ESA and permitted work

[fletch70]

Hi again, confused here

Just had notification of my loans and grants

I will get a loan of 5555

The special support grant

A bursary to help with course costs which I do not think counts as income

 

Therefore by my calculations, and taking off the allowances for travel, books etc I will be just over the ESA Wrag IB limit. Will this mean that I have to come off ESA or will it mean that I have underlying entitlement but do not receive anything

If I get underlying entitlement it should mean that I get all my HB paid , if not I guess it will just be assessed on my income

 

t seems to me like a stupid system and one, where if you do not know the rules , you will probably get shafted with

[Nystagmite]

You won't get full HB on the basis of an underlying entitlement.

 

Even though you won't get any ESA, you'll still get your NI paid.

[fletch70]

Sorry maybe I didn't express it well, if I have underlying entitlement then the HB deduction would be my income-esa rate . I am not expecting full HB , it s just a lot of what ifs and I am not very good at what ifs

[fletch70]

My WP is now talking about getting people in 3 days a week as there are not enough clients. She is also telling me that even when i start Uni i will have to attend even though i will be getting little or no ESA.

As a wrag claimant what can they force me to do and how often. Seems like madness

[Mr.P]

If it is a full time course, I doubt very much that you would be required to attend any of their sessions - Perhaps having a word with the DWP would be in order.

 

If, once you start Uni and you find that your ESA is reduced to zero, then there is no requirement to engage with any WP provider as your qualifying entitlement has been removed.

[fletch70]

If the site team are OK with this I would like to start a discussion thread where people can let off steam. If it is felt that it is better not to , or move it to the Bear Garden than so be it.

 

I will kick it off with a few general opinions

 

1) The general idea behind it may be a good one

2) There are some people that "play" the system in fact with ESA things are so bad you often do have to describe your condition on the worst possible day

3) People who work for the various work providers are generally ok people who are doing a job to the best of their ability although they may get worn down by the constant demands placed on them by clients and employer

4) Making it a business where profit is based on results causes more problems than it solves

5) The DWP can abdicate from the bad processes by blaming the work providers

6) There is a general lack of training with the advisers, particularly where disabilities are concerned and even more so where MH issues are concerned

[essexmat]

1. The idea of a WP in general is a good idea but is flawed in many ways
   
2. WP staff are just doing their job but they also want an easy ride - if you genuinely think they want to help you then you are mistaken. 9-5 and home, done
   
3. WP staff (unless in a senior position) do not know the rules of the WP with regards to JSA/ESA etc
   
4. Everyone on the WP is tarred with the same brush - there is no individuality re training/workshops etc. You can placed in the same 'pool' as someone who has never worked or has no qualifications if you have worked 20+ years at senior level and have a variety of experience and qualifications
   
5. WP staff try and make out you are better off working in some jobs when in fact you are not simply so they can get their bonuses and get you off their books and say they have 'engaged and helped' a client
   
6. Having a system (the WP) that is results based with bonuses is plain wrong - they are playing with peoples lives for their own benefit
   
7. WP seem to think they are gods when in fact it is JCP/DWP that have the power not these charlatans
   
8. People with the ability to look for work themselves who have good experience and history of work should be left alone to do so rather than continually placed on pointless courses and MAN appointments
   
9. WP should be abolished and replaced with tailored help via the JCP
   
10. To conclude - WP ARE A TOTAL WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY AND SHOULD BE SCRAPPED
    

[fletch70]

Matt

I certainly agree with you that the program as it stands should be scrapped . I would disagree about non of the staff wanting to help, I think some genuinely do or at least do at the start but maybe get ground down. Certainly where I am people are "streamed" into groups but more based on willingness to actively search for work than anything else. The really disruptive ones get the luxury of having 1:1 sessions .

People do get asked for courses, but as you say they are not specific. I got asked to go on a customer service course...I have spent 30 years working in customer facing roles in retail and sales so I declined . In the last three years I have had 3 people rewrite my CV, all different and even funnier I have told them all my sister is an ex careers advisor who wrote C.V.s for a living . I am afraid I nodded took the C.V. and ignored, but more wasted resources

 

I am not sure how to fix it in a way that isn't extremely expensive

[Mr.P]

Having a system (the WP) that is results based with bonuses is plain wrong - they are playing with peoples lives for their own benefit

 

The "Payment by results" model is inherently flawed as it encourages the practice of "park and cream" - Concentrate on the easy cases and get the money in quick and have intermittent contact with the harder cases just to show "that we are doing something". Under the previous incarnation, Flexible New Deal, a (substantial) fixed fee was paid up front. This resulted in the providers simply saying "we've got the money, just harass the victims until their time is served". No real incentive to actually deliver any genuine support or help.

