Benefit sanction figures expose Tory lies

[sadone]

I actually do. Maybe that attitude is what is sadly missing from society today - people aren't hungry enough to do everything and anything to find a job, any job.

 

 

Oh for gods sake. There's no hope for you I'm afraid...

[Lilly_Monroe]

What about the sick who get sanctioned - are they meant to go hungry and cold.

[hallowitch]

I expect my hubby will be sanctioned shortly not through lack wanting to find work this is 3rd term of unemployment in 40 yrs and has always found a job within weeks of being made redundant /paid off

 

Why do I think he will be sanctioned

 

J.C,_ have you applied for these jobs (hands him a list of jobs in his field )

 

Hubby_ No I need a safety passport ticket and I haven't got one do you do grants to get this ticket

 

J C_ yes we do we have £300 but you must apply for the job and once they guarantee you a job we will pay for it takes about 6 weeks altogether

 

Hubby- cant apply for the jobs without this ticket they wont even look at my C,V, and it wont look good for me applying for a job without this and they wont look at my C.V again if I sent it again after I get my ticket

 

J.C. - well that's the way its works so apply for the jobs

 

Hubby - I cant I have no safety passport and no firm is going to Guarantee me a job and wait weeks for me to start

 

JC - you must apply for the jobs

 

Hubby- forget it I will find the money and pay for it myself

 

so I expect the next visit to the J,C, will be fun because he cant /wont apply for any jobs that need this ticket till he gets one and all/most construction sites wont let you on site without one

[Nystagmite]

I know someone who got sanctioned for missing a JC appointment. They had a job interview elsewhere.

 

I've heard this one a few times before too.

[down'n'out]

DWP regulations state that when a letter is posted it is deemed to have been delivered as long as it was 'stamped and posted to the last known address'.

What is DWP regulations concerning sent letters to do with the WP?

 

If the letter doesn't arrive, then that is grounds for an appeal. If you go the other way would you expect the DWP to continue to pay a benefit whilst waiting to argue that it didn't arrive? If so you would have every Tom, Dick and Harry claiming that they never received anything.

I would expect tom dick and harry to be treated as innocent until proven guilty.

 

Arriving late at an interview is seen by an employer as that the potential employee isn't taking the application procedure seriously. If I was interviewing for a position and an applicant turned up 5mins late, I would show him/her the door. I would expect them to be early!

No one mentioned being late for a job interview. But as you mention that. If you where late for a job interview, you would not be sanctioned for failing to attend.

 

You cannot use the argument that as there are few jobs the DWP should be more lenient - why?

I would say "Jobseekers Allowance Regulations- 10 "Reasonable prospects of employment"-b "the type and number of vacancies within daily travelling distance from his home"

[silverlight]

Benefit should not be stopped simply because a doubt is raised. The claimant should be given the opportunity to present their side of the story and then a DM makes the decision.

 

And in the meantime they continue to receive their benefit monies?

 

Is that fair on those that always comply and never have a doubt raised, and is it fair on the general taxpayers?

 

It is done that way (a) as a deterrent and (b) to protect the public purse.

[silverlight]

What about the sick who get sanctioned - are they meant to go hungry and cold.

 

Do you mean those that are in the 'Work Group'? If so they have been found not to be so sick that they cannot work, but sick enough that with help they may be able to re-enter the work place in the short to medium term.

If they choose not to comply with the rules that are laid down then I am sorry, they deserve to be sanctioned as well.

It isn't rocket science to follow simple directives. However if things do go wrong you are given the opportunity to put your side of the matter to the DM before a sanction is formally given. Any monies that have been stopped in the meantime will be repaid to you.

 

It is therefore in everybody's interest to ensure that you comply in order to avoid any doubt arising in the first place.

[caro]

I think it is 3 times in a year. This is done to ensure that everyone who needs help gets it.

