Ingeus

[osdset]

That bit left me with nothing to say but the same applies, how does repeatedly forcing people to work benefit anyone apart from the companies who receive the labour?

Exactly! And that's the whole point of it, they have created a slave labour force in all but name and the fact that you won't get a nice steel collar and be chained to the poor sod next to you.

[Chester6]

Exactly! And that's the whole point of it, they have created a slave labour force in all but name and the fact that you won't get a nice steel collar and be chained to the poor sod next to you.

A labour force that also gets bonuses for the pimps and profits

Sanctions and lies replaced the chains, lies like that they can help

[Bakatcha]

A labour force that also gets bonuses for the pimps and profits

Sanctions and lies replaced the chains, lies like that they can help

Chester - I see you're getting the hang of it.

[RebeccaPidgeon]

err its not..the upshot of it will be 40 hours unpaid labour, to some supermarket, all under the guise of 'work experience' then when you have finished there it will be supervised job searching using the new skills you have learnt stacking shelfs

Of course, if a candidate is required to attend a business between Monday-Friday 0900-1700, and when they, they are required to work under the direction of a mere pleb with pretensions of Nazi grandieur, then a defacto Contract of Employment exists.

 

Congratulations..... You can now cite the fact that neither candidate, nor employer, may waive the rights of the employee to receive at least the National Minimum Wage, and if that is not forthcoming, then the court can decide whether the employer is perpetrating fraud through not paying either the NMW, let alone tax and National Insurance.

[Nystagmite]

err its not..the upshot of it will be 40 hours unpaid labour, to some supermarket, all under the guise of 'work experience' then when you have finished there it will be supervised job searching using the new skills you have learnt stacking shelfs

 

And the supermarket can't offer this person a paid job because...? Oh silly me, it'll eat into their profits.

[Chester6]

Chester - I see you're getting the hang of it.

 

Depressing isn't it? Jobseeking is stupid as many who can do the jobs never get a chance or hardly ever do yet idiots can and do get the jobs

[Chester6]

And the supermarket can't offer this person a paid job because...? Oh silly me, it'll eat into their profits.

 

The skivvy's are meant to be happy that it's a reference and that it shows they can handle routine etc

[LongHairedLily]

Saw my Advisor today, I'm on year 2 now with Ingeus. Apparently I'm meant to see her three times per week, however due to volume going through to year two and showing ability I see her in a month!

[Chester6]

does anyone trust the money matters people to be accurate or are they often wrong?

are they just lackeys of the pimps? eg pimps' pimps

[debt4get]

Of course, if a candidate is required to attend a business between Monday-Friday 0900-1700, and when they, they are required to work under the direction of a mere pleb with pretensions of Nazi grandieur, then a defacto Contract of Employment exists.

 

Congratulations..... You can now cite the fact that neither candidate, nor employer, may waive the rights of the employee to receive at least the National Minimum Wage, and if that is not forthcoming, then the court can decide whether the employer is perpetrating fraud through not paying either the NMW, let alone tax and National Insurance.

whilst i agree totally with the statement, how would you actually go about it....by demanding that a contract exists and holding out my hand is only gonna 'show me the door' then for not engaging with the work programme then sanctioned for up to 3 years.....without money catch22 the law is correct, but sanctions biting in are going to more important im afraid

[RebeccaPidgeon]

whilst i agree totally with the statement, how would you actually go about it....by demanding that a contract exists and holding out my hand is only gonna 'show me the door' then for not engaging with the work programme then sanctioned for up to 3 years.....without money catch22 the law is correct, but sanctions biting in are going to more important im afraid

I suspect that the wording of any Mandatory Work Activity letter would be such that the candidate would have to attend an organisation between Mon-Fri 0900-1700 hrs. I haven't gone through the process yet, and may not. However, We are where We are.

If the candidate, by virtue of previous training, can do what is expected of them, then whereas there would be a point in the candidate doing something related to their training, there would not conversely no point in working for the employer which does not even attempt to offer anything of value.

 

However, whereas a candidate may prove that they are "engaging with the work programme" by attending a place of business Mon-Fri 0900-1700 hrs, they can also establish a legal basis on which they are neither prepared to be complicit in deceit, nor support organisational practises designed to "obtain peecuniary advantage through deception".

 

If the candidate were to work under a defacto Contract of Employment, then I would certainly call the employers bluff.... and take them to court for NMW, and to get an order for tax evasion and fraud.

[debt4get]

the problem still being would be how you would live with no imcome...that is that stark reality facing people, perform the monkey see monkey do tasks, or have your benefit sanctioned, whether a contract exists or not, court cases take an inordinate amount of time to come to court, the removal of legal aid, will further exacerbate the situation.

[Bakatcha]

does anyone trust the money matters people to be accurate or are they often wrong?

are they just lackeys of the pimps? eg pimps' pimps

You're right Chester - there is something deeply suspicious here! The Money Advice Service (MAS) currently advertising heavily on TV (not to mention posters in the A4e customer toilets!) is funded by a levy on Independent Financial Advisers. The concept seems to have sprung from the fevered mind of one Emma Harrison who had a heavy hand in its design and there seems to be a very close tie up with A4e with MAS advisers regularly having office space and a lot of pushing by A4e staff to see the MAS people (I believe they have targets for referrals to MAS). I wonder if MAS are paid per capita for people seen - if so this could be a nice little earner?!

