Ingeus

[estellyn]

My previous Advisor at Ingeus used to check my posts on here, which is why I've not been on here in a while. He confronted me regarding a post on here a while back...

 

I referred to the work program as a "prison camp", this didn't go down very well with him. I have a new Advisor now who has barely left school, he used to harass me in a cantankerous way, and forced me to complete tasks over and over again.

 

I'm now working at Royal Mail over the Christmas period sorting all the mail, I'm loving it! It's nice to escape my 2 year sentence on annual leave. The funny thing is i took my withdrawal of consent letter to work and popped it in the pigeon hole myself! hahaha

 

I'm not looking forward to going back to Ingeus next year, they are a bunch of morons who continue to make unilateral decisions to hit targets. I cant believe my Advisor wanted me to attend over the Christmas period, yet I'm F'in working!

 

How did the adviser know it was you on here?

[estellyn]

Yep, working as a benefit adviser, I got a telephone death threat from an employer who was upset that I'd advised one of his staff members about the fact he was holding back half her maternity pay (and claiming the full amount from HMRC, so making a profit), and that her and the other staff were not being paid minimum wage - and told her to report him to HMRC.

 

Never had too many problems working at DWP. A few people swearing down the phone, but they soon calmed down when I explained that I couldn't sort out the claim until they answered the questions, and I warned I would put the phone down when they swore at me.

[estellyn]

I have been verbally abused more times than I can remember, I have been held at knife point, received a bomb threat for te office, been told that someone would put a bomb under my car (didn't even drive then so would have had a job), spat at (which personally is one of the worst things that anyone could do), slapped, had my keyboard launched at me, had my phone thrown at me, pens, claim forms, kids toys (the plastic rattle really friggin hurt too), and had a portable cd case bounce of my head.

Acceptable behaviour?

 

Why do I put up with this behaviour? because every now and again I come across 1 person who is in absolute genuine need of honest help and if I can do that then sod the neanderthals who think the above is acceptable behaviour just because I happen to sit behind a desk at JCP. I honestly wonder sometime how many people would do my job for less that £15k a year?

 

Yep, the front of house staff always got worse treatment than we did, being mainly phone contact only - but maybe 15 years ago people were also more polite - not sure.

[estellyn]

coronobog I think you may need to consider just howe you word your posts, yes your posts could be taken the wrong way and I very nearly did.

To put it bluntly here for you no it is not part of the job and yes do you know what it is part of my daily working life do I have to accept it no I don't, do I accept ot no I don't I ask people to treat me with a little respect and if that can't be given then I will walk away, simple as that. Respect is a two way street.

 

If you have been to the GP surgery recently, a hospital, bank building society to name but a few have you seen signs dotted around stating that staff deserve to be treated fairly and without abuse, why is it any different just because I work in a JCP office?

 

Also don't make assumptions about staff going back to a nice warm home with a warm meal and bed waiting for them it isn't always the case. The benevolent fund is being called on more and more and someone I work with has had need for that and also the foodbank etc

 

Indeed - when I worked full time for the DWP (15 years ago) I was taking home around £800 a month, certainly not a good wage, even in those days - A one bed flat in my area was about £400 a month, so hardly a living wage then for a single person, and would be tougher now.

[estellyn]

Coronobog I will not hide behing PM's unlike you.

If you have something to say then say it in fullview of other posters and don't hide behing PM's.

I may take abuse at work (to an extent) but I will not be spoken to like that in my own time, how dare you send me such a nasty message.

I hope you never require any help or advice.

If I can help someone on this forum by giving a bit of advice then I damn well will and I won't and never have portrayed myself as Mother Teresa but will not answer any further post made by you.

Yes I have reported your messge .

Absolutely disgusting behaviour.

 

flumps, I'm appalled that you've received an abusive pm. I suspect the guy was trying to incite an argument, typical troll like behaviour. I'm sorry you've been the target of his abuse.

[estellyn]

Ok, probably a good time to clear up a few things.

 

I understand that I'm not going to be on everyone's christmas card list. However, what I can do is perhaps resolve some of the common misconceptions that seem to appear so often.

 

Firstly the one that's going to annoy most of you. An advisor (or 'clerk' for you rebecca) starts at just over £24k - it's not uncommon to earn just over £30k once you're established in the role.

