Ingeus

[YorkyLad]

from wiki:

In 2002 the company was rebranded as Ingeus to reflect the spirit of human ingenuity

 

I think 'the spirit of human ingenuity' was indeed reflected.... but they should have looked to absorb it.

[YorkyLad]

typing in Ingeus here: http://www.ico.gov.uk/ESDWebPages/DoSearch.asp gives you their data control terms

 

I notice under 'purpose 2' of their reasons for holding data is listed as for "Advertising, Marketing & Public Relations" and one of the parties they are permitted to disclose or acquire data about you are "Traders in personal data"

 

So, in order to improve their PR they are permitted to trade our data??

[Bakatcha]

Typing in A4e brings similar response. In addition under Purpose 5 "crime prevention and the prosecution of offenders" we have:

THE USE OF CLOSED-CIRCUIT TELEVISION FOR THE MONITORING AND COLLECTION OF VISUAL IMAGES FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAINTAINING THE SECURITY OF THE PREMISES, FOR PREVENTING CRIME AND FOR INVESTIGATING CRIME.

Which explains the universal coverage of CCTV (there's even CCTV cameras in the toilets!).

[YorkyLad]

purpose 5

 

Data subjects are:

 

Staff including volunteers, agents, temporary and casual workers

Customers and clients

Suppliers

Members or supporters

Complainants, correspondents and enquirers

Relatives, guardians and associates of the data subject

Advisers, consultants and other professional experts

Students and pupils

Offenders and suspected offenders

 

Data classes are:

 

Personal Details

Family, Lifestyle and Social Circumstances

Racial or Ethnic Origin

Political Opinions

Religious or Other Beliefs Of A Similar Nature

Trade Union Membership

Physical or Mental Health or Condition

Sexual Life

Offences (Including Alleged Offences)

 

Sexual life????

[YorkyLad]

This clears up any ambiguity regarding the changes of name http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/ingeus-uk

 

Previous Company Names

WORKDIRECTIONS UK LIMITED

Changed 27 Aug 09

 

WORKDIRECTIONS LIMITED

Changed 24 Sep 02

 

STOLI LIMITED

Changed 11 Mar 02

 

Here is the same page for A4e http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/a4e

 

I think most notably on that page it shows A4e have managed to record 10 billion pounds worth of transactions with the DWP

 

(Source: Company House)

[caledfwlch]

Typing in A4e brings similar response. In addition under Purpose 5 "crime prevention and the prosecution of offenders" we have:

Which explains the universal coverage of CCTV (there's even CCTV cameras in the toilets!).

 

Is it legal to put CCTV in toilets

[osdset]

Is it legal to put CCTV in toilets

Something I have been trying to find out, so far it seems that it is! Frankly if that is the case I am appalled it is wrong on so many levels.

[Bakatcha]

Well I did challenge this. I was told that the CCTV camera was not working. I only have their word for this. The CCTV installation/camera is still there in the ceiling of the toliets. Other than their word I have no reason to believe that it is not a functional camera and every motion (if you'll forgive the pun!) is not being recorded.

[YorkyLad]

http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_the_public/topic_specific_guides/cctv.aspx

 

CCTV should only be used in exceptional circumstances in areas where you normally expect privacy - such as in changing rooms or toilets, and should only be used to deal with very serious concerns. The operator should make extra effort to ensure that you are aware that cameras are in use.

[osdset]

http://www.ico.gov.uk/for_the_public/topic_specific_guides/cctv.aspx

The ico site just publishes guidelines, well we all know how people treat guidelines!

 

A factor to take into account here is that a lot of the w2w pimps rent office space in buildings that are occupied by other companies, the toilet facilities are often communal on landings etc, in which case the cctv issue would have to be taken up with whoever manages the building, I am guessing the get-out would be they are there to monitor illegal drug use.

 

My initial response would be to test whether the camera was working by giving it the 'middle finger' every time I used the ablutions, alternatively one could take a deep snort from a cleverly concealed nasal spray, go wide eyed at the camera, and stagger out!

[osdset]

All the w2w pimps are in for the biggest shock of their lives soon, once the cohort of those forced onto JSA from ESA either by losing at appeal, losing contribution based ESA, or other reasons are eventually mandated onto workfare, and they will be, utter and total bedlam will ensue.

[Bakatcha]

Bring it on! Trips to the pimp are already a bit of an adventure. looks like it could turn into something like a cross between a Fellini film and a Breugal painting.

I will be an amused bystander.

[means2anend]

[caledfwlch]

It's a bit of a cost when on benefits, but....

 

I wonder what would happen if there was a concerted effort to hit individual providers with thousands of SAR's at the start of a month. Given that they can be in trouble for not fulfilling them in time

[G4C389]

hi all, i found work and politely asked my advisor by e-mail not to contact my new employer, the next day she sent me an e-mail by mistake which was addressed to another advisor saying 'hi mush, can you please contact (my new job details ) and get the employer contact and we will do our bits each end, thanks xxx' i was so annoyed, just want to ask is there anything i can do about it?

[osdset]

There is quite a bit of unrest amongst staff employed in the w2w sector, they have finally realised that the propaganda spouted by the upper echelon within their organisations is in fact smoke and mirrors, they are finding it harder and harder to hit the targets, some are grudgingly admitting to each other that the jobs just aren't available, and that the 'customers' as they like to call them are not cooperating.

The rate of pay for the 'foot-soldier' pimp is not that good, I have seen figures of less than £19,000 per year bandied about, and some are complaining that in real terms they are not much better off than the 'customers'. I would not be surprised to see the whole house of cards come tumbling down sooner than expected.

