Me and My Various Benefit Claims and issues

[boomboomboom]

If it's a vacancy you found yourself on UJ, then the JC can't obtain feedback - even if you did apply via the 'Apply Now' button. It's still your vacancy.

 

Only if the adviser formally told you to apply for that job (matched vacancy) could they obtain feedback, no matter how you applied for it.

 

Once again it comes down to the JC advisers not knowing their own guidance - they assume that because you've listed it on UJ, they can check up on anything, whether matched vacancy or one you found all by yourself. By the time you find out they've done it and complain..they've already done it! Be very careful what you put on UJ.

 

At one time, applying for jobs where you didn't quite have the experience was looked upon as showing initiative, now the JC classes it as 'not trying'. Unbelievable!!!

 

yeh i applied for it without the job centre telling me so i applied for it myself at my own accord so they have no rights to get involved in something they never gave me to apply for.

 

ye gonna watch what i put on it but end of the day if they ask for any info of the company or the company contact job centre i will be complaining because surely that is a break of DPA as it was not a "matched Vacancy"?

 

am still waiting on a reply from the company to ask about weather they know i dont have experience for food and beverage and is which it says on there job requirements they are looking for if they say yeh but u can still come for interview i think its a bit misleading if they have advertise a job looking for a food and beverage person with full experience and basically inviting someone who does not and then that could stop another person who does as the experience not getting a interview.

[boomboomboom]

What if you go for the interview and they get a bit narked cuz you dont meet the requirements so they phone and complain to the job centre?

 

why would they complain to the job centre about that?

 

was a misunderstanding when i looked the job over and noticed what i had done but surely even there team should notice that on there "job requirements that it says u must have the full experience of food and beverage experience" but yet i dont have any so why would they consider someone with no experience when they are looking for a experience person lol!

[pauls33]

If it's a vacancy you found yourself on UJ, then the JC can't obtain feedback - even if you did apply via the 'Apply Now' button. It's still your vacancy.

 

Only if the adviser formally told you to apply for that job (matched vacancy) could they obtain feedback, no matter how you applied for it.

 

Once again it comes down to the JC advisers not knowing their own guidance - they assume that because you've listed it on UJ, they can check up on anything, whether matched vacancy or one you found all by yourself. By the time you find out they've done it and complain..they've already done it! Be very careful what you put on UJ.

 

At one time, applying for jobs where you didn't quite have the experience was looked upon as showing initiative, now the JC classes it as 'not trying'. Unbelievable!!!

 

 

Thanks for clarifying

 

 

I only put generic wording down on UJM/Work booklet

ie Applied for XX at Town Name

 

 

If they want any more details on the job/proof then I show them confirmation email that I got from applying (this I take with me on my sign on day if they want to look at)

[boomboomboom]

Thanks for clarifying

 

 

I only put generic wording down on UJM/Work booklet

ie Applied for XX at Town Name

 

 

If they want any more details on the job/proof then I show them confirmation email that I got from applying (this I take with me on my sign on day if they want to look at)

 

i see what u mean.

 

getting fed up i have contacted the 3 emails that u do to ask for more info on this job if u have to have the experience and no reply yet thats been a day and still nothing getting quite fed up!

 

u would think a big company like it would reply to u or let u know that your email will be answered soon but nothing!

 

am not wasting a journey of over an hour for nothing know what i mean?

 

surely the job employer wouldnt contact the job centre to tell them. and another thing i have still not replied to the email to confirm if i want this interview or not so to them i may not have got the email yet.