 

I've seen the conversation on here develop over the weekend but wasn't going to sit and tap a response on my telephone in-case the grammar police come out to call me nasty names.

 

Developing meaningful relationships with employers is the aim of the Employer Services Team and it's something that they do very well indeed. However, a relationship is one thing - vacancies are another. I know of EST workers spending time visiting companies to come away with an excellent relationship and an offer of vacancies when they become available. That said, I also know of several big companies in our local area that do use the EST team for all of their external recruitment and this works very well for those interested in those types of work.

 

Which takes me on to the next point. There's clearly a feeling that Work Programme providers only chase what are termed as low-grade jobs. Well, here's the uncomfortable bit - what might constitute a 'low grade' role for you may be out of the reach of someone else. Equally, what might be an ideal job for you might be so far out of touch for someone else that they'd never consider it.

 

So where does a provider focus? On the roles that are going to have the most impact for the most people?

 

An example of this is probably the most common story in the office I worked in.

The construction industry collapsed in a apocalyptic fashion in our area leaving thousands of people without work. This was bad enough however those impacted most heavily were the labourers, relatively low-skilled compared to their tradespeople counterparts the market for these people was awash and simple supply and demand economics took hold.

 

The issue was brutally simple, hundreds of people chasing a few temporary jobs meant that the agencies moved in. Where a construction company may have had 10 or 15 general labourers on a full time permanment basis they now hired them by the hour. A week here, four days there as and when the work was available.

 

Add into this a group of people that 'only want to work outdoors' who have limited skills beyond their experience in the construction industry and perhaps a 'ticket' to use a chainsaw or dumper truck.

 

So, what to do? You can offer training into roles that are available but then again, of the hundreds of these people I met, I could count those willing to work in an office environment on one hand.

 

So, I guess the response is to 'train them properly', but to do what? After all, if they will only consider working outdoors then what else is there? Every labourer is already chasing every gardening job. If they're trained to become doctors can the NHS sustain them? What about HGV driving, is the transport industry not already struggling to employ those already trained?

 

I see lots of 'they don't offer proper training' yet few suggestions as to what might be considered 'proper training' and which industry could sustainably employ people once trained. Trust me when I say that some of the people I met needed basic education before they embarked on anything like 'proper training'. People who could neither read nor write were commonplace so how does this person best improve their chances? I spent hours completing application forms and calling employers to introduce people in this exact situation.

 

Employment in the UK is changing, fact. Employers expect people to be adaptable and intelligent, something I can see that all of you are. However, what were boom industries are now on their knees so perhaps that adaptability needs to be around what we choose to do for a living.

 

I'm a project manager by 'trade' but at the end of my last project I didn't have another to go to, hence the stop-over with Ingeus - sooner something than nothing.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

So, what is your 'high-grade' job, what is it you're looking and waiting for?

Does that job really exist in any numbers anymore?

Do you have the neccessary skills and experience to bag that job when it comes up, if not how can you improve your chances?

Does your advisor / clerk know what your real ideal job is?

Have you really considered the alternatives?

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Last bit, and I guess it's specific to one person and it's about the temporary role in the post office and the questions around that.

 

First of all, well done on getting the job. Experience is experience and there's not many substitutes for it.

 

Secondly, with regards to the advisor's apparent reaction I'll endeavour to explain the things that I'd have discussed with you had you of been working with me.

 

When moving into work from JSA there are several helping hands available, albeit they're not spectacular but rent run-ons, back to work credit etc can be dependant upon a continous claim in excess of 6 months. Now, if you've had a break in your claim in the last 6 months then it makes no diffence - a break being another job / failing to sign / sanctions.

 

Frankly, the sustainment payments are of relatively low consequence to an individual advisor.

 

Just wanted to say thanks for spending the time to share your perspective on these issues, especially on such a highly charged thread. Your insight is very valuable to this discussion.

[estellyn]

I have a question, bullpoofilter, with regards to sanctions. What guidance are advisers given on referring people for sanctions? Are there mandatory things that must be referred? Are there any targets to hit? - so for instance, if an adviser wasn't referring anyone for sanctions, would they get pulled aside for a 'chat'. How much of it is at the individual adviser's discretion?

[estellyn]

As of late September we were issued guidance that every missed appointment or failure to complete a mandatory action should be submitted to the decision makers. This was explained to us as something that had been highlighted during audit by the DWP as not being up for negotiation and a contractual obligation.

