Universal Jobmatch

[jasta11]

I will have to wait until I'm back at work and under the revised Electonic Media Policy I will have to be extremely careful what and how things are posted sorry.

 

You take care of yourself, Flumps! We're all extremely grateful for your advice and clarification of issues but don't go jeopardising your job. Same goes for Rebecca and all the other DWP people who help us - stay safe!

 

When I DO have to register with UJ, I'm considering just putting my mobile number (I have a cheap spare phone) and email address (made especially for UJ). No home address provided. Phone and email should be enough to let any potential - and hopefully genuine - employer quickly get in touch with me without handing over my actual address to all and sundry.

[flumps1976]

jasta if you asked me at work of that was sufficent then you would be advised that yes it is as long as you can be contacted by email and ohone the dwp will be happy that you are making yourself available to employers . Thank you I honestly will help as much as I can but also have to think about my job and family too, I just hope everyone understans that.

[bialoman]

Flumps, thanks for helping us and providing info for us.

 

Thanks for all your help to us all jobsekeers.

[postggj]

I have been keeping an eye on this for the last few months and i have had no notification on any amendments to the primary legislation to impose mandatory signing up of UJM by claimants

 

We have employees of the job centre constantly giving out this persona of authority with the threat of sanctions if the claimant does not comply. This is all down to targets and performance management as most job centre staff are watching their own backs. Most job centre staff are compassionate in their role but are driven by external forces and have little choice in the matter

 

If any job centre employee tries to make you sign up to this UJM against your wishes or with threat of sanction, ask them to put it in writing on official DWP paper

 

Until their is any official announcement with statutory provision for mandatory sign up for UJM, by the DWP, treat it with the contempt it deserves

[antone]

may i ask where that compulsory direction has come from and under what statutory authority,

(Welfare Reform Act) The Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulations 2012

their would have to be secondary legislation (amendment) to the original primary legislation

 

Flumps is just passing on information she's heard. Perhaps the best way to get an answer to your question would be to do an FOI request.

[postggj]

Flumps is just passing on information she's heard. Perhaps the best way to get an answer to your question would be to do an FOI request.

 

Thats the problem

 

Job centre staff through no fault of their own are being given deceptive information by the powers that be. This information is so far from the truth and full of spin as to deliberately deceive the claimants and benefit staff alike. Misinformation is a powerful weapon as people start to believe it the truth if told enough times, especially with the threat of punitive reactions for failing to comply

[ubeefortea]

I cant see how they can make UJM compulsory because not everyone can use a computer, have access to a computer or has a land line or mobile phone.

 

As far as dwp knows I dont have a phone, i dont have a computer nor can I use one. So they can stick their UJM where the sun dont shine

[RebeccaPidgeon]

Thats the problem

 

Job centre staff through no fault of their own are being given deceptive information by the powers that be. This information is so far from the truth and full of spin as to deliberately deceive the claimants and benefit staff alike. Misinformation is a powerful weapon as people start to believe it the truth if told enough times, especially with the threat of punitive reactions for failing to comply

 

Staff within DWP and JCP have already reported to be feeling under threat of their future employment, not only through an increasing proportion of candidates taken on through Short Term Contracts, but also from the threat of the Welfare To Work Sector.

 

However, in respect to the Work Programme, a Work Programme Memo (WP92, Published 07/01/13), entitled "Reduced signing trial for Work Programme participants" accessible via

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

is informative over the future direction of policy.

 

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/work-programme-memo-92.pdf

Ministers have asked the Department to look at options for reduced signing for Work Programme participants to investigate if this has any impact on the off flow from benefits. The Reducing Signing trial will operate in four Job Centre Districts between Feb 2013 and Spring 2014

 

Summary and action

6. The Jobcentre Plus Districts running the trial will be:

• Leicester & Northampton and West London – Suspended signing

• Black Country and South Yorkshire – Four Weekly signing

 

7. Details of the two options for reduced signing are:

• Suspended signing - For the period of the trial the participant will not be required to attend the Jobcentre or submit job search evidence unless you raise an actively seeking doubt/availability doubt or the participant reports a change of circumstances or there is a fraud concern.

• Four weekly signing- For the period of the trials the participant will sign on at their Jobcentre Plus office four weekly. The participant will only be required to provide evidence of actively seeking once every four weeks (which will cover the 4-week period).