 

The idea that the majority of the long term unemployed can be "helped" back in to work by contracting out to these private companies is fundamentally flawed. Reduced to the most basic, the core of the problem is simply there is not enough jobs around for everyone looking for work. The money being wasted on these programmes is nothing short of a multi-billion pound PR stunt (sc.am) to fool the voting public in to believing that something is being done to tackle the "problem".

 

The money would be better spent on:

 

• Investing in job creation, especially in areas of high unemployment.
  
• Provide the JCP with the resources to provide/fund targeted genuine local support for those that need it.
  
• Increase staff and training for staff at all levels within the JCP.
  
• Provide better healthcare and support via the NHS & Social Services.
  
• Increase funding for local charities and support groups.
  

[SabreSheep]

I Agree that the system is fundamentally flawed. To much emphasis placed on enforcement rather than assistance.

 

1) Everybody entering the system should start with an interview with a professional to update OR teach the claimant how to do CVs and Covering letters. (This would only have to be taught if the claimant could not prove they knew how to do one)

 

2) More self managed job search for those that are genuinely looking for work and do not need the assistance meaning resources can be targeted at those that need the extra help and persuasion.

 

3) Sanctions regime overhauled. I Like the yellow card idea where a first fault triggers a meeting where the fault is discussed and next steps jointly agreed to rectify problems. Second offense triggers a sanction investigation but sanction is not applied until a decision is made AND the appeal process exhausted. Thus removing need for most hardship payments and reducing burden on charities and food bank.

 

4) When a Sanction is applied, a specialist harship advisor should be on hand to risk assess the claiment to make sure they are not vulnerable.

 

5) Job searches should be reviewed. Quality should count more than quantity. A new job search utility should bre created which forbids the placing of jobs by agency and zero hour contracts and must offer 17 hours minimum

[fletch70]

Sabre

Interesting points, I am not sure about only advertising 17 hours or more as there are some people (on ESA for example who actually want 8-16 hours to see how it goes.

 

With a C.V. what is acceptable, this is very subjective . Current thoughts are that you go back 10 years for job history but for me that includes only 1 job and completely misses out my retail management experience.

 

I like your ideas about sanctions but wonder what the cost would be and how it could be abused . Definitely agree that there should be a consistent policy .

Maybe someone could put a price on the head of a certain secretary of state:lol: -that's a joke as I don't condone any violence

[estellyn]

The main problems with the WP are that payment is based on a claimant getting a job....any job, and that the staff appear to be trained in badgering and manipulation rather than any type of career counselling role.

 

An ideal program, would as has already been stated be individualistic. A detailed assessment would be made at a claimant's commencement on the WP assessing current skills, training, work history, goals, and an individualised program would be given to each claimant.

 

For instance, an 18 year old with no work experience and poor reading, writing and maths skills should be assessed for any learning issues (dyslexia for instance), sent on further education (specialist if necessary) for that to start with, assisted with some proper CV and application form courses then on to a few different work experience placements - proper work experience, not simply shelf stacking, and then assisted to find a job.

 

Someone coming out of work, rather than school, following assessment might be encouraged to consider retraining if there are very few jobs any more in their chosen field, or courses to develop further job skills, and work placements in their chosen industry if appropriate.

 

I feel that the way that jobseeking is organised today is highly inappropriate and in some cases unrealistic. There are never going to be enough jobs to go around, this is fact - gone are the days of full employment, so as a country we have to have a realistic plan to deal with people without the means to support themselves - because at it's most basic, this is what a job is - a way for people without any other funds to get money to live. So we need to accept some truths, the most difficult one for those who are right leaning is that some people are never going to be able to hold down a job. Some can't work due to chronic illness or disability, but others simply don't have the ability to maintain a job - several hundred years ago, these people would have either been supported as part of a family or would have been vagrants or beggars or dead.

 

Society has changed - we no longer have many extended families who are willing to support economically inactive members. It is also no longer considered acceptable to allow those without financial support of their own (or immediate family) to fend for themselves and starve or beg (though the Tories might like to do this). We have sickness and disability benefits for least physically and mentally able, but this then leaves us with a pool of people, the first half is those who are unwell in some way, but not considered quite unwell enough by current standards, and the second half are those with no obvious health issues, but due to......whatever personal issue, be it literacy, understanding, undiagnosed health issues and personality disorders who can't get or hold down a job. What do we do with these people? A lot of these people, due to the WP are falling foul of the sanction system, and some are being made miserable enough to commit suicide. Others, I expect, are turning to crime to support themselves rather than submit to the WP, which is not good for any of us.