 

The truth in my experience was a little different. Bearing in mind that the advisors role is to 'raise a doubt' and present the facts to the decision makers at the DWP. The feeling in my office was that as the paperwork involved in doing it was so time consuming and in reality it did little to help anyone that we would spend our time working with people who were engaging with us. No manager I met would express any concern over someone concentrating on someone likely to have a positive result rather than spending 20 minutes printing out details of missed appointments and attendance records.

 

After all, there's no financial incentives to sanction someone but there are if someone else gets into a job.

 

So, were there targets for raising doubts? No. The targets in the role were related to the number of jobs started and the sustainability of those at 3 and 6 months.

 

Like I said no one ever got the 'chat' for not doing them. The most common types of sanctions we saw were related to failure to sign / failure to apply for a matched vacancy and insufficient job search activities recorded on the diary presented at sign on or failure to comply with all of the agreed tasks on the job seekers agreement.

 

Thanks for replying. With matched vacancies and jobseeking actvities, were these also automatically referred, or was there discretion? So if someone explained they didn't apply for a vacancy for a good reason, would this still be referred or could discretion be used by advisers?

[estellyn]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuro-linguistic_programming

[estellyn]

Thanks estellyn. I didn't bother reading passed the third word. 'Discredited'.

 

Yep, that's pretty much all you need to know

[estellyn]

An acute form of Cargo Cult Science... another example is Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. Although someone reported that A4E mandated conscripts to attend NLP, delivered by "NLP Practitioners", I am not sure whether i) the baloneous technique is more widely used within other W2W pimps, and ii) whether tutors have been reported for attempting to practice medicine without possessing a license.

 

In respect to the Flexible New Deal, it was common practice for agencies to recruit tutors to deliver "Employability Training" within the Welfare To Work Sector (such as A4E and Working Links) where candidates need not have been qualified teachers, and needed to possess no teaching qualifications.

 

CBT has its uses and can be effective for certain disorders. Too much stock is put in it by some practitioners, who suggest it as the solution to everything including world peace. But it has a place as a psychological therapy.

[estellyn]

It's a treatment for people with mental health issues isn't it? Being on benefits does not mean you have mental health problems so why are A4E allowed to do CBT? They aren't allowed to use or prescribe other medical treatments. indeed, where ESA claimants are being sent to Providers, the letters are VERY clear that the Provider may not prescribe or attempt to force you into taking a treatment.

 

This is what Wiki has to say on CBT:

 

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is a psychotherapeutic approach that addresses dysfunctional emotions, maladaptive behaviors and cognitive processes and contents through a number of goal-oriented, explicit systematic procedures. The name refers to behavior therapy, cognitive therapy, and to therapy based upon a combination of basic behavioral and cognitive principles and research.

CBT is thought to be effective for the treatment of a variety of conditions, including mood, anxiety, personality, eating, substance abuse, tic, and psychotic disorders. Many CBT treatment programs for specific disorders have been evaluated for efficacy; the health-care trend of evidence-based treatment, where specific treatments for symptom-based diagnoses are recommended, has favored CBT over other approaches such as psychodynamic treatments.[1]

 

So, erm, not something you would expect a work programme provider to send you on, this absolutely IS forcing benefits claimants to undertake medical treatment against their will.

 

No one should be forced into a therapy. But some will be grateful if it is available (by properly accredited professionals), as CBT places are like gold dust, with huge waiting lists via a GP.

[estellyn]

The problem with non attending, even on occasions when you think you're in the right, is that if a doubt gets raised and you get a sanction, you will be without money for a while. Yes, if you are in the right you'll get it back at appeal, but that takes a long time and is a dangerous game to play.

 

I'm in two minds about the pointless courses - I'm sure it would annoy me if I were being put on them, but saying that, I've worked for several employers who loved sending people on in house courses (they were 'investors in people'). Most of the courses were irrelevant to my work, some of the courses I really enjoyed, but others were a complete waste of my time, and there were so many of them! We had to go to fortnightly 'talks' on the development of the organisation which were sleep inducing and mandatory, and I once went to a meeting about a meeting about a meeting. This type of inanity is part of the working world, and it may be best just to take the approach of 'getting on with it'. Though I agree that some stuff is not suitable for those with health issues, but that's a whole different issue of breaching the DDA.

