Ingeus

[chuks]

And I strongly feel... I may be wrong but I kind of see think as u can hardly know who is who online sometimes the saying that what u eat is what u are can as well be the case of what you say is what you are. It is questionable m8. But your failure to recorgnise the devilish and abnormal behaviour of these fascist servants and their boss at the helms of affairs is unbelievable....... that alone re-enforce my opinion that unemployed people should also be careful on the advice the recieve from some people online. However you have giving me a vital information(another hint) by reading inbetween the lines of your comment. Thanks though

[think about it]

Chuks,

 

I'm fully aware of some of the less than favourable ways that job coaches / advisers might work, I've seen it myself.

 

In saying that I can't understand why discussing what you actually want to do with someone is 'difficult' I am thinking of what they could actually 'do' with that information.

 

If we take it to worst case scenario; they 'may' go online, find jobs that match your preferences and mandate you to apply for them. Meaning that if you fail to do so you may be subject to a sanction. Of course, these are jobs that you want, so there's no reason not to apply besides the exceptions such as travelling distance/time or perhaps clashes with other limitations such as working hours and caring responsibilities. They may even challenge you as to why they've managed to find vacancies if you've struggled to do so but then, if it's something that interests you - take the details of those vacancies and do something with them. It may be that they can discuss with you alternatives if there's a distinct lack of suitable work in your area.

 

I make it no secret that I used to work in the WP, I don't anymore and for what it's worth, I didn't agree with some of the ways that things worked. But, I also know from first hand experience how a reasonable adviser / coach might work.

 

I'm guessing, unless things have changed in the last two years since I left, that you've just been put onto a part of the programme called Personal Routeways (PR). The coach / adviser may have 200+ people that he or she is working with and that they will be expected to, every three months or so, review how you're getting on. When I was there, part of that review was to revisit what people wanted to do. Nothing says that you must stick to the role you specified at the start of the process.

 

Mr P puts it perfectly (he normally does), it's not an odious request and there's nothing stopping you aiming high and getting your coach thinking. I always enjoyed working with people who knew what they wanted, it's better to share some common purpose and work from that.

 

A gentleman comes to mind as I type this. He literally sat there and grunted at me, I honestly think that in the few times we met we perhaps shared a couple of minutes of what a reasonable person would call 'conversation' over the course of a few months. About 6 months after me leaving he came over to me in a supermarket and we had a good laugh about it. What wasn't funny was that we'd done nothing but waste one-another's time, nothing good had come from our time together besides a bit of a giggle and a handshake in ASDA a few months later. If these companies want to wear the 'we help people' badge then make them work for you, not against you.

 

Bear in mind that what's on that MAN is mutual, get the adviser/coach to do things too and to document that they're going to do it - then you've got ammunition should you ever need it. I can only speak for myself but I found my days went so much faster when I was actually doing something useful like calling employers, writing to places for people and actually doing my job than battling over what really are small details.

 

I can fully understand why people don't want to trust someone who they feel is out to get them. I've been there, on both sides of the desk and it's the reason I don't work on the WP anymore.

 

I'm not sure exactly what was inbetween the lines of my post and you're right, nothing is stopping anyone from asking questions here or anywhere else for that matter, likewise there's nothing stopping anyone from answering those questions regardless of who they are or what they eat.

 

To be fair, there's a chance that working advisers/coaches read this too, but then they wouldn't be very good 'spies' if they responded. I come on here because I do actually want to help and because I've seen first hand how it worked when I was there - admittedly I'm probably a bit out of date but can perhaps offer another, if not sometimes unwelcome perspective.

[chuks]

Am sure my resond actualy brought u out of your shell. Have you consider this question as you sound so pationate and indeed concern about my case. Even when you cant over me anything. WILL THEY LOOSE their job if the stop missleading customer, set u up , harrassing customer with police simply because customer refuse to be intimidated . Will they loss their job if they apply the rules accordingly, without manipulatively ...... you what the list goes on and on. You kind of played it down by simply saying you have seen it all. And so what, does it make it ok. Are they doing there job accordingly even when you admit it but it still ok and the poor man and woman will be picking the pieces and they get paid despite the fact that they are not complying with the law and customer get sanction for a minute late. If you cant see or get what I got from reading inbetween the line of you statement.then you should know that it is not how many years you sat at both end of the desk. It is how well and accordingly you perform in line with the law you are subject to when working for ingeniou or till date. May I tell you sir.....I have gone past all the rigmaro you talking about, if you here to help pls do loads are looking for help . as for me I dont throw stone to fruitless tree upon descovery . It a wast of time. The first three respondents were helpful. Hope you are cleared and if not go and change the laws to allow more bad practise such as missleading, coersion etc. See ya

[chuks]

And for your information. I believe you still believe advisers are unchallengable. No sir ...... they are subject to the laws as well

[SabreSheep]

I think this is getting a wee bit personal.....