Welfare To Work Staff are already too uppity for their own good, are already confused over their duties and responsibilities, and it does not require a leap of faith to be made to suggest that, if candidates are assigned to the Work Programme, then eventually a Work Programme Provider will have responsibility for processing candidates through Signing On. And the Job Centre Plus Office would simply process candidates from initial signing until they hit the 6 month unemployment barrier. This, however, is pure speculation on my part - I am not employed by JCP or within the DWP.

 

I cant see how they can make UJM compulsory because not everyone can use a computer, have access to a computer or has a land line or mobile phone.

 

As far as dwp knows I dont have a phone, i dont have a computer nor can I use one. So they can stick their UJM where the sun dont shine

It will be even worse for candidates who have an aversion towards IT (for whatever reason), and there are better ways to address the long standing problem of reaching this group of people, particularly important for Universal Credit (Digital By Default), than a badly constructed system in the guise of UJ.

Edited February 8, 2013 by RebeccaPidgeon
Additional Information Submitted

[flumps1976]

The email has been cascaded from senior management but if you don't believe me then that is up to you, as I posted I didn't have a chance to read the email in it's entirety before leaving work yesterday. I will refrain from any updates and let those of you who have doubts be advised by your personal advisers when you next attend the office.

[postggj]

please accept my apologies if i have offended in any way, it is not intended. The email may well be correct, on the other hand it could be one last attempt by DWP managers to try an compel people into signing up to UJM. I myself think Ian Duncan smith is going to end up with egg on his face with this universal credit leviathan, and i can see managers being given a mandate to bully job centre employees to try and save face.

 

The sign up rate for UJM stands at only 40 % of all job seeker claimants, so much for the 80% targets smith was bragging about.

 

But thanks for the heads up on this, anybody claiming job seekers have been notified and will know what to expect next time they sign on, and can ask relevant questions on the legality of such instructions.

 

I am surprised though smith is not on the news shouting from the rafters if this change of legislation is true. He has been rather quiet as late. The quiet man is now living up to his reputation as one time leader of the Tory party. No doubt that Political Comic, the Daily Hate Mail will be front page news in the morning if correct.

Edited February 8, 2013 by squaddie

[speedfreek]

Flumps is just cog in a great big machine.

 

A very pretty and lovely cog but a cog being told what to do by the bigger cogs that make her move just the same.

 

The people on desks are just now wage slaves on temp contracts which hardly ever get renewed. So you do what you are told! It's really nothing to do with them as they can only do as directed or join us.

 

It is not unheard of for whole DWP offices to go rouge and implement from above directions contrary to the legislation that governs them.

 

If you look on rightsnet there's plenty of evidence for this. As they dealt with numerous cases they could spot and check this trend. Now they have been removed from play we only have ourselves in a collective help forum and FOI requests by those able to do them as protection.

 

Send in that FOI request as Antone suggests.

 

p.s. I heart Flumps

[ubeefortea]

Why anyone would delete my message I dont know but lets try again.

 

I find it irresponsable for anyone to release information on these forums without knowing the full facts.

Now we have much speculation and blind panic.

Would it not be better to know the full story on such an important issue before saying anything?

[flumps1976]

Thanks I was just testing out the power hungry status from the other thread! (joke in case anyone thinks I'm being serious!)

In all honesty though with the revised Electronic Media Policy I will have to be vigilant about how I post anything and as long as it is made clear that it is my own personal opinion and not on behalf of the DWP itself and it is not seen as whistelblowing I will continue to pos on here, but I'm aware sometime things aren't what people want to read, but it's the same as not wanting to hear it face to face at work!

I'm not even allowed to swear on my facebook page now and must not post anything political on my page either!

[ubeefortea]

"power hungry status"?

I dont understand lol

[postggj]

Please do not post anything that may identify yourself on here or Facebook

 

The Whistle Blowing Act only goes so far if it is for the benefit of the wider population on possible unlawful practice by an employer, and if justified

 

Please protect your job before anything else

[antone]

Why anyone would delete my message I dont know but lets try again.

 

I find it irresponsable for anyone to release information on these forums without knowing the full facts.

Now we have much speculation and blind panic.