 

I'm sorry but I have no sympathy with anyone that receives a sanction. In most if not all cases, it has been created by the negligence of the claimant. It is an attitude thing - surely if you are that desperate to find some type of employment you would be doing everything and more besides to get it. If I was in the position of looking for a job, I would be tramping the streets every day making a nuisance of myself at the door of every employer. If there was no work locally, I would find some very cheap accommodation in another town/city for 3/4 nights and blitz every employer personally until someone gave me a job.

 

How would you pay for the accommodation and travel costs?

[antone]

And in the meantime they continue to receive their benefit monies?

 

Is that fair on those that always comply and never have a doubt raised, and is it fair on the general taxpayers?

 

It is done that way (a) as a deterrent and (b) to protect the public purse.

 

I wasn't describing how I think it should be, I was describing how it actually is at the moment.

 

After a doubt is raised, whether via a WP08 or a JSA adviser, the claimant is given the opportunity to explain their actions (which, as you note, turn out to be justified the majority of the time) and all this evidence it presented to a LM DM to make a sanction decision.

[Nystagmite]

And in the meantime they continue to receive their benefit monies?

 

Is that fair on those that always comply and never have a doubt raised, and is it fair on the general taxpayers?

 

It is done that way (a) as a deterrent and (b) to protect the public purse.

 

Should we just treat everyone as guilty until a decision has been made? I can't see how that's right.

[silverlight]

I expect my hubby will be sanctioned shortly not through lack wanting to find work this is 3rd term of unemployment in 40 yrs and has always found a job within weeks of being made redundant /paid off

 

Why do I think he will be sanctioned

 

J.C,_ have you applied for these jobs (hands him a list of jobs in his field )

 

Hubby_ No I need a safety passport ticket and I haven't got one do you do grants to get this ticket

 

J C_ yes we do we have £300 but you must apply for the job and once they guarantee you a job we will pay for it takes about 6 weeks altogether

 

Hubby- cant apply for the jobs without this ticket they wont even look at my C,V, and it wont look good for me applying for a job without this and they wont look at my C.V again if I sent it again after I get my ticket

 

J.C. - well that's the way its works so apply for the jobs

 

Hubby - I cant I have no safety passport and no firm is going to Guarantee me a job and wait weeks for me to start

 

JC - you must apply for the jobs

 

Hubby- forget it I will find the money and pay for it myself

 

so I expect the next visit to the J,C, will be fun because he cant /wont apply for any jobs that need this ticket till he gets one and all/most construction sites wont let you on site without one

 

Why go through all of that? The DWP/Jobcentre directive might appear stupid and illogical but those are the rules - do what they tell you when they tell you!

Why argue with them - you won't win - you will only, as you say, put yourself in a position of having a 'doubt' raised.

 

If I was in your husband's shoes and I was told to apply for a job as an electrician and didn't know a red wire from a black one, I would still apply just to keep everybody happy. Only then would I raise the matter with the jobcentre and ask why I was being told to apply when I clearly didn't have any experience or qualifications for that particular job.

If you behave yourself and do as you are told they can't create a doubt.

[silverlight]

I know someone who got sanctioned for missing a JC appointment. They had a job interview elsewhere.

 

I've heard this one a few times before too.

 

Surely the answer to that one is to go to the Jobcentre the week before and take with you the interview appointment letter and ask them to give you a directive in writing as to what you should do - sign on or attend the interview.

[silverlight]

How would you pay for the accommodation and travel costs?

 

If you were that serious about finding a job you would find the money. There are plenty of cheap B&B's and I mean cheap! in most cities, As long as there is a bed, a toilet and somewhere to wash it doesn't matter what it is. Travel? hitch a lift, use a bus/coach.

[Nystagmite]

How would you pay for the accommodation and travel costs?

 

You can't. Not really anyway. Ok, it may only be £12 a night if you're lucky. But that's a lot when your only income is basic JSA.