[antone]

I think this is getting a wee bit personal.....

 

Quite. We treat other posters with courtesy and respect around here - whether they are claimants, JC staff, WP staff (or former WP staff) or indeed just interested observers.

[think about it]

And for your information. I believe you still believe advisers are unchallengable. No sir ...... they are subject to the laws as well

 

As you wish, good luck with your job search and indeed everything else.

[essexmat]

Can we stick to the purpose of this thread? It is an excellent thread that has been running for a lomg time and I do not want to see it locked or deleted

[chuks]

Hi anybody have idea if it is posible to sign claimant commitment even when univversal credit is not available in ones area or district.

[Mr.P]

I was under the impression that "Claimant Commitments" were being imposed on all new UC claimants and existing JSA claimants. So if you are still on JSA, still on an older Job Seeker's Agreement, and outside a UC pilot area, you will be asked to sign a CC in the near future.

 

As with any "agreement", read it very carefully, and use the opportunity to get it to state realistic steps and goals that does not place undue burden on yourself - If terms and conditions are dictated to you that cause you concern, you have the option to ask for it to be reviewed by a Decision Maker before signing it.

[chuks]

Thanks m8. What got me thinking was that. If CC is a condition for UC. Then I was wondering how it might be posible to have cc while on still on old jsa.but ur respond is clear. Just that bit was not clear(2nd line of my statement at the time as i was never told when I will move to

Universal credit and the jobcentre is not on list of jcp where universal credit is available. Thanks m8.

Universal credit. Ok So once claimant signs the CC then one has to apply Universal credit when it available.

 

On job goal was told by WP not provide it anymore today by after I said it was already in their possession and i feel it unreasonable to mandate me to attend only to provide it and it a personal information.

[chuks]

And all other details they might want concerning the restrictions and days of availabilty and so on relating to the job goal are also sent to them by dwp . Thanks for ur reply and info yesterday and all who contributed. Thats what the sit is all about. Thanks

[chuks]

Will keep sit update about claimant commitment without universal credit. Just got a message. It says sign it first (claimant commitment)and later get advice on it on for review. As it a two way sword. Dont know what that mean. But guess it to prevent sanction.

[JustInterested]

Don't confuse a Universal Credit Claimant Commitment with a JSA Claimant Commitment. The UC CC is only introduced where Universal Credit is operating and that's a tiny amount of the Jobcentres at the moment and a tiny amount of people in those Jobcentres - about 140,000 in total just now.

 

The JSA CC is being imposed on all new claimants and returners from the Work programme but the idea is that eventually all claimants will be on a JSA CC (if they're not in a UC area).

 

The problem is that the DWP wants claimants to believe that the JSA CC is the same, in legal terms, as a UC CC and it most definitely is not. The JSA CC is just an old style Jobseeker's agreement written in a different way and it's important to know that because there have been many cases of advisers trying to enforce conditions, such as 35 hour job searches, on JSA claimants where they can only be imposed legally on UC claimants.

 

It's a deliberate attempt to subvert your rights...don't be fooled by it or them!

 

P.S. There's even doubt as to whether old style JSA claimants (those whose claim has run continuously from March 2013) even have to accept a JSA CC at all, but that's another story.

[chuks]

Ah thanks m8. Your respond is very clear and straight to the bull eyes. Hope others get this and act as well.the sit is realy helping people now.thanks m8

[Mr.P]

The JSA CC is just an old style Jobseeker's agreement written in a different way and it's important to know that because there have been many cases of advisers trying to enforce conditions, such as 35 hour job searches, on JSA claimants where they can only be imposed legally on UC claimants.

 

P.S. There's even doubt as to whether old style JSA claimants (those whose claim has run continuously from March 2013) even have to accept a JSA CC at all, but that's another story.

 

I have my doubts that a 35 hour per week job search can be legally imposed on anyone, JSA or UC claimant - One would have to read through the raft of legislation and statutory instruments to find the relevant passage.

 

As far as I am aware, a claimant is required by law to have a valid Job Seeker's Agreement in place in order to claim JSA - One does not have to accept a Claimant Commitment or agree to an updated (or reviewed) JSAg at a later stage (unless the rules have changed since I last looked at them). If a claimant has any objections to a JSAg or CC, he/she can ask for it to be looked at by a Decision Maker - In many cases, this is a delaying tactic with the hope that the front line adviser will have forgotten about it by the time a DM reaches a decision.