 

I realise my viewpoint may not be popular, and I do totally sympathise with those who feel they're educated grown ups who can look for jobs themselves without all the interference. I'd be pretty irritated being treated this way too. I think to get through it I would tell myself that jobseeking is now my poorly paid job and I'm paid by the government. In order to get 'paid', I have to do the courses/attendance that I'm told and can do my real work (actual jobseeking) the rest of the time. Sometimes I've found it's best to change the way I look at things to stop myself going crazy.

 

I would however draw the line at work experience at any profit making employer (tesco/poundstretcher etc).

[estellyn]

Aside from the fact that the plebs have wasted your time... I fail to see the logic of any employer barring an applicant from any Call Centre Vacancy, not on the basis of a criminal conviction of financial irregularity, but because they had worked within the Call Centre previously and are barred for 3 years.

 

Or was the ingeus adviser telling him he couldn't apply because they don't get a job outcome payment if you've worker for the employer within the last so many years - if so this should be reported.

[estellyn]

Under the last rabble, Charles Falconer introduced legislation which introduced "Community Legal Advice Centres" and, at a local level, the existing network of Citizens Advice Bureau and Legal Aid Centres (amongst others) were invited to bid for local authority funding. In the case of Hull, A4E won the contract, and the local Legal Aid Centre closed.

http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2008/05/28/poverty-pimps-march-on-a4e-close-local-law-centre/

 

Devising an Omnishambolic Portfolio of Policies isn't a Conservative Religion .

 

Yes some awful places won the contracts, including firms of solicitors who would put the legal aid benefit work onto the trainees who did often appalling work - had to mop up a couple of cases from people who'd been with one of these firms then moved into our area - where luckily we kept our contract. Anyone on this forum could do a better job than workers at some of these crappy firms.

[estellyn]

Very true... but I always drop into the conversation with every advisor I get that I'm ex-DWP, have friends in the DWP Training Contracts investigation section AND socialise with the DWP Regional Manager - my pal of 30 years. It pays to advertise sometimes

 

Yes, I always drop in that I'm an ex appeals caseworker at my ATOS assessments - then suddenly they are furiously typing everything I say for the rest of the assessment, onto their computer, rather than use their little tick boxes. Every little helps, and a bit of additional info like that can act as a 'warning shot' saying 'I know stuff, don't mess with me'.

[estellyn]

Hey Im a drunk.

Dont you think that these so called "druggies and drunks" are actual ill people? Who may have mental health problems?

Look I didnt choose to be an alcoholic. I didnt choose to be kicked out of the army and leave my wife and son. Nothing was more important to me than getting my drink. It left my life in ruins and alone. I tried to take my life twice and spent a lot of time in hospital and on a mental health unit.

I dont think its fair to stereotype people. I am sure that your "druggies and drunks" have some other issues, which is the majority of them.

Just thank your lucky stars you are not one of us.

I blame society for their problems. Geez with the way us ill, disabled and unemployed are being put through the wringer and condemned by government and media is it any wonder that people turn to drink or drugs to escape from it all?

 

Yes, addiction IS an illness, and is often linked with mental health issues. I've assisted lots of addicts with benefit issues, and they are real people with real issues. Most people who haven't suffered with addiction find it very difficult to get their head around. How many times have I heard judgemental people say 'well why don't they just stop?' - as if it was that easy. They really don't understand. Addiction IS NOT a moral failiing, it is not a character flaw, it is an illness with genetic, social psychological, emotional and most importantly psysiological components.

[estellyn]

I have been there in that dark place myself many years back...for 30 years........now 16 years clean from booze...I discovered that the only "problem" that druggies and drunks have is themselves..pointing the finger of blame at other circumstances is a big one and resentment is No 1 offender

 

......but I have to say at one JC 3 years ago I was victimised by JC staff even though I've been clean for years I got treated like ****. (long story).

 

I have had some really tough times and yes I find life hard at times I've also been homeless 3 times, twice here, and once abroad during that 16 years of cleanliness... I've had no end of job losses people dying on me etc etc but throughout I never touched the stuff. I know the problem is ME I have trouble with people places and things and have to navigate my sensitive little self through these minefields on a daily basis.

 

Granted some people might have mental health problems I dont dispute that and be using as well, but the majority will find the mental health stuff they think they have will go away once they stop pumping their bodies with poisons and using every damn unfortunate circumstance, that happens to non-drinkers too,... as an excuse to be a bum.

