Community Work Program

[nexxusone]

Also today Seetec staff had the daily meeting within ear shot and it was general talk about targets etc and on day 20 out of 31 they have met 17% of monthly targets.... what targets i couldn't hear, but another phrase i most certainly heard correctly was the discussion of issuing mandates to get people in for 5 weeks solid every day referred as 'The letters of Disappointment...'

So this afternoon i had to sign on and i thought i'd raise the problems with JCP advisor to be told they have 5 mins to sign me, confirm my id, check job search and show payment, I still told her about problems and she very quietly said, that they (jcp staff) all expect it to fail as they have another 150 people to refer to it, she has no reports back of people being placed in work placements and knows its over subscribed with limited charity shops spaces etc...

Edited August 20, 2014 by nexxusone

[Mr.P]

If the building suffers from poor lighting and there is risk of trips and falls, contact the local council and ask for the department that deals with health and safety.

 

If fire exits are electronically controlled, contact the fire department - I'm sure they would have something to say about that.

 

Should a door be secured to prevent anyone leaving, that smacks of unlawful detention - A call to the police may be in order. It is certain they would be called to deal with a breach of the peace when someone decides enough is enough and removes the offending door.

[eddie the wire]

So if you don't get a placement, do you just hang around the offices at Seetec for 6 months and then return to the job centre? Let's say you get a placement after 3 months at Seetec, does this mean you only do it for 3 months?

[nexxusone]

i'm guessing you're on it for 6 months but it actually lasts 32+ weeks, the thing is the woman who signs all the cwp jsa claiments told me NO one has been found a placement so far as charity shops at limit... i'm waiting for more info as i have requested it from Seetec but they failed so far to get back to me.

[eddie the wire]

i'm guessing you're on it for 6 months but it actually lasts 32+ weeks, the thing is the woman who signs all the cwp jsa claiments told me NO one has been found a placement so far as charity shops at limit... i'm waiting for more info as i have requested it from Seetec but they failed so far to get back to me.

 

Well, here's hoping it works out for you.

[nexxusone]

Well, here's hoping it works out for you.

 

Been totally screwed over by seetec they sent me a mandate out and missed one page out with dates on (pages not numbered) so i didnt turn up and have been sanctioned

[nexxusone]

I really need some advice on correct way to complain about the Service provided by Seetec (Norwich)

 

they have raised a sanction doubt on me, when it's their mistake ( missing page in mandate) I have this in hand with a grievance letter to center manager, with copies waiting to go to dwp and local mp.

 

but its the continued substandard services they are providing, the willful disregard for data protection and general 'you couldn't make it up' daily chaos - newest examples below

 

last week thursday people in my cwp told come in a hour later , but go to employment agencies before you come in, this would seem sensible but they expected people to visit 3 and giving that seetec to city center is 15 mins walk that leaves 45 mins divided by 3 leaves 15 mins per employment agency, but with 10+ people that less than 1.5 mins each, so 1st come get to give details back of queue have to leave before even being seen...

 

friday people arrive 9am to sign in, told to claim expense and go home as too many people booked in, one bloke left at 6.30am to arrive for 9am and faced a similar journey back... he was not happy.

 

and guessing this is why, that same friday Seetec 'Lost' one of its training centers due to non payment of rent, so all clients from that center came to 'our' center...

 

this tuesday 26th i was due in but did not receive the correct M.A.N so did'nt attend and get sanction doubt raised, i attended yesterday 27th told why wasn't i in suit as requested??!! (never been told) and did i have my passport for i.d ?? (err again not told) as 3 employers on site offering jobs. these turned out to be 1 week training course in basic maths , english etc and odd apprenticeship staring at £2.44 p/h lol,

 

A charity mugger fundraiser offering £7.10 p/h with a g/tee bonus of £90 if 2 commissions in one night obtained, so basically a business fronted as a charity, could not answer what percentage of collected 'donation' went to charity or a list of the organization(s) it helped.

 

A local window door company, great i think stand in line -30 mins, hand in c.v too be told not looking for installers, just self employed door to door sales...

 

so these 3 employers where a very poor example of seetec seen to be doing something but doing nothing in reality, the best thing was as we stood there, another 40 - 50 work program ( not cpw) arrived and decended onto our pc 's that we had documents open on, usb sticks connected to and our paperwork left at, resulting in people leaving queue to reclaim their property.

about a hour later after we had finished and asked where we could sit as ALL chairs taken (20 odd people standing) we were allowed out an 1hr early and told not to return that afternoon... and see you tomorrow morning.... except at 4pm i got a phone call cancelling the morning session and see you at 2pm. (today) Now why would this be a problem you may ask? Well simply I have 2 autistic children and routine is everything to an autistic child, so having to arrange lifts via family and friends, then cancel them after explaining this to said child usually results in said child having a melt down. basically seetec have taken on too much and cant provide the service at a reasonable level.