 

Do you mean those that are in the 'Work Group'? If so they have been found not to be so sick that they cannot work, but sick enough that with help they may be able to re-enter the work place in the short to medium term.

If they choose not to comply with the rules that are laid down then I am sorry, they deserve to be sanctioned as well.

 

Utter rubbish. My brother was put into WRAG and had an interview at the job centre. Mum took him down and he spent most of it with what I can only as tics. I also get these if I am about to have a meltdown. So anyway, they did what they had to and came home. Mum was then the one who had to deal with his behaviour after. Is that fair? He was taken to a place which for him is odd and possibly scary. He was then forced to interact with a stranger who said she has no understanding of his disability. He would never be able to get a job because of the difficulties he has. So your theory of them not being sick enough that they may be able to return to work isn't quite true.

 

A lot of the time, it's not choosing not to comply. It's being physically or mentally being unable to.

[CuriouslyGeorge]

You sound deluded Silverlight, one of those do gooders who thinks that all the unemployed/sick people are doing things wrong and getting sanctioned.

 

The Jobcentre are told to target people and sanction them...........FACT!

 

Therefore, they will do anything possible or find any little thing to use against someone as an excuse to sanction them.

[sadone]

You can't. Not really anyway. Ok, it may only be £12 a night if you're lucky. But that's a lot when your only income is basic JSA.

 

 

 

Utter rubbish. My brother was put into WRAG and had an interview at the job centre. Mum took him down and he spent most of it with what I can only as tics. I also get these if I am about to have a meltdown. So anyway, they did what they had to and came home. Mum was then the one who had to deal with his behaviour after. Is that fair? He was taken to a place which for him is odd and possibly scary. He was then forced to interact with a stranger who said she has no understanding of his disability. He would never be able to get a job because of the difficulties he has. So your theory of them not being sick enough that they may be able to return to work isn't quite true.

 

A lot of the time, it's not choosing not to comply. It's being physically or mentally being unable to.

 

Personally I'd ignore this poster as to me their comments come across as nothing more then plain old trolling. So don't waste your breath love.

[pokerking1]

If you were that serious about finding a job you would find the money. There are plenty of cheap B&B's and I mean cheap! in most cities, As long as there is a bed, a toilet and somewhere to wash it doesn't matter what it is. Travel? hitch a lift, use a bus/coach.[/QU

 

Get real ,a lot of people have families, so to take money out of benefits for extra accommodation is not viable, the only people who get help with working away from home are the liars and thieves in parliament (alleged )

[hallowitch]

Why go through all of that? The DWP/Jobcentre directive might appear stupid and illogical but those are the rules - do what they tell you when they tell you!

Why argue with them - you won't win - you will only, as you say, put yourself in a position of having a 'doubt' raised.

 

If I was in your husband's shoes and I was told to apply for a job as an electrician and didn't know a red wire from a black one, I would still apply just to keep everybody happy. Only then would I raise the matter with the jobcentre and ask why I was being told to apply when I clearly didn't have any experience or qualifications for that particular job.

If you behave yourself and do as you are told they can't create a doubt.

 

May I point out that my husband is 57 yrs of age in his whole working life 40 yrs he has been unemployed in for less than 3 months in total he was only paid off 2 weeks ago he hasn't even had a payment from them yet

 

he is a very proud man with a strong work ethic and takes pride in chosen career and would never send a C,V, to a prospectus employer without this ticket they would think he was some kind of idiot or his C,V, is one fat lie because no construction worker worth his salt would apply for a job that requires this ticket

 

the point I am making is they found the jobs for him (I had already seen them that's why he asked about funding) they want him to apply for the jobs they are in his field but without the correct tickets he know full well once he sends in a C.V. and they see he doesn't have the ticket they wont look at his C.V, again

 

We will pay for it our self just like we paid for the last few he had to renew to get his last job but I can assure you paying for will stick in my throat (not his ) I

[fletch70]

Silverlight

Lets get something right

The WRAG is for people who are classed as too sick to work but who may, with the right support and help be able to enter the workplace within a certain timeframe, maybe even a year.

