suing the work program,is it possible

[veni 1]

hello everyone,new to the site so hear we go, i seen this on another site and it has really caught my attention.

now the work program differs from the dwp,in that they are not a goverment authority,in the event you get a sanction doubt raised for non compliance,suing the dwp would be very hard,but would it be a better option,to look at going for the provider or better still the individual who raised the doubt,that would be your advisor.

the act of sanctioning you will incur loss which is foreseeable,in other words they knew the effects a sanction would have on you, any thoughts.

[sir_gilmour]

Hi veni 1

Welcome to The Consumer Action Group.

 

 

I am just letting you know that as you haven't had any replies to your post yet, it might be better if you post your message again in an appropriate sub-forum. You will get lots of help there.

 

Also take some time to read around the forum and get used to the layout. It is a big forum and takes a lot of getting used to.

 

 

Once you start to find your way, you will soon realise that it is fairly easy to get round and to get the help you need.

 

It can be bit confusing at first.

[dx100uk]

moved to benefits forum

 

dx

[down'n'out]

hello everyone,new to the site so hear we go, i seen this on another site and it has really caught my attention.

now the work program differs from the dwp,in that they are not a goverment authority,in the event you get a sanction doubt raised for non compliance,suing the dwp would be very hard,but would it be a better option,to look at going for the provider or better still the individual who raised the doubt,that would be your advisor.

the act of sanctioning you will incur loss which is foreseeable,in other words they knew the effects a sanction would have on you, any thoughts.

 

The work provider only raises a "Doubt" to your participation in the work programme. It is the (JCP/DWP)decision maker who would then place any possible sanction.

 

In the Work Providers Guidance, at the beginning of Chapter 6

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/welfare-to-work-services/provider-guidance/work-programme-provider.shtml it states:-

Raising a compliance doubt.

 

1. When you mandate a participant to an activity and they Fail To Participate (FTP), you must raise a compliance doubt on form WP08

With the guide putting forward that they[the work provider] must raise a compliance doubt for FTP, then I doubt attempting to sue the work provider due to them following guidelines would work, as they are only raising doubt of participation to the work programme, not placing a sanction.

[veni 1]

many thanks for your reply mate, their has been quite a few people who i know who have had these doubts put on them for very trivial reasons, from the advisors on the work program, and they never told them they were putting a doubt on them,should they at least tell them they are putting a doubt on you. the trivial reasons run from being a couple of minutes late,not bringing enought job searches in with them,but when they put the doubt on them they claim did not attend or abusive behaviour, they mainly put that one on when you ask questions. some advisors run riot to get their numbers down. internal complaints on the work program is weak at best, their has to be some kind of remedy for the people who attend these places.

[down'n'out]

I have seen various posts on this forum and others where, as you state, doubts have been raised for trivial events, such as being a few minutes late. There was even a post on this forum where someone was given a sanction for missing an appointment, even though the appointment had been agreed to be rearranged.

 

At one time I did think that the "Doubts/sanctions" was all about fear/control, but I think there are other factors at play, such as possibly with the governments numbers of those coming off benefits. In one of the latest reports from Grayling, he put forward how the work programme is working, but rather than him putting forward the number that have been placed in work, he mainly puts forward the number that have had a break in benefits. (report here:- http://www.dwp.gov.uk/newsroom/press-releases/2012/jul-2012/dwp075-12.shtml )

It does make me wonder if those seen as "having a break in benefit" also includes those who are sanctioned.

There is just too much smoke`n`mirrors with the Government.

[veni 1]

totally totally agree,and their is no one willing to question what is going on,the media (lets call them that) shy away from it,the advisors in these work program places only go through the motions,they are robots.most of these advisors? are on between 23 to 26 thousand pound a year,that money can be better used in putting real jobs/training for people. some of these advisors are out and out bullies they really are,they get off on a power trip.until a bodie of people get together and put peoples complaints forward under a offical banner these work program people will run riot.their must be remedy.

[Nystagmite]

the trivial reasons run from being a couple of minutes late

 

Yet, them running late is ok. I don't think I've had an appointment on time with them. Once had to wait 2 and a half hours later than planned for them to call me.

[down'n'out]

...........,the media (lets call them that) shy away from it,

 

Most of the media is controlled by the private bankers and large corporations, and it is them who are pushing(lobbying, promises of good jobs, donations etc etc to those in a position to push through policy) for most of the reforms we are seeing.

 

It`s like with the constant reports about how those who are unemployed are "lazy work-shy scroungers" and should be working and not getting hand_outs from the taxpayer. So what do we get. We get places like Tesco who take thousands of job-seekers on for "Work experience". So they[Tesco] then get grants from the government for running the scheme, they make profit due to all the extra free workers, they can also lay off staff with no need to take on new employees, and the job-seeker still gets paid by the taxpayer. Which of course means the taxpayer is actually paying twice (for the scheme and the workers), there are less actual jobs, and [most of] the media love it and put forward what a wonderful thing it is to behold.

[osdset]

.most of these advisors? are on between 23 to 26 thousand pound a year,that money can be better used in putting real jobs/training for people.

Managers might be on that pay scale, the foot soldier ants are on between £18-21K according to adverts on the Indus Delta site, which is probably why they have cr4p attitudes, in fact I am surprised anyone works within the WP industry at all, from what I can gather the conditions aren't that good.

Maybe it's the lure of re-living their old days as bully's at school, only this time around they get to really feck up peoples lives.

Edited July 20, 2012 by osdset

[down'n'out]

........ the foot soldier ants are on between £18-21K......

 

I thought they where on MWA scheme

[veni 1]

agree, this is were we need a voice,plus some legal challange.

[veni 1]

the work program is 2 years long,now they are makeing sure you dont get a good rapure with your advisor,every 18 weeks you will be given a new advisor,and will have to do the same old thing over and over again. their is no real training programs to help you learn a skill or get a I.T. skill,but they are quite happy to sit their and look at you as if its your vault.as for the work experience for 2-4 weeks,can not understand when people say that is a good thing,when sooner or later their jobs will be on the line,and replaced by work experience.

[estellyn]

It seems to me that the work program is not really about helping people, but getting as many people off of JSA as possible - either by sanctioning. forcing into inappropriate 'work experience' that won't stick (and takes the jobs of others), or making people so anxious that they eventually claim esa ending up on a merry-go round. The majority of those on JSA would love a real job. they would love the opportunity for real training and education to improve their prospects, rather than the waste of time that is the work program.

 

People who are getting sanctioned are often the most vulnerable, unable to stick up for themselves and with the legal aid bill, will have nowhere to go for help to sort things out or appeal these sanctions.

 

My advice: invest in a covert recording device and have no contact with the advisers or DWP without recording the conversation. A small outlay to start with, but may protect your benefit if unjustly sanctioned.

[veni 1]

thank you for your reply, i have been takeing statments of people who are on this program,some of the stories horrible,and i have noticed a group of advisors names that keep popping up,but i will do the recordings adds to the evidence,alls we need is someone who will listen and take action,thank you.