 

Actually, it's well known that schizophrenics will often self medicate with alcohol as it helps their symptoms and they find it easier than the side effects of normal medications. I believe there are other mental health disorders where the mental health issue comes first and then alcohol or non prescription drugs are used as a way to cope - depression is another example.

 

Congratulations on getting clean, that is a huge achievement, but you need to understand that everyone is different, and the truths you discovered about yourself may apply to some other addicts, but won't apply to all.

[estellyn]

Yes I thought I was different from everyone else too

 

Luckily I'm not an addict, so I'm speaking as an impartial observer. And it's not surprising finding someone who is in recovery being so............zealous regarding their opinion of how to successfully recover, and also what causes the issue in the first place. I understand that.

 

But a lack of understanding in addiction by JCP and work programme advisers can cause much difficulty, and indeed exacerbate issues.

 

For instance, an adviser can have a guy in front of them, 10 am, obviously been drinking - what is that adviser thinking? How might they treat that person? With understanding or derision? The likelihood is they will just see that person as a drunk, and that if they made the effort they would be able to stop - a common view by those without experience of addiction. But if the adviser had talked to the guy about it, they might find that the person is schizophrenic, had bad side effects on his meds, and with poor mental health provision in his area, he didn't take this up with a professional. Instead he found the voices were quieter when he drank, so he drank more and more of the time. Another 10am appointment and a woman at her appt, obviously been drinking - again the only thing given her is judgement. But the young woman suffers with depression and self harms following an abusive childhood - it's how she copes with the low self esteem an feelings of shame an guilt.

 

The way the work programme should run, is that people should be assessed and referred for the help they need. In these examples, the guy isn't going to be able to have effective alcoholism treatment without getting his meds right and help from a psychiatrist and monitoring from a CPN or support worker. The young woman will need intensive therapy, possibly medication and an alcohol recovery programme. They also need to want to get better - I'm sure you're well aware of the terror of giving up that crutch whether it be alcohol, drugs, gambling, food etc.

 

But until funding, resources and will are available, these people will continue to be looked at in jobcentres and work programmes with scorn and anger. Underneath every addiction is a story, an individual, deserving of help and respect, and not everyone has the resources or strength to be able to deal with their issues at that time.

 

The whole 'I did it, therefore everyone else can do it and should right now' opinion makes me crazy. It shows a lack of empathy and understanding.

[estellyn]

Long term alcohol abuse - mimic's schizophrenia and also causes depression. In recovery you learn to differentiate between whether you have an addiction to alcohol or you have a true mental illness. AA advises you to seek out help for other problems you have in your life. I have had sponsorship and recovery experience since 1992. The "I have done it and so can you" is the whole theme of AA. Have you ever attended an AA meeting dear. Then I suggest you pop along to an open meeting its a real eyeopener.

 

I had a guy say to me in the JC (I was homeless and living in the YMCA at the time) when giving me a sanction for something petty and when I confronted him that he was discriminating against me because I was in the YMCA...he laughed and said " why would I want to be victimising you? I still get my salary at the end of the month so why would I do that?(that comment took him to a Tribunal).

 

I did not smell of drink (being in recovery) I looked normal and ok...and still this guy found something to LORD it over me for regardless....having grey hair is another one...........JC staff are not counsellors or sponsors they are just there to shuffle paperwork....but I agree people could do without the comments and the judgement and the discrimination which is bestowed upon anyone who walks through that door. Having said all that I changed my job centre and got much better treatment from the new one at the time...

 

Please don't try and patronise me by calling me 'dear'. I've spent 20 years working with the poor and vulnerable in one capacity or another and have seen and helped people with a broad spectrum of issues including addiction, homelessness, criminal behaviour, mental health problems, learning difficulties etc. Yes, I've been to several AA meetings with clients, and I've also seen when AA doesn't work, and I have issues with certain aspects, I agree it can be very effective for a lot of people, but not so good for others.

 

Sadly, as JCP and WP advisers are people, their attitudes can vary wildly, and quite frankly some are prejudiced simply because the person in front of them is unemployed. Most of us make internal judgements about people all day every day (positive, negative or neutral ones), but I feel there is no room for giving voice or action to prejudice or personal bias when working in a professional capacity.