[pauls33]

That is one of the things that annoys me

 

 

Sending emails to companies/agencies and they get ignored

Try phoning them and constantly get told the person is busy and they will call back, they never do

 

 

The only time they speak to you is if you are successful in getting an interview, then they ignore you again after that and don't tell you that you didn't get the job

 

 

I am sure this is just down to the number of people applying, but I am sure it wasn't like this 10 years ago

[boomboomboom]

That is one of the things that annoys me

 

 

Sending emails to companies/agencies and they get ignored

Try phoning them and constantly get told the person is busy and they will call back, they never do

 

 

The only time they speak to you is if you are successful in getting an interview, then they ignore you again after that and don't tell you that you didn't get the job

 

 

I am sure this is just down to the number of people applying, but I am sure it wasn't like this 10 years ago

 

yeh i have sent 3 emails even to the receptionist bit as they will surely reply to it or forward it on and the person who does interviews and the person who sent the email asking if i would attend or not but not a single reply and i need to know if they know that i have no experience at all in food and beverage and they might say its been a mistake as i don't think they have looked at it probable and noticed that i dont have any experience at all and if they say they have looked at it correct then i say well its a bit misleading that your asking for people for full experience and and i dont have any experience at all and am getting asked if i would attend a interview or not and there people who are with experience getting basically told no and missing out due to someone like me with no experience what so ever.

 

and another thing i dont see why the ujm does not have a remove button on it as all that money they spend on it and they dont even have something where i can say a have wrote that wrong i will delete that and do it again not sure if anyone else agrees with me on this one ?

[boomboomboom]

got email back saying "In regards to previous experience, it really is dependent on a number of things. If perhaps you have experience in something similar i.e. customer service then this would be taken into account. Sometimes if you haven’t worked specifically in a restaurant then you may have transferable skills gained from some other areas such as working experience or a club you take part in." but surely " Previous experience in food & beverage essential." i would not have any of this? i have sent my cv to see maybe if she will look at it and see that im maybe not the one to invite.

 

and when i reply she says that she is away to tuesday so now she wont be able to see my cv as she wont have emails as she will be on holiday aw ye great lol

[Lapsed Workaholic]

Sorry to see that you are still struggling to come to a decision on your next move. It is important that you realise and understand how UJM works.

 

Every time you log on to UJM your Account ID details along with the date and time is recorded. Likewise every time you log off. That way they have a record of how long you spent on the site.

 

Every page you spend time on and how long, every job advertisement that you spend time on and how long is similarly recorded. Every job you apply for via UJM is also recorded. All the notes, or whatever, you add are also recorded.

 

All this is not to help you to get a job. It is to monitor your “Actively seeking work” activities. The system itself is set up to seek out and highlight discrepancies. On discovering a discrepancy it automatically sets off a ‘doubt’ signal. The ‘doubt’ signal sets the sanctioning procedure in motion.

 

So, you see, all the above can be done without the aid of hand or eye. The adviser will accept it as sufficient that the system has raised a doubt based on your own activities and entries and he/she will not question it. Those advisers aren’t programmed to contradict or second guess the machine. The whole system would collapse in a day if advisers could over-rule the machine whenever it suited them.

 

Now every employer, or agency working on his behalf, who uses UJM to advertise jobs must also open an Account before they can use it. That Account must be accessible to DWP. All the checks that can be carried out on your Account and more can be carried out on an employers’ Account. If an employer’s job advertisement appears on UJM it means that that employer, or an agency working on his behalf, has a UJM Account and whichever way a potential employee applies for that job, even if you replied by tying a message to a pigeons’ leg, their Account will show it. If their Account shows it, DWP will see it.

 

In this case you know that the job was advertised on UJM yet you chose to apply for it by other means. They know by now that you have applied by other means, not least because you told them, and they might wish to question you on why you did not apply via UJM, which would have been the simplest way to apply and because you promised them that you would use it. At the very least they might have you for treason, at most, if you use as your defence the explanation that you have given here, attempting with malice aforethought to defraud Her Majesty’s Department of Work and Pensions. I can see 8 years in Barlinnie as a bare minimum. Your only possible chance now would be if Scotland votes ‘YES’ in September and English writ no longer ran in Scotland.