I feel i need to complain higher than seetec but not sure who or how to ?

[Mr.P]

I really need some advice on correct way to complain about the Service provided by Seetec (Norwich)

[...]

I feel i need to complain higher than seetec but not sure who or how to ?

 

Oh dear, that grubby little office down by the river - It is perhaps large enough to seat twenty to thirty people at a time, any more than that and you're sitting on each others lap. Who to complain to.... The first port of call would be Seetec (mis)management, but this is a futile path to follow. The "Third Party Contracts manager" at Kiln House (did have his name somewhere, but can't locate it) would be the next level. Then of course, there is your MP - Depending on which one it is, you could find she is of little use, or he may be able to raise the issue at a higher level.

 

If you feel overcrowding is an issue that has safety implications, it may be worth contacting Norfolk County Council - I think it comes under the remit of Environmental Health, if not, they should be able to point you in the right direction. Planning Control would certainly have put a limit on the number of people when the building was originally built.

 

As for the sanction, I suggest the first step would be to ask the DWP for the WP08 and supporting documentation that had been submitted by Seetec. I assume you have already asked for a mandatory reconsideration.

[nexxusone]

not had any letters yet but been verbally told i'm been reported to the attendance tracking team, i explained its their fault, and i have submitted a grievance letter via recorded delivery. (if i hand it in they can lose it). i agree the local 'she' mp to busy with her rise in government cabinet dream to cause any waves in a government run scheme.

I have to do a lot of my stuff at night between 10pm till 1am via letters, as i'm either at cwp or helping my partner with our autistic child, who generally sleeps between 10pm and 6am, I normally survive on 6hrs a night sleep.. anyway time to catch bus to my cwp appointment.

[Lapsed Workaholic]

Nexxusone

Sorry to hear of your predicament, especially after you have been so meticulous in trying to be co-operative and avoid getting sanctioned.

 

All Work Programme providers have (or should have)an internal grievance procedure and claimants who are referred to WP need to use that procedure in the first instance if they have complaints or grievances about the WP that need to be addressed.

 

Ideally the manager at the premises you attend should be the preferred recipient of your complaint or grievance, which should be in writing. Copy of letter to area manager or office, if you know location, copy to manager of Jobcentre you attend for signing-on, highly recommended, copy to local MP, if you thing said MP could be of use, some couldn’t care less.

 

There has already been reference to mandating on this thread a few posts back. Unless the claimant is notified of the mandated activity in writing in plenty of time to comply with it then there is no compulsion on the claimant to carry out the activity unless he/she chooses to do so. It follows that failing to comply with or carry out an activity for which the proper mandatory procedure has not been followed cannot attract censure or sanction.

 

The form that Mr P has so fortuitously provided a link to already this morning, the sanction referral form WP08 actually asks for the date that the written mandatory notice was issued. Failure by the WP provider to complete that section of the form will automatically nullify the sanction referral notice because, according to their own regulations, a mandatory activity notice never existed, which it didn’t unless it was in writing.

 

The link below might be useful to you. It sets out the WP providers guidance on sanctioning claimants for non-compliance with Mandatory Activity Notifications.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/306483/wp-pg-chapter-3a-22-october-2012.pdf

 

Section 4 will be of particular interest to you in your present predicament.

 

Actions

4. The following steps must be taken on every occasion you want to mandate a participant to do something:

• Ensure that the activity is reasonable in the participant’s circumstances

• Ensure that the participant is aware of the sanctions consequences of failing to participate in a mandated activity

• Notify the participant in writing on a Mandatory Activity Notification (MAN):

• The specific action that they are required to undertake

• When or by when they must undertake it

• That the action is mandatory

• What evidence, if any, they must supply to demonstrate completion

• The potential consequences should the participant fail to comply. Required wording: If you do not undertake the activities required in this notification your benefit could be affected

• For JSA participants you must include the wording as outlined in paragraph 34 regarding the consequences of not participating

• For IS lone parents (claiming IS solely on the grounds of being a lone parent) and ESA (WRAG) lone parents with a youngest child aged 3 –

4 years, you must state on the notification that ‘this activity forms part of your work-related activity action plan.’

• The MAN must be either handed direct to the participant or sent by post

 

Record the above information (the MAN) along with all other ongoing mandatory requirements in a single action planning document (Further information regarding Action Planning can be found in Work Programme Guidance Chapter 3b – Action Planning.