 

so my idea for a new reorganisation:

 

A national employment agency where all vacancies are registered, where people seeking employment register and are assessed and assisted to find work in a fair and appropriate way.

 

All children are mandated to stay in school until 18, schools teach according to ability, with the least able taught basics and living skills before anything more complex that would have absolutely no use to them in the rest of their life. Children are advanced according to ability and not according to age - this ensures that all school leavers have a basic education in the skills they will need most.

 

From 18 till 21, young people can choose either to take a degree course, take a three year vocational education course or do some type of 'service to the community', be that military, civil, local or charitable.

 

Along with the above there is a national citizen's income, of (for example) £10,000 a year for every adult over 21, £7500 a year for 18 - 21 year olds and £5000 a year for the first three children, £1000 a year for any subsequent children. An additional £10,000 a year for those assessed to be permanently unable to work.

 

No welfare benefits.

 

The national employment agency would provide a free, quality, tailored service to those looking for work. All vacancies would have to be registered with the agency, and all advisers would be highly trained with no incentive payments.

 

OK, now I've fixed that, on to peace in the middle east. (cowering behind a wall while right leaning caggers throw things)

[fletch70]

Are you suggesting that a couple of 22 years olds with three kids would get a national income of £35K . That in itself encourages having children and "family values". IMHO children are not a right they are to be planned for.

 

As for the rest of your ideas I broadly agree although I am not keen on mandating education to 18, what do we do with the people who will never be able to manage their own affairs , we can not teach them. I totally agree that some people will never be able to have a job as they just do not have the ability but there must be something many can do to contribute to society .

I know this will pander to the right wingers amongst us but we must not allow unemployment to be a lifestyle choice as it is for some. Here is a radical idea for you, the people who appear to be baby factories with no job or partner have these children taken and adopted by families who want and can afford children .

I do not think that humanity is evolved enough for your ideas just yet but it would be great if we could get there.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Who the hell is going to pay for all this??

Nearing 70 and still have to work but benefit from only minimal increases in pension whilst taxed to pay for others benefits NO.

[estellyn]

Are you suggesting that a couple of 22 years olds with three kids would get a national income of £35K . That in itself encourages having children and "family values". IMHO children are not a right they are to be planned for.

 

As for the rest of your ideas I broadly agree although I am not keen on mandating education to 18, what do we do with the people who will never be able to manage their own affairs , we can not teach them. I totally agree that some people will never be able to have a job as they just do not have the ability but there must be something many can do to contribute to society .

I know this will pander to the right wingers amongst us but we must not allow unemployment to be a lifestyle choice as it is for some. Here is a radical idea for you, the people who appear to be baby factories with no job or partner have these children taken and adopted by families who want and can afford children .

I do not think that humanity is evolved enough for your ideas just yet but it would be great if we could get there.

 

I agree, we're not evolved enough yet to do this - and I struggle with the kid issue - maybe less, maybe only for the first two kids, not sure.....

[osdset]

The number one overriding flaw with the Work Programme is, it is in the hands of the private sector.

This should have been an offshoot of JCP. Staffed, monitored and controlled by JCP. Whilst there is profit to be made standards will inevitably suffer.

 

What other private enterprise is:

 

Not allowed to fail.

 

Has its product supplied daily free of charge, then gets to charge the client a £600 stocking fee per item.

 

Gets to keep the product for two years whilst garnering fees for re-packaging, and can hand the product back to the client after the two year period if it hasn't sold.

 

If the product sells itself and the provider can find out who the buyer is the provider still gets a commission.

[estellyn]

Who the hell is going to pay for all this??

Nearing 70 and still have to work but benefit from only minimal increases in pension whilst taxed to pay for others benefits NO.

 

dismantling the welfare state, increase in number of jobs, stimulation to the economy, complete overhaul of the tax system.

 

This is coming eventually. With more jobs being replaced by technology there will need to be a more robust system for ensuring that everyone has the basic funds to live, acknowledging that all have the right to the basics of life, a roof over their heads and food. Employment income or personal wealth, private occ pensions etc. is then in addition, and leaves it up to the individual the quality of life they want.

 

Of course in order to ensure that basic income covers basic needs, there would need to be some price control on food basics, water, domestic heating, power and rent.

 

Most will still want to work to raise their standard of living. Innovation, invention, art, lifelong learning and business start up would all be encouraged due to basics of life always being ensured.

 

Healthcare is free in this country and considered a basic right, I don't think it's such a terribly big stretch to say that food, water, heat and a roof are basic rights too, and should always be ensured.

 

And to take it back to being on topic, acknowledging that these things are rights as being a citizen of a developed nation, means that WP providers who badger, manipulate, trick and humiliate people just so that they can continue to receive not enough money to ensure these rights become abhorrent.

