather than 20 but if i needed 100.00 then i would do it.

Self employment is a different ball game, I've been there myself, you are lucky if you can break even at the three year mark let alone be in a position to pay yourself a decent wage. If the business makes it to year five you might, just might be making a profit, there are just too many things that can, and do go wrong, cash-flow (or the lack of it) is the usual suspect and it's the major cause of business failure.

Having said that I'm in the process of starting up again utilising the only serviceable string I have left on my bow, there are maybe two dozen or so other people in the south east that have the same particular skill set as me, and no competition at all in my area so I stand a fair chance of scraping a living together.

Mainstream employment was never my ball game anyway, and at 56 I'm regarded as past it now by most employers.

I agree that the age thing can be a problem with prospective employers, daft isnt it? Good luck with your venture.

I agree that the age thing can be a problem with prospective employers, daft isnt it? Good luck with your venture.

Unfortunately, in the case of Mr Alan Sugar, whereas he left school with a few mediocre grades at O level before reaching his Career Pinacle of being a Barrow Boy, he now works to the proposition that "he would have to be barmy to recruit women of child bearing age", which kind of rules out any female applicant for a job between the age of 16-55 !!!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/jul/24/alan-sugar-louise-mensch-twitter

A Barrow Boy worth over £100million! I take my hat off to him at least he earned it, unlike these gormless wealthy ponces that run the country and are only where they are because daddy's has a few bob.

A Barrow Boy worth over £100million! I take my hat off to him at least he earned it, unlike these gormless wealthy ponces that run the country and are only where they are because daddy's has a few bob.

You should learn not to believe in Mr Alan Sugars PR Agent.... after all, if he was THAT competent, he would have stuck in at school, made the grade for a few more O Levels, then A levels, etc And, in the scheme of things, he comes across as marginally less competent than Nick Buckles of G4S.

But, lets not forget that, a few years ago, Mr Alan Sugar (who, incidentally, was also given an Honorary Doctorate by Brunel University in 2003), announced to great acclaim a new Public Phone Box which offered eMail and intended to charge £0.15 per email - the device bombed, but at the same time, announced that Apples iPod would bomb.

Quite a pathetic individual. I blame his parents.

You should learn not to believe in Mr Alan Sugars PR Agent.... after all, if he was THAT competent, he would have stuck in at school, made the grade for a few more O Levels, then A levels, etc And, in the scheme of things, he comes across as marginally less competent than Nick Buckles of G4S.

Academic qualifications weren't high on the list of priorities when he was growing up, the 'barrow boy' mentality is typical of the East End at that time (actually it's not so different now), there is just as much of a chance that if he had stuck it out at school he would be nowhere now.

Whatever your personal opinion is of Alan Sugar the facts remain that he is a very successful businessman, there is no comparison between him and the feckless Mr Buckles.