 

From your account of what has occurred, you got a written Mandatory Activity Notification through the post with actual attendance dates missing. Did you receive this letter in time to do anything about that omission? On a previous occasion you contacted them straight away seeking confirmation that you were being excused a mandatory activity. This is the sort of difficulty or confusion that is likely to arise from making a habit of contacting these people over the phone, or accept being contacted, on some occasions and not on others.

 

Your other issues with the standard of service generally are separate issues which may be better addressed separately to avoid the confusion of trying to deal with too many issues at the same time. Might even be a good idea to discuss it in another thread, under maladministration, perhaps. I reckon your priority at the moment will be this sanction doubt looming over you.

[nexxusone]

yes sanction doubt my main priority and always will be, I actually demanded a reprint of my 16th august MAN and this had 5 pages this time where as my originally received one had 3 pages... even though pages not numbered, page 2 and 4 missing and these contain dates and warning about sanction.... oh how i smiled! and yes i queried the original 3 page MAN via telephone on 19th August and can prove with my itemized telephone bill, they failed to get back to me as promised and there for i missed an appointment on 26/8/14.

Im reading the the MAN received today and its clear no one proof reads these things as it clearly had me booked all day on bank holiday monday.

Also as this MAN (just a reprint) still has me booked in all day even though they have cancelled all my morning sessions from now on (by answer phone message - i have recording saved automatically to my goggle drive) so again they should have issued a further MAN but haven't.

on a plus side it looks like they have paid up rent arrears and regained entry to the 'locked out -lost' office.

 

i will probably start another thread once i have got sanction doubt sorted

[Mr.P]

All Work Programme providers have (or should have)an internal grievance procedure and claimants who are referred to WP need to use that procedure in the first instance if they have complaints or grievances about the WP that need to be addressed.

 

One minor point, nexxusone is on the Community Work Placement scheme, not the Work Programme. The guidance is broadly similar any any gaps should be filled in by first looking at the Generic Guidance. The sample CWP mandation letters are considerably longer than the WP templates - For some reason the RTF file that the DWP has crashes my editor so had to resort to an online rtf->pdf converter. If anyone else wishes to have a read, file attached.

 

Four pages, and yes, each one is numbered, as it should be.

 

Im reading the the MAN received today and its clear no one proof reads these things as it clearly had me booked all day on bank holiday monday.

 

Now you see why I carried a selection of red pens when dealing with these people in the past

[SabreSheep]

An aside here that someone may be able to play with. Easy questions to answer.

 

1) Are your children considered Disabled?

2) Are you their legal carer/guardian

 

Are you aware that the Single Equality act replaced the DDA. One important bit that is highlighted is that a non disabled person can not be discriminated against due to their caring commitments to a disabled person.

 

Seeing as that Section 4 states it must take any MAN and consider if it is right for your circumstances.......

 

Anyway just thinking out loud. Maybe peeps can look at this and offer feedback

[Lapsed Workaholic]

and yes i queried the original 3 page MAN via telephone on 19th August and can prove with my itemized telephone bill, they failed to get back to me as promised and there for i missed an appointment on 26/8/14.

 

Thanks for that clarification, if you mentioned it before I missed it. The only reason I pointed it out to you was that I felt it could be used against you to trip you up.

I now have no doubt that you have a cast iron case for having any sanction doubt quashed.

PS: I have started a new thread entitled “Maladministration” which you might peruse at your leisure. Any comments or opinions would be appreciated, within reason, of course.

[Lapsed Workaholic]

An aside here that someone may be able to play with. Easy questions to answer.

 

1) Are your children considered Disabled?

2) Are you their legal carer/guardian

 

Are you aware that the Single Equality act replaced the DDA. One important bit that is highlighted is that a non disabled person can not be discriminated against due to their caring commitments to a disabled person.

 

Seeing as that Section 4 states it must take any MAN and consider if it is right for your circumstances.......

 

Anyway just thinking out loud. Maybe peeps can look at this and offer feedback

 

 

You make a good point there Sabresheep. If any consideration were given to Nexxusone's circumstances he would not be having his attendance times messed about with expecting him to drop serious family commitments at a moment's notice on a whim.

 

 

His decision to get serious with those swine is the right one and hopefully with a little help he will be able to sort something out sooner rather than later.

[nexxusone]

on 19th telephone call i got receptionist who only confirmed i was in on 20th (with a promise look into and phone back), I attended on 20th but due to half of lights /pc's tripping electric, they couldn't check my next time and said come in as normal (i.e 1 weeks time on 27th) So on 26th i phoned again as no one had phone and was told i missed 25th appointment, any way im confident that i can win this 99% i'm just in limbo as i haven't received any written confirmation i'm sanctioned.