[think about it]

https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/simplifying-the-welfare-system-and-making-sure-work-pays/supporting-pages/introducing-the-jobseekers-allowance-claimant-commitment

 

There's a little about it here in terms of being used as just interested says above. I'd imagine they'll be keen to use the CC for returners from the WP so that the transition from JSA to UC is less of a job if they can migrate over an existing CC rather than start from scratch.

[chuks]

Ahh thanks. Will check it and print out and forward it to others who dont have access to interne. Thanks

[chuks]

What a day. After fews old jsa and still on work programe claimants approach DWP/JCP ON why they must sign a jsa claimant comitement. Dwp still claim that they must sign it as jsa regulation has been amended to require old jsa and still on work programme claimant(claim starts 2012)to sign it. In addition universal credit is not available yet in this jobcentre .

Please does any body have this amended jsa regulation dwp claim enable them (dwp) to require old jsa and non completer of wp to sign this jsa claimant commitement.

[think about it]

Chuks, despite someone being on the WP the job centre will still want to engage with you and ensure that you're doing everything expected of you. I know you may not have agreed with what I wr the other day but even in light of this post it's not unreasonable for Ingeus/ JCP to periodically review the job seekers agreement. If they feel amendments are required then there's no sense doing it on a form or in a manner that will render it unsuitable when UC is introduced in your area.

[chuks]

Well agreement has it principle and elements to form a valid contract as we know taking into considerstion the way and manner they approach it.

However I think of some point.

If what (old jsa activities)they want to vary does not give u a chance of getting a job then it should not have been accepted in the first place.

Secondly.. if reg has been amended and it is a condition to sign it to have jsa then we should not be entitled to jsa till date as we have not sign it. But have you not ask why can it be stop then. i feel they know it is still inforce and valid. Which makes me think it is not mandatory . You are to do all you can do to get work ..it has always been like that will decision maker consider what u doing as not giving you chance of getting job when it was entered into by employment officer. If customer ..old jsag and activities and employment officers proposal give u chance and are valid . Then customer proposal takes the lead. Note as stated by other contributor we are concern about jsa cc, area without UC and people not transferef yet to UC. And if UC IS fully inforc then there should not be anything like old jsa. This are few thing I read from some post elswhere

[jasta11]

As I posted elsewhere, I recently had to change from JS Agreement to a Claimant Commitment and if it's handled properly, it need be no worse than your existing JS Agreement - mine contains exactly the same requirements, which aren't very much anyway. The reason it ended up this way was because I didn't just sit back and say nothing at the appointment, I showed the adviser that I was already doing everything I could to find work; in other words, I got in first and had an answer for everything she asked. She saw I was doing far more jobsearch than could ever reasonably be required so pretty much left things unchanged.

 

You definitely need to be pro-active if/when you have your Claimant Commitment appointment and show them you're already on the ball, then they won't need to 'up' your jobsearch requirements. Getting a fairly reasonable adviser is a help too.

 

Regarding the '35 hour jobsearch rule', this is absolutely NOT mandatory across the board and the guidance - and adviser staff training literature - is quite clear that the emphasis is on quality of jobsearch, not quantity. It states that if a reasonable amount of jobsearch has taken place in less than 35 hours then this is perfectly acceptable. The 35 hours is just a scare tactic to make us think we'll actually have to spend that length of time - some people will be able to produce jobsearch results faster than others so the actual amount of time spent will vary per person.

 

Regarding the Plan Booklet you're supposed to fill in each fortnight, I'd advise not using this - again, it is absolutely NOT mandatory. It's up to us how we show our jobsearch so whatever method you use, just make sure that you show enough solid evidence. Screenprints are your friend here. I regard the Plan Booklet as a possible sanction tool, since it also asks you to write things you intend to do..and if you fail to actually do something you've written there, I'm sure the adviser will pounce on it as a possible sanction offence. Be wary what you write if you do use it.

[chuks]

Think why will they stop agreement-contractct and start it again. Stopin without any reason. That is why m8 we are still been paid... to avoid breach of contract. Review then should be on mutual aand favourable terms.if ur activities still gives u chance till date to get job

[chuks]

Ahh agree with you m8. Just that experience encountered in my jcp over a year is not good. But thanks for this info u just posted. It gave me another thinking direction. Thanks

[chuks]

Thanks so it is ok to sign it.... to be honest that my only concern as i have been misslead couple of times.That is just my concern.

 

And also forget about not been a wp returner or been existing or old jsa claimant. But to be proactive. Pls can you refer me to where I can get the guide -adviser and staff literature so I can get more inform and share with others in my community.

Pls m8