 

I’m afraid that along with Jasta11 and Pauls33 you may be under a misapprehension if you believe that the DWP can’t contact an employer or potential employer about an employee or potential employee.

 

Either the people advertising the job must have placed the job ad directly onto UJM, in which case they have to have an Account with UJM, or they advertised it via an agency and that agency placed the job ad on UJM, in which case they must have an Account with UJM. Neither the agency advertising on behalf of the employer, nor the owners of UJM, Monster Inc. acting for the agency, provide this service for nothing. Those paying for the service would be justified in making enquiries if the service they received was less than adequate. So the employer could complain about your behaviour and seek redress from the agency it uses, and that agency could complain and seek redress from UJM.

 

 

Along with the UJM link there is this:

 

The Welfare Reform and Pensions Act 1999 (Section 72) (Relevant Authority) Designation Order 2013 came into effect on 17 July 2013. From this date, where a person in receipt of JSA has been notified about a job by an Employment Officer, that employer is designated as a relevant authority. This means that that employer, or the employees of that organisation, can share with DWP information regarding whether or not a JSA claimant applied for the job in question.

From this it may be possible for an Employment Officer who notified any claimant anywhere about the job you have applied for to designate that employer as a 'relevant authority' and as such entitle the DWP to ask any questions it chooses.

 

It is staggering how easy it is for the system to find out everything it needs to know, and everything it doesn’t need to know, come to that.

 

PS:

Do they do catering or cookery courses at Barlinnie?

[Brenty]

I'm sorry Lapsed Workaholic but where do you get your authority from? I worked as a civil servant in DWP until last year and I must say you are talking absolute rot.

 

I realise I've just joined this site and don't want my first post to be negative, but when I read such blatant misinformation written in such a high-handed manner I just can't hold my tongue.

 

(I realise this is an open forum for benefit/disability advice, and I haven't read the previous posts from him, so if he has long standing mental health, alcoholism, drug addictions, Aspergers issues - or just too much time on his hands, then I apologise).

[Lapsed Workaholic]

Hello Brenty and welcome to the site.

 

 

Always ready to admire anyone who comes out fighting their corner.

 

 

If you can point out an example of "blatant misinformation" or "high-handedness" feel free to enlighten me so that I might have a chance to respond.

 

 

I suffer from nothing on your list although it does not surprise me that someone of your own pre-eminence should think that anyone daring to challenge you should.

[dyfed]

If like me you have been to pubs and restaurants you could say you have had experiance of food and beverage all be it as a customer eating and drinking it lol

[Brenty]

"Every time you log on to UJM your Account ID details along with the date and time is recorded. Likewise every time you log off. That way they have a record of how long you spent on the site.

 

Every page you spend time on and how long, every job advertisement that you spend time on and how long is similarly recorded. Every job you apply for via UJM is also recorded. All the notes, or whatever, you add are also recorded."

 

Erm... No! DWP *WISHES* UJM was that sophisticated but take it from someone who watched it being developed and implemented, same as the billion dollar NHS cock-up integrated software - it sure as hell can't do what you think it does. And to suggest it does makes me think you are unecessarily paranoid, (in addition to your constant self-aggrandizing purple prose was suggesting to me either alcoholism, MH issues).

 

We're all here to help though ultimately, so no offence is meant to you personally, it's just easy for you to be an internet weekend warrior without really having any experience?

[dyfed]

Brenty are you here to missinform us?

Somehow I dont believe you. Maybe because the evidence says different.

Oh well, have a nice day and I look forward to reading more posts from you in due course.

And yeh I do have MH and alcohol issues

[Brenty]

don't we all darling - that's really why most of us are all here

[Lapsed Workaholic]

A Jobcentre adviser told me that if I did my jobsearch on UJM and noted every other activity that I carried out off UJM on UJM then allow him access to my Account he would have all the evidence he needed to satisfy himself that my job seeking activities met with the requirements of 'actively seeking employment'. He told me that every move I made on UJM, every keystroke, was recorded. Shock, horror, did he lie to me? Many other were told similar things by their advisers.