 

As for my daughters i have 4 (only one at home the 2yr old with new partner)

 

18 yr old in Wales at Uni (normal)

 

7 yr old Autistic , i have friday night till sunday night, my ex receives DLA for her

6 yr old (normal) i have fri - sun, full sister to above

 

2 1/2 yr old has hypermobility , IS on the Autistic spectrum condition (they dropped calling it disorder to be politically correct..!!) and has part of chromosome 13 missing specifically q12.12 which is only now being linked to autism / deafness . we are in process of claiming DLA.

[Lapsed Workaholic]

Thanks for that clarification, if you mentioned it before I missed it. The only reason I pointed it out to you was that I felt it could be used against you to trip you up.

I now have no doubt that you have a cast iron case for having any sanction doubt quashed.

PS: I have started a new thread entitled “Maladministration” which you might peruse at your leisure. Any comments or opinions would be appreciated, within reason, of course.

 

 

Can anyone tell me if they noticed the new thread mentioned in the quote. I feel sure I posted it, yet I can't find it now. It's possible that I may have not pressed the right buttons when I posted it, in which case I will have another go. If the powers that be removed it on the grounds of some irregularity please let me know what that was.

[morgandlin]

I have no view on this, but I am disabled., do some advocacy, and used to work for the DWP, so a broad range....

 

If i am reading it right, disregarding the kids with no difficulties, you have one disabled child over the weekend only, and together with a partner, have another child, who you are hoping to claim DLA for.

 

In my experience, none of this would be enough to make them change their programme set out for you.

 

This government, for it's own reasons, has decided it will go a certain way - and, despite many legal challenges, continues to do do. DWP staff are compelled to follow the rules, and that is the way it is.

 

If you feel you have been sanctioned, unfairly, then the only way to proceed us by an appeal for MR, and then full appeal, if that's rejected, and, if you feel staff are unreasonable, an official complaint.

[nexxusone]

The problem being a 1st time sanction lasts 4 weeks, so by the time JCP inform me, i ask for MR (which I hopefully would win) we are going to be near to or past the 4 week sanction... i will have to request help from local food banks, declare nill income to HB and CT and generally sort out, someones else mistake

[Mr.P]

The DWP should send you a letter asking for "good reason" for the failure to attend before issuing a sanction. But it seems "following correct procedure" is ignored in many areas.

[nexxusone]

oh well after 2 lovely weeks off on sick, i'm back at seetec CWP, I was sitting doing my daily job search, when i heard my name being slated, that i've been in contact with seetec head office, which is incorrect they phoned me 5 times when I was off sick and I admit after a the 3rd time, I got annoyed and told them to go away, read notes and stop harassing me!

Anyway said centre manager was running her mouth off about me, so I fired off an email of complaint to seetec head office there and then, so I guess when I go in today I will be public enemy no.1 .

[whoflungpoo]

Reading through the CWP guidance which can be found here https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/314475/community-work-placements-provider-guidance.pdf

I found this and I quote “section 5.02 Please Note: Where a claimant’s benefit claim ceases and a subsequent reclaim to JSA is made beyond 30 weeks following referral, the claimant will not return to you to complete a 'balance of time'. Claimants will only be signposted back to you to complete any remainder of allotted time (not balance of time) e.g. where a claimant started CWP, gained employment and left provision at week 10 of allotted time, and returned to benefit 6 weeks later they would be required to undertake the remaining 14 weeks CWP allotted time. “

 

So does this mean that if I went to the CWP referral and then found a job the following day which lasted 30 weeks or more and then I returned to the job center the job center cannot put me back on to CWP as I’ve already done my balanced time whatever that means?

 

Can anyone with more brains than I clear this up for me as I do not understand the meaning between balanced time and allotted time.

[Mr.P]

The way I read it:

 

Allotted time is 30 weeks. Claimant completes say 10 weeks on a placement then finds a short term job lasting 12 weeks. On returning to the JCP, they get handed back to complete another 8 weeks. The clock does not stop whilst the claimant is signed off for what ever reason and the time counts towards the 30 week sentence.

[whoflungpoo]

Thanks Mr.P for the reply

 

So balanced time = the full 30 weeks

 

and allotted time = is also 30 weeks but it's like you say Mr.P 10 weeks on CWP 12 weeks off then you have to do the remainder of 8 weeks back on CWP witch = 30 weeks to class it as balanced time

[whoflungpoo]

I went to my CWP provider today acorn training and according to them if you sign off because you find work then after 30 weeks you don’t have to go back to them if you are made redundant and have to sign back on again but if you just sign off and then sign back on after 30 weeks just to avoid working for nothing (slave labour) JCP can put you back onto CWP.

 

My question is how would they know if I had a job or not if I don’t tell them anything also if I decided to become self-employed and sign off and then sign back on after 30 weeks because it wasn’t going to well and I couldn't find any funding than that will be classed as employed so that mean I wouldn't have to go back to the CWP?