Would it not be better to know the full story on such an important issue before saying anything?

 

I removed your post. Despite protestations to the contrary, it was an obvious personal attack and these things aren't allowed. I won't engage in discussion about this.

[ubeefortea]

A personal attack or criticism for being reckless?

The post you did not remove was basically the same as the one you did. I find it astounding that you would protect reckless comments based on lack of information.

Just look at the comments that followed. Nobody is sure what the truth is but it will effect many of us so the information should have been correct.

 

Nice to see freedom of speech is alive and well on here.

[antone]

A personal attack or criticism for being reckless?

The post you did not remove was basically the same as the one you did. I find it astounding that you would protect reckless comments based on lack of information.

Just look at the comments that followed. Nobody is sure what the truth is but it will effect many of us so the information should have been correct.

 

Nice to see freedom of speech is alive and well on here.

 

The poster you complained about was not being reckless, she posted information she had. And I left your next response to make it clear why I'm not going to tolerate this crap.

 

So here we are. And you need to understand the concept of "freedom of speech". Really. Look it up. To put it bluntly, it means you are free to defecate on your own carpet, but not on ours.

[ubeefortea]

The poster you complained about was not being reckless, she posted information she had. And I left your next response to make it clear why I'm not going to tolerate this crap.

 

So here we are. And you need to understand the concept of "freedom of speech". Really. Look it up. To put it bluntly, it means you are free to defecate on your own carpet, but not on ours.

 

Nice to know thank you so much for putting me straight lol

[ubeefortea]

I urge everyone to tell them that you dont have a telephone, mobile or computer and that you cant use a computer.

They may send you on a course but if you fail this course and show that like thousands of others you just cant or never will be able to use a computer then what are they going to do? Nothing but maybe send you back on a computer course which you just fail again.

It aint my fault if I am a technophobe and cant manage to use a computer is it?

It aint my fault if I cant afford a telephone or mobile nor a computer because I am ill and cant work so live on low benefits that the tory posh boys are cutting.

 

These are just my thoughts. Its up to you if you do this but be warned you might be sanctioned as a result of doing this.

[sillygirl1]

I had to sign a form saying that I agreed to the UJM when I went to sign on yesterday, it did not have any kind of 'opt out' clause on it. It did have a box asking if you had a medical condition which affected your day to day living so I ticked that (I have arthritis and asthma and on bad days take a lot of medication, on good days none).

 

If you can not use a computer they (and I have this on good authority) send you on a course to use one and then you have to go weekly to a Seetec centre to use theirs.... for 1 1/2 hours at a time!

 

You can also upload up to five different CVs on the system (which would only confuse the thing even more - so write a CV that contains 'key words' for jobs you are NOT qualified to do and you will have fullfilled the criteria.

 

I still think if every single jobless person logs onto the system at 9am in the morning and uses the search term 'and' or 'the' the whole system will crash spectacularly!

[postggj]

may i ask what this form was

 

was it on official DWP letterhead

were you given a copy

 

its just that i am trying to find out if this is the old BS routine again by the DWP, making out that signing up to UJM is mandatory, when it is not, and relying on peoples ignorance to increase the take up rate

[san_d]

I had to sign a form saying that I agreed to the UJM when I went to sign on yesterday, it did not have any kind of 'opt out' clause on it.

 

Did they give you evidence that you have to do it? If the ask you to sign that means it's not compulsory.

[sillygirl1]

Not sure of the number of the form, and I was not given a copy, it was on the grey paper they use. I can find out what the form is though and could ask for a copy on Monday when I go to see my adviser at Prospects.

 

I think it was a 'scare' tactic form designed to make out that you HAD to agree or 'be sanctioned'. The adviser I had on Friday is a 'junior processor' who is not all that friendly or helpful, I am going to ask if I can have another adviser instead of her - she tends to make you feel like you are 'not making an effort' if you query things.

 

I showed her the two interview letters I have for March and she didn't even congratulate me - just asked to see where I had applied for the posts on my jobsearch form.

[SWLABR9]

They can't sanction what you don't have http://think-left.org/2013/02/08/tories-employ-catch-22-over-employment-support-allowance/ this is what's awaiting the disabled and the ill, it seems. Mods, you might want to give this a new thread.