 

 

Why are they all so keen we use it if it doesn't record our activities in a way that they can check?

 

 

I have read DWP Guidance to Work Programme Providers, to its own advisers and decision makers, they all say the same thing. I have read DWP's terms of reference with employers who choose to use UJM and the terms of reference between DWP and Monster Inc. All extolling the virtues of UJM and praising its ability to grab claimants by the short and curlies and squeeze.

 

 

If you are what you claim to be and possess all this insider knowledge what possessed you to respond to my humble offerings, nether asked for nor welcome, rather than address the issues and the problems and the distress of the hundreds, if not thousands, on this site desperate for help, if not sheer badness?

[Brenty]

I've only just found this site. It seems (mostly) friendly. I joined to ask about an ongoing debt issue but found this benefit forum and just felt minded to add my two-penneth when I read your 'word to the wise' postings.

 

In answer to your direct question - Yes UJM notes when you've logged on. Your advisor can see when you logged on and which day. But what they CANNOT see (irrespective of whether you choose to tick the 'I authorise DWP to view my site' - and note this is just a token gesture to placate the disinfranchised who always seem so obsessed with who is monitoring them as if they are SO important, lol) is how long you stayed on for or what you looked at. All they can see is what you applied for, what notes you saved in your 'Application History' and what days you logged on.

 

To suggest otherwise is pure paranoia and suggests to me once again, that with respect, someone of your clear intelligence, has wholly too much time on their hands.

 

Chris x

[Lapsed Workaholic]

Dyfed,

Do you have any idea what self-aggrandizing purple prose is? Do you suffer from it yourself? Would you recommend I went for a snifter? Sometimes one feels so left out when one’s normal.

Drunk or sober I reckon we have a right plonker here.

[Brenty]

I'm only trying to correct you, if you choose to take this as a sleight on your ego then so be it.

 

As I said, no offence meant. But I can't stand by and see you peddle crap.

 

Enjoy your snifter, I'm about to have one myself Cx

[Lapsed Workaholic]

In addition to the list offered above you might peruse the DWP’s own factsheets on cookies (not the kind you eat, Dyfed) and the Information Commissioner's Office reams of literature on the subject.

 

When you have read all that perhaps you could point me to the information that describes UJM the way you would have me understand it.

 

Might I suggest too that you take it steady with the personal abuse? I can take it myself and if pushed give it to an extent that would turn my purple prose blue. It’s just that the powers that be frown on common trash contaminating the site. Nothing personal, you understand just that the snakes crawl at night, that’s what they say.

 

I ask again, when are you going to address the problem currently under discussion on this thread before we were so rudely interrupted and give us your considered specialist advice?

[antone]

Ladies and gentlemen, civility is not optional here.

[Chester6]

I was told they don't even know when you log in apart from the last time you logged in eg log in daily and see them on Friday, if you logged in before seeing them then they only see that one

[jasta11]

This is the problem; nobody knows exactly what the DWP can and can't see or do with your UJ account. Ask 10 advisers and you'll get 10 differing replies - incuding a few they've made up out of thin air as they haven't a clue themselves. Doesn't matter what the guidance or law says on the use of UJ, Data Protection, etc, we all know the DWP and JC staff are prone to 'bend' any rules they have, when it suits them.

 

Being a natural cynic, I've always assumed everything I do on UJ is recorded and fully accessible to them, even without my permission. Being paranoid saves a lot of time and trouble I only apply for vacancies which have an external email contact, or handled by an agency I can contact directly. The JC adviser gets the UJ number and info on the vacancy I've applied for, so they can check the vacancy does exist and they get a screen print of my direct application. Nothing is recorded on UJ whatsoever, so I'm fulfilling the requirement to use UJ but not laying myself open to the perils of recording stuff on there.

