Work placement. Is it Legal?

[Skinnered]

Any objective opinions on the following scenariowould be appreciated.

 

1. Conscriptedonto the work programme without choice or as much as a by your leave.

 

2. Pressuredinto participating in a work placement. Again, no choice offered, but thethreat of sanction if I failed to participate.

 

3. Thisis the main point, the legality of which I question:

 

The work placement provider was asub-contractor set up by my work programme provider.

 

Either the placement provider orthe programme provider bid for council contracts to repair, maintain orregenerate council properties/land etc.

 

Jobseekers on the work programmewere then coerced, browbeaten, intimidated and threatened with sanctions, ifthey refused to “volunteer” to carry out the work, fulfil the contract forwhich the placement provider and/or the programme provider bid and were gettingpaid.

 

There was not even pretence atpassing the experience off as preparation for gainful employment. It was puregraft and manual slog. A half decent building contractor would have used a JCBto dig and shift quantities we were expected to move by hand.

[RebeccaPidgeon]

Any objective opinions on the following scenariowould be appreciated.

 

1. Conscriptedonto the work programme without choice or as much as a by your leave.

 

2. Pressuredinto participating in a work placement. Again, no choice offered, but thethreat of sanction if I failed to participate.

 

3. Thisis the main point, the legality of which I question:

 

The work placement provider was asub-contractor set up by my work programme provider.

 

Either the placement provider orthe programme provider bid for council contracts to repair, maintain orregenerate council properties/land etc.

 

Jobseekers on the work programmewere then coerced, browbeaten, intimidated and threatened with sanctions, ifthey refused to “volunteer” to carry out the work, fulfil the contract forwhich the placement provider and/or the programme provider bid and were gettingpaid.

 

There was not even pretence atpassing the experience off as preparation for gainful employment. It was puregraft and manual slog. A half decent building contractor would have used a JCBto dig and shift quantities we were expected to move by hand.

Which Provider/Subcontractor and which scheme of workfare ?

 

For example, if Mandatory Work Activity, the only option which remains valid since the court decision earlier last week, the guidelines are specific.

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

 

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/pg-part-p.pdf

3.13 It is not necessary (although it’s desirable wherever possible) for the placement to be in the same sector or type of work as the customer’s job goal, as MWA is designed to help the customer develop disciplines associated with employment. Customers cannot choose their placements.

 

3.15 Placements must be additional to any existing or expected vacancies. You must ensure that employers are not taking advantage of MWA as a source of labour at the expense of employing workers in the open labour market.

However, the same rationale may be addressed if an attempt is made to coerce someone to work for an employer for nothing.

 

If the subject arises, dont say No, but simply admit that you will consider the option further, and get back to them in due course.

 

Based on the information you have provided, it is likely that an attempt to coerce an individual is illegal, and that the organisation is attempting to perpetrate fraud - recruiting someone to do a job, and yet not only failing to pay salary, but also tax and National Insurance.

Edited February 17, 2013 by RebeccaPidgeon
Additional Information Submitted

[Skinnered]

Thanks for that Rebecca,

 

I mentioned in my post that the scheme was the Work Programme.

 

For obvious reasons, not least legal ones, I cannot name names at this stage. Anyway as far as I understand the work programme the same legal requirements covers them all.

 

The questions raised by my points 1 and 2 have been well aired in previous enquiries and the recent court ruling seems to have confirmed my suspicions that the programme providers were not acting legally.

 

The question of whether work programme providers are within their rights to set up a business and then use jobseekers for their own gain is the one I have not seen much written about and I wondered if any else had a similar experience.

[RebeccaPidgeon]

Thanks for that Rebecca,

 

I mentioned in my post that the scheme was the Work Programme.

 

For obvious reasons, not least legal ones, I cannot name names at this stage. Anyway as far as I understand the work programme the same legal requirements covers them all.

 

The questions raised by my points 1 and 2 have been well aired in previous enquiries and the recent court ruling seems to have confirmed my suspicions that the programme providers were not acting legally.

 

The question of whether work programme providers are within their rights to set up a business and then use jobseekers for their own gain is the one I have not seen much written about and I wondered if any else had a similar experience.

There is some confusion as to what happens when a candidate finishes a 2 year stint on the Work Programme, the regulations will be forthcoming apparently later in the year, and if candidates are going to be assigned to the Community Action Programme or MWA or similar, then I think the general guidance provided within the MWA Regs will be valid.

 

At least if you are threatened with a sanction, then by reviewing your situation in regard to the Regulations, will establish a defence.

[SWLABR9]

It sounds to me like the whole idea's illegal. Surely minimum wage laws must apply, especially as IDS was on tv this morning characterising work experience as work being paid for by benefits? If it's paid work as he says, why isn't it paid at the proper minimum wage? This whol;e scheme and its variants must surely collapse in a welter of lawsuits as hundreds of thousands of claimants claim their back wages and want to see their employers national insurance contributions have been paid, with interest, in all cases.

[Bazooka Boo]

You might want to have a read of this, forced labour is a human rights violation.

http://www.boycottworkfare.org/?page_id=1820

[renegadeimp]

The whole scheme is illegal and is a simple ploy to get people off of benefits in whatever means possible . Seriously. Read up on the numbers that have been thrown off benefits, then a few weeks later, the Condems are raving about how their project has made record numbers of people into work.

 

It's a [problem], pure and simple. IDS even went public about a geology graduate complaining that stacking shelves in poundland for 2 weeks was a waste of time. He didnt even get paid for it. The graduate was 100% correct as the only beneficiary was the company.

 

Even the judge agreed with the student that there was no experience in stacking shelves for a graduate.