[fletch70]

Well it's nice to see that broadly speaking we are in agreement . Bit of a marxist there Estellyn?

I happen to believe that the basic marxist thoughts are something to aspire to but a long way to go. We can not do it alone . I believe that the world needs to change

 

Brig

The costs may not be as prohibitive as it first looks once it is set . Remember this is an ideal, something to aspire to. I think we will both be long dead before it happens.

You say you are still having to work, may I be rude and say you are working to maintain the lifestyle you want . I am not saying it is easy being a pensioner on guaranteed pension credit but it is still double that of someone on JSA

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Well it's nice to see that broadly speaking we are in agreement . Bit of a marxist there Estellyn?

I happen to believe that the basic marxist thoughts are something to aspire to but a long way to go. We can not do it alone . I believe that the world needs to change

 

Brig

The costs may not be as prohibitive as it first looks once it is set . Remember this is an ideal, something to aspire to. I think we will both be long dead before it happens.

You say you are still having to work, may I be rude and say you are working to maintain the lifestyle you want . I am not saying it is easy being a pensioner on guaranteed pension credit but it is still double that of someone on JSA

 

 

 

No guarantee for me!

 

 

Indeed I work to maintain a home, and a comfortable lifestyle having worked for decades for the same employer.

[SabreSheep]

The Green Party advocate a citizens income.

 

If it is to work then I would suggest the state does an agreement with the people. No more than 2 children per couple (Now that should drop a bomb or two)

 

As for price controls on food power and water and basic housing, Ive always said, strategic utilities should be in the hands of the state and not the private sector.

 

Full employment is coming to an end (If it was ever here to start with) which means society has to change and adabt.

[fletch70]

No more than two children per couple, well for a start the Catholic church would have a fit and I can see the headlines in the DM now#

BTW has anyone seen Coniff, a bit of right wing rhetoric would be fun

 

Anyway back to topic

Can we change things?

Would labour change anything?

What is the best way to deal with them?

Am I collaborating with the enemy when I suggest trying not to rock the boat to avoid sanctions or is it easy to tell people to fight them on the beaches when it is not your benefit money being cut?

Can I think of any more cliche's?

[estellyn]

No more than two children per couple, well for a start the Catholic church would have a fit and I can see the headlines in the DM now#

BTW has anyone seen Coniff, a bit of right wing rhetoric would be fun

 

Anyway back to topic

Can we change things?

Would labour change anything?

What is the best way to deal with them?

Am I collaborating with the enemy when I suggest trying not to rock the boat to avoid sanctions or is it easy to tell people to fight them on the beaches when it is not your benefit money being cut?

Can I think of any more cliche's?

 

I think the best way to handle the sanction/WPP/JCP to encourage and assist people to fight their sanctions. I think at the moment most claimants don't realise their rights or that they could successfully challenge their sanction. what needs to happen is as with ESA, where so many appeals go in and so many decisions are overturned that those in charge have no choice but to take notice and change things.

 

There needs to be a national 'challenge sanction' campaign. Maybe someone could knock up an easy proforma mandatory recon letter that people can fill in the gaps and send.

 

Maybe also some proforma sheets of jobseeker/ESA WRAG claimants' rights - there are threads here that cover some common problems people seem to be coming up against - a information sheet that they can hand over when a doubt is raised may well stop some sanctions in their tracks.

 

Maybe if we try and list some of the reasons people are getting sanctioned, more experienced caggers could volunteer to take an issue each and write a short info 'letter' on that topic suitable for WP/JCP meetings, or to send in response for man recons. What do people think?

[fletch70]

I think it is a great idea but do not have the skills to do it. I know there are people about who could. My understanding is that sadly and imo wrongly people only find they are sanctioned when no money hits the bank. This to me is so wrong. Even then getting the recon in is too late as they have no money. I know it would throw me off balance.

[estellyn]

I think it is a great idea but do not have the skills to do it. I know there are people about who could. My understanding is that sadly and imo wrongly people only find they are sanctioned when no money hits the bank. This to me is so wrong. Even then getting the recon in is too late as they have no money. I know it would throw me off balance.

 

 

This is the problem, the money stops, the JCP staff give them the impression the sanction is final and set in stone and they're not going to get their money restarted, so people either don't know they can challenge it, or don't know how to challenge. There is so little help out there now for welfare benefits help, and CAB are swamped, I think a lot of claimants feel there is nowhere to turn.

[dyfed]

@fletch

 

Children are a right. Do you think that disabled should not have children because they cant work? Do you think that a working family should not have children in case the bread winner losses their job?

 

Maybe you think only middle and upper classes should have the right to have children.

 

Its a very right wing view you have there my friend.