 

95% of my evidence comes from other sources and I just throw in 3 or 4 UJ vacancies to show that I've looked at the site. Remember, the JC can't specify where you get your vacancies from; as long as you meet or exceed your JS Agreement requirements that's all they need.

 

I also remember the days when you got a nice letter back after applying for a vacancy, thanking you. We were classed as 'Personnel' then though, now we're just 'Human Resources' who don't even warrant an email reply.

[pauls33]

For me my PWP Coach recommended I fill in my details on UJM (did not say I had to only advised I do) just to cover my back, so for me I use it daily and record everything on it (all jobs I have seen on it for me are via an external website, so if I see a job and it says reed.co.uk under it, I go direct to reed and apply from there)

 

 

when I do see my coach, she has my UJM details on her screen and sees exactly the same thing I do, nothing extra (not to say more details aren't being gathered in the background for checking up on me)

 

 

I do also use the paper job book along side this, as this is what they look at when I sign on

 

 

IMO, as long as you at least stick to your job seekers agreement, recording details on UJM, paper book, printed word documents etc it shouldn't matter

 

 

Yes mistakes can happen and people get wrongly sanctioned, but if you are doing everything you are supposed to (and more) then this should get overturned

 

 

I know most don't agree with using UJM, but I can only give my experience of using it along with my local job centre, which has not been negative so far

[Lapsed Workaholic]

Chapter 3, section 25 of the DWP’s own UJ Toolkit says:

25. UJ brings a shift in the focus from helping claimants search for jobs, to looking instead at the claimant’s activity on UJ.

 

My interpretation of that statement is that using UJ is not meant to help me or make it easier for me to find a job. It is primarily to make it easier for the Jobcentre staff to keep tabs on what I do, my job seeking activity.

 

If the focus is to keep tabs on my job seeking activity and not to help me find a job, what else can they possibly want to keep tabs on me for?

 

The only answer that I can think of to that question is so that they can gather evidence with which to punish, penalise or sanction me.

 

It follows then that by agreeing to use UJ I am aiding and abetting the Jobcentre staff in their primary aim which is to punish, penalise or sanction me.

 

It follows then that by exercising my right to refuse to give them access to my UJ Account, or better still, not to use it at all, I am limiting the time and effort expended on defending or protecting myself from sanction and increasing my prospect of obtaining work by expending more time and effort in actually actively seeking it.

 

Here are two kinds of programmes that can be used to keep tabs on one’s activity on a website or a computer. There are undoubtedly more and some so secret that the general public knows nothing about them.

 

Website Trackers. These programmes tracks and records all activity while on a website.

 

Keystroke Loggers. These programmes are even more alarming. The following is a brief description of how they work from one of the many websites that sell them. A more thorough description would probably result in some making a dash for the sledgehammer and smashing their computer to bits.

 

A keylogger program does not require physical access to the user's computer. It can be downloaded on purpose by someone who wants to monitor activity on a particular computer or it can be downloaded unwittingly as spyware and executed as part of a rootkit or remote administration (RAT) Trojan horse. A keylogger program typically consists of two files that get installed in the same directory: a dynamic link library (DLL) file (which does all the recording) and an executable file (.EXE) that installs the DLL file and triggers it to work. The keylogger program records each keystroke the user types and uploads the information over the Internet periodically to whoever installed the program.

 

These programmes can be downloaded onto a computer’s hard-drive and be triggered to run in the background without the user’s knowledge. Every move that the user makes on that computer is then recorded, stored and sent at regular intervals to whoever controls the programme. Even camaras that some computers now come equiped with can be triggered to record and send pictures without the user knowing anything about it. Many computer training sites and publications now issue warnings to cover the camera with a piece of tape just in case.

 

There have been reports that keylogger programmes are used on Jobcentre IADs in order to obtain personal information of users who would not otherwise willingly give it.

[boomboomboom]

Ladies and gentlemen, civility is not optional here.

 

i agree with you here.