[caledfwlch]

hi all, i found work and politely asked my advisor by e-mail not to contact my new employer, the next day she sent me an e-mail by mistake which was addressed to another advisor saying 'hi mush, can you please contact (my new job details ) and get the employer contact and we will do our bits each end, thanks xxx' i was so annoyed, just want to ask is there anything i can do about it?

 

get hold of your new employer ASAP and withdraw all permission for them to communicate with Ingeus! And tell them this is your legal right, no matter what Ingeus may try to claim in a letter or phonecall to them.

[Bakatcha]

Oh dear! and with summer just round the corner. All those long, light, balmy evenings. All the unrest and dissatisfaction. All that petrol stashed away in jerry cans (at minister's advice). What could possibly go wrong?

[Optimist Prime]

Ok, so here's my problem with this outfit -

 

I've had an initial introductory meeting with them, didnt sign any waivers, didn't give them a copy of my CV. Attended a second appointment with them to go over 'how they can help me' well, long and short of it is I'm going back for a CV overhaul workshop- which was optional but I don't mind sprucing up my CV to be honest, and a mandatory 'Effective Jobsearch Methods' workshop. Towards the end of the meeting with my advisor I was given an application tracker to fill in for my next appointment, my advisor also attempted to give me a target number of jobs that I had to apply for before i went in again. I imediately said that I wouldn't be party to having targets set for me as the conditions of my JSA are a contract between me and the DWP and would only deal with my jobseekers agreement with the DWP. Now the advisor didn't actually ask me to change my agreement, but specific targets were mentioned and I said that its unfair to place specific targets on something I have no control over, ie available jobs. The advisor said they wouldn't put it on this time but future meetings would have targets like this set for me. They said they had no intention of trapping me in a situation where sanctions could be applied to me for not conforming, but if I fill out this application tracker (which has been deemed a mandatory requirement) hand it over to the advisor and they then do a job search and find a job that I haven't applied for myself, I can have sanctions placed on me.

 

I'm really worried that they will basically just put anything they want down as a mandatory requirement for my appointments and if I don't adhere then boom, sanction applied.

[Bakatcha]

I think there are a lot of empty threats here.

You seem to me to have handled the situation very well so far by responding to their illogical and threatening behaviour with reason and calm. Continue to do so and they will switch their attention to easier prey. Don't be afraid to record evey meeting, and don't be afraid of letting them know you are doing so. You are entitled to make a record for your own purposes and it's amazing the effect that recording them can have on their attitude.

[flumps1976]

Optimist Prime, once yu have been transfered to the Work Programme they take responsibility for your Job Seekers Agreement in a s much as they can realistically discuss with you the type of work you are looking for, what you have experience and qualifications in and all type of employment that you can apply for, it is not limited purely to the 3 job goals or your ES3JP Job Seekers Agreement. They can alter it to what they think and you have the right to question it if it is unreasonable.

 

It is what they refer to as an action plan which you are supposed to bwe issued with to take to the JCP office to show what your hjob goals have been for the previous 2 week period you are signing for.

[caledfwlch]

Optimist Prime, once yu have been transfered to the Work Programme they take responsibility for your Job Seekers Agreement in a s much as they can realistically discuss with you the type of work you are looking for, what you have experience and qualifications in and all type of employment that you can apply for, it is not limited purely to the 3 job goals or your ES3JP Job Seekers Agreement. They can alter it to what they think and you have the right to question it if it is unreasonable.

 

It is what they refer to as an action plan which you are supposed to bwe issued with to take to the JCP office to show what your hjob goals have been for the previous 2 week period you are signing for.

 

They must be on VERY dodgy grounds if they are claiming to sanction you, because, even though you have fulfilled your agreement, they have found a job you did not see. They are effectively saying, you are contracted to apply for 5 jobs, but if you do that and we find 6 jobs, then we are sanctioning you for breaching the contract you have fulfilled??????????

[Optimist Prime]

Thanks for the quick response, I actually did record, as I did the initial introduction meeting. I didn't openly disclose the fact I was recording but the device was noticed (although not mentioned) on my first encounter, this was a different advisor although I'm sure this would have been passed on to advisor I saw this time around.

Here's the thing though, you say they are making empty threats but, my point is I've been asked to complete an 'application tracker' which details all of the jobs I'll have applied for up until my next appointment, they ask for specific employer details like name, contact number, job id or soc code (if they are on directgov) this task has been marked mandatory, no specific figure was placed on the amount of jobs I had to apply for but it would be in future appointments. I was also told that job searches would be done at my appointments and if vacancies were found that I had not applied for then basically I'd get sanctioned. This is the problem for me, when my appointment is being arranged they can just stick down whatever they like as being mandatory and if I don't comply I'll get shafted, if they find something I've missed, I'll get shafted whether I've recorded the meeting or not.

[osdset]

Optimist Prime

I think I may know why they are 'leaning' on you, it's probably sour grapes over your unwillingness to comply with the data waiver, CV, etc, this is the other side of the coin that people face when sicking up for their rights, the pimps get ever so upset and basically throw the book at you.

When I had my little 'run in' with w2w three years ago I took the ever so nice but bloody awkward approach, I was lucky I was originally mandated for 26 weeks, it was cut to 13 because they had too many people to deal with, and out of the 13 weeks I only served 10 of the sentence as I took the allowed two week holiday followed by a week sick, and for some reason I never fathomed they only asked me to attend for an hour every fortnight, I guess I was just lucky, or they could not stand the sight of me!

[caledfwlch]

I thought it was "legal" ie not sanctionable to leave off the company name of jobs your applying for to the pimp? It's only the DWP itself that has a sanctionable right to demand such info?

 

Because we are not contracted to provide the pimp with useful job contacts.

 

I would have thought 21.04.2010 Administrative Position Local Company CV Emailed to requested address with cover letter is unsanctionable. One can provide the DWP itself with the employer details, and prove of email service if required?