 

You seem to think that benefits are easy, could you live on £71 a week ?

[silverlight]

You can't. Not really anyway. Ok, it may only be £12 a night if you're lucky. But that's a lot when your only income is basic JSA.

 

 

 

Utter rubbish. My brother was put into WRAG and had an interview at the job centre. Mum took him down and he spent most of it with what I can only as tics. I also get these if I am about to have a meltdown. So anyway, they did what they had to and came home. Mum was then the one who had to deal with his behaviour after. Is that fair? He was taken to a place which for him is odd and possibly scary. He was then forced to interact with a stranger who said she has no understanding of his disability. He would never be able to get a job because of the difficulties he has. So your theory of them not being sick enough that they may be able to return to work isn't quite true.

 

A lot of the time, it's not choosing not to comply. It's being physically or mentally being unable to.

 

It all depends on how serious they take job hunting.

 

In the case you mention why wasn't an appeal put in to apply for the Support Group when the original decision was made?

 

The system as it is I will admit is inflexible. But unfortunately we are stuck with it.

I would put up a strong enough argument up to be transferred if I thought that they had made the wrong choice of group.

[silverlight]

Should we just treat everyone as guilty until a decision has been made? I can't see how that's right.

 

It's not a question of being guilty or not, the suspension of benefit is done to protect the public purse.

 

Suspensions happen all of the time with all benefits if there is the slightest risk that payment is being made when it should not be so.

[silverlight]

 

Get real ,a lot of people have families, so to take money out of benefits for

extra accommodation is not viable, the only people who get help with working

away from home are the liars and thieves in parliament (alleged )

 

I'm a little worried that with that attitude, you seem to be finding reasons and excuses instead of ways to find a job.

 

A very old friend of mine who used to be a stevedore at the old London Docks. He was never guaranteed any work but turned up every morning on the off chance he was one of those picked for a days work. Living as he did in the East End of London, he used to walk miles every morning asking everybody and anybody if they could give him a days/nights work if he wasn't picked that morning. Invariably someone somewhere would give him some work to carry him through to the following day.

[silverlight]

May I point out that my husband is 57 yrs of age in his whole working life 40 yrs he has been unemployed in for less than 3 months in total he was only paid off 2 weeks ago he hasn't even had a payment from them yet

 

he is a very proud man with a strong work ethic and takes pride in chosen career and would never send a C,V, to a prospectus employer without this ticket they would think he was some kind of idiot or his C,V, is one fat lie because no construction worker worth his salt would apply for a job that requires this ticket

 

the point I am making is they found the jobs for him (I had already seen them that's why he asked about funding) they want him to apply for the jobs they are in his field but without the correct tickets he know full well once he sends in a C.V. and they see he doesn't have the ticket they wont look at his C.V, again

 

We will pay for it our self just like we paid for the last few he had to renew to get his last job but I can assure you paying for will stick in my throat (not his ) I

 

All he had to do was do as he was told.

The Jobcentre would look the idiot for telling him to apply

[antone]

 

 

 

I'm a little worried that with that attitude, you seem to be finding reasons and excuses instead of ways to find a job.

 

I'm just about tolerating your behaviour, but I will not accept this sort of personal insult directed towards another member. Cut it out.

[silverlight]

Silverlight

Lets get something right

The WRAG is for people who are classed as too sick to work but who may, with the right support and help be able to enter the workplace within a certain timeframe, maybe even a year.

 

You seem to think that benefits are easy, could you live on £71 a week ?

 

Whether I could or couldn't is here nor there, I'm not the one claiming the benefit and having to obey the rules that are laid down.

 

As you say with the 'right support and help be able to enter the workplace', then isn't that what the DWP/Jobcentre/WP is trying to do?

 

If you seriously think that the DWP made a bad decision he should have appealed against it when it was originally made.