From memory the MAS budget is around £49 millions - with an awful lot being spent on advertising, As to whether the advice on offer is any good - I don't know. I suspect there may be some good advisers and some bad. What I do know is that if the idea is to get good advice to those in need of it the money would have been far, far, better spent on funding the Citizens' Advice Bureau rather than on TV advertising and salaries/bonuses for the MAS.

[RebeccaPidgeon]

the problem still being would be how you would live with no imcome...that is that stark reality facing people, perform the monkey see monkey do tasks, or have your benefit sanctioned, whether a contract exists or not, court cases take an inordinate amount of time to come to court, the removal of legal aid, will further exacerbate the situation.

In terms of certain classes of debt, up to £5000, the Small Claims Service may be used

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/ManagingDebt/Makingacourtclaimformoney/DG_195936

 

Legal Aid will not be necessary.... and whereas you are fully engaging with the Work Programme, which may involve attending an employers place of business, but as to what happens when you get there and what you do, that is entirely a different matter. If you need advice, liaise with unpaid member of the Citizens Advice Bureau.

[Nystagmite]

I was once told by an adviser that I have to work in Sainsburys 9-5 for 8 weeks. Apparently, volunteering in a charity shop (I'd been there for 4 months by then) wasn't good enough.

 

Bearing in mind I'd already done up to 30 hours a week in the charity shop for 8 weeks, a 2 week break and then 3-4 hours each week.

[Chester6]

You're right Chester - there is something deeply suspicious here! The Money Advice Service (MAS) currently advertising heavily on TV (not to mention posters in the A4e customer toilets!) is funded by a levy on Independent Financial Advisers. The concept seems to have sprung from the fevered mind of one Emma Harrison who had a heavy hand in its design and there seems to be a very close tie up with A4e with MAS advisers regularly having office space and a lot of pushing by A4e staff to see the MAS people (I believe they have targets for referrals to MAS). I wonder if MAS are paid per capita for people seen - if so this could be a nice little earner?!

From memory the MAS budget is around £49 millions - with an awful lot being spent on advertising, As to whether the advice on offer is any good - I don't know. I suspect there may be some good advisers and some bad. What I do know is that if the idea is to get good advice to those in need of it the money would have been far, far, better spent on funding the Citizens' Advice Bureau rather than on TV advertising and salaries/bonuses for the MAS.

 

the leaflets about money matters that I have seen have the A4E logo on them

[Chester6]

I was once told by an adviser that I have to work in Sainsburys 9-5 for 8 weeks. Apparently, volunteering in a charity shop (I'd been there for 4 months by then) wasn't good enough.

 

Bearing in mind I'd already done up to 30 hours a week in the charity shop for 8 weeks, a 2 week break and then 3-4 hours each week.

 

`i think their attitude is that their work experience is best because they say you need it

think of jobsworths who don't care that you already have experience due to your volunteering, it's just to tick the boxes of what the system says that they must do

[Nystagmite]

I was told by my manager that working in a charity shop is a bit different than a supermarket; but it's not that different.

[Chester6]

I was told by my manager that working in a charity shop is a bit different than a supermarket; but it's not that different.

 

only difference is that you replace somebody who could get paid to do what you do

often many so-called providers love to dump everyone into charity shops as it's less work for them

[RebeccaPidgeon]

I was once told by an adviser that I have to work in Sainsburys 9-5 for 8 weeks. Apparently, volunteering in a charity shop (I'd been there for 4 months by then) wasn't good enough.

 

Bearing in mind I'd already done up to 30 hours a week in the charity shop for 8 weeks, a 2 week break and then 3-4 hours each week.

Aside from the fact that the Charity Shop, more than likely, employed Senior Managers and Executives on full salary, perhaps the Clerk (masquerading as an Advisor) could be reported to the authorities for suspicion of conspiracy to defraud HMRC.

[Nystagmite]

Aside from the fact that the Charity Shop, more than likely, employed Senior Managers and Executives on full salary, perhaps the Clerk (masquerading as an Advisor) could be reported to the authorities for suspicion of conspiracy to defraud HMRC.

 

Pardon? sorry, that's gone right over my head!

[debt4get]

is what you are suggesting rebecca, obviously without seeing the letter mandating attendance, is once you get there, then providing you attend only, without engaging in any 'work' then in effect you are complying with your w2w agreement. in affect you could sit there all day do s*d all, and inform the employer that the only way you are going to stack a shelf is if you get paid nmw for it....

if that is the case, then again i think you will be shown the door for non-compliance and sanctioned....although i have to agree with your analysis on the law that if you do the work, you are entitled to pay as a contract will then exist...i just cant see if operating in practice

[debt4get]

Pardon? sorry, that's gone right over my head!

i think what rebecca is trying to say, is under the law as it is, if you are mandated to attend the shop and work, there then exists a contract of employment between yourselves and the employers, if the adviser knows you are not being paid they are complicit, of fraud, employing someone without paying nmw and tax and ni....if i have read the posts correctly

[RebeccaPidgeon]

is what you are suggesting rebecca, obviously without seeing the letter mandating attendance, is once you get there, then providing you attend only, without engaging in any 'work' then in effect you are complying with your w2w agreement. in affect you could sit there all day do s*d all, and inform the employer that the only way you are going to stack a shelf is if you get paid nmw for it....

if that is the case, then again i think you will be shown the door for non-compliance and sanctioned....although i have to agree with your analysis on the law that if you do the work, you are entitled to pay as a contract will then exist...i just cant see if operating in practice

The issue is theoretical for me at any rate at the moment.... but I sympathise with those candidates who have to attend a place of work, have to work under the direction of a supervisor, and who are effectively party to fraud.

[Nystagmite]

Ah, I get it now.