Forced mandatory work sceme

[SabreSheep]

Really, i have, they seem to be growing and spreading.

 

How subjective is that.

 

Deal in facts

 

If you believe the government statistics JSA claimants are decreasing.

[essexmat]

How subjective is that.

 

Deal in facts

 

If you believe the government statistics JSA claimants are decreasing.

 

Of course they are decreasing ....

 

- seasonal work

- part time work

- short term work/zero contract

- moving to ESA

 

Unemployment is UP not DOWN

[sillygirl1]

Or people like me on an 'indefinate' agency contract, we get messed about with 'holiday pay' and loose out on other things - but it is far more than the dole paid me - even though I had worked solidly since I was 16 and ended up unemployed at 54... I am now doing a job I did ten years ago, learnt new software and am paying £53 a week fares (only to be messed about with by Southern Region most days).

 

Long term life on the dole isn't what the DM likes people to think - whilst I could have got my family to help out sometimes I would still have had to repay any money borrowed.

 

I have strong objections for people coming in from other countries and taking admin work, there are plenty of qualified able people to do those (and other) jobs in this country but at a living wage and not at a pittance and relying on a partner for support.

 

The whole system has been tinkered with by blinkered people who have never had real-life experience of being long term unemployed - if everybody who worked for the DWP had it in their contract that they had to experience two periods of three months with minimum wage every three years the system would improve dramatically.

[Mcall]

Or people like me on an 'indefinate' agency contract, we get messed about with 'holiday pay' and loose out on other things - but it is far more than the dole paid me - even though I had worked solidly since I was 16 and ended up unemployed at 54... I am now doing a job I did ten years ago, learnt new software and am paying £53 a week fares (only to be messed about with by Southern Region most days).

 

Long term life on the dole isn't what the DM likes people to think - whilst I could have got my family to help out sometimes I would still have had to repay any money borrowed.

 

I have strong objections for people coming in from other countries and taking admin work, there are plenty of qualified able people to do those (and other) jobs in this country but at a living wage and not at a pittance and relying on a partner for support.

 

The whole system has been tinkered with by blinkered people who have never had real-life experience of being long term unemployed - if everybody who worked for the DWP had it in their contract that they had to experience two periods of three months with minimum wage every three years the system would improve dramatically.

 

Amen to that.

[SabreSheep]

Abolish zero hour contracts

Enforce the minimum wage

DO away with recruitment agencies

Bring Work Providers back in house that are not motivated by profit but only by results.

Change the sanctions regieme so that the sanction only goes live AFTER the appeals process has been exausted OR the Sanction is accepted.

Stop wasting tax payers money on stupid courses that do not apply to the 90% of those sent on them.

Tailor support to the individual and aim to get them into Sustainable work

MWA restricted to those that DO NOT want to work. Make it so that the MWA is done serving a charity and no private business.

Scrap UJM - Its pointless and full of fake [problem] jobs. OR have every job vetted before posting BAN agencies from advertising on there.

[Mr.P]

For 2 out of the 4 weeks that I was on a placement along with about 8 others the boss at the company we were placed with called us into his ‘office’ on the Friday afternoon and gave us each £20 and thanked us for our efforts.

[...]

Do you suppose that the fact that my experience was exactly 12 months ago and that I did not mention it at the time nullify any action along the lines you suggest that I might wish to take now?

 

From the DWP MWA Guidance:

4.18 You or the placement host must not give any incentive payments or

rewards to the claimant for participation in MWA.

From the Work Programme guidance, Chapter 3c:

 

National Minimum Wage Act

54. It is the provider’s responsibility to ensure that all work experience and

community benefit work placements are in line with National Minimum

Wage regulations. As part of their considerations, providers should

consider the following points:

• As a general rule, persons participating in a relevant Government

Scheme – which includes the Work Programme – designed to

provide training, work experience or temporary work, or to assist in

seeking or obtaining work, do not qualify for the National Minimum

Wage (NMW) in respect of work done for an employer as part of

that scheme.

 

• However, there are some important exceptions:

• Participants will qualify for the NMW if they are regarded as

employees of the employer AND are paid for their work by the

employer. (Payment of expenses can be ignored for these

purposes.)

 

• "Employment" has a wide meaning, and participants are likely to be

regarded as employees if they agree voluntarily to take up the

placement with a particular employer.

• The NMW is very unlikely to apply to participants mandated to

participate in unpaid work experience or an unpaid community

benefit work placement through the Work Programme, or to

Participants who volunteer to take part in an unpaid placement of

either type which is not a work trial exceeding 6 weeks. Where a

claimant’s expenses are paid, this still counts as unpaid work

experience or unpaid community work placement.

It is a thin line, and the "official" guidance makes it clear that only expenses can be paid. Anything else is a "wage" and falls within the remit of the National Minimum Wage. Unfortunately, to argue a case before an Employment Tribunal, the claim would have to been made within three months of finishing your placement. Could have been a very interesting case, especially if you had named both the "employer" and the placement provider.

[honeybee13]

Slightly off topic, but let's remember that it costs money to start an employment tribunal now, sadly. There can be help with fees for people who are on a low income.

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/226548/t437-eng.pdf

 

HB

[antone]

This does make me a little angry, ok morally it may be very wrong, but, if you have been on JSA for x amount of time is it not right that you start earning it a little and do not just expect it. Maybe i am wrong because i have only been on JSA for 9 weeks once in my 14 year work history, but it does stench of people wanting something for nothing, when i was on jsa i would arrive suited and booted and would have actually looked for jobs, others turned up pretty much in pj's or stinking of booze and just got signed for another fortnight.

 

This is something I don't understand. The unemployed have to "earn" their JSA, but employers don't have to "pay" their workers? And they say it's the claimants that are getting something for nothing.

 

Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I believe that if you have a job that needs to be done, you pay someone to do it. You don't try to weasel out of your responsibility to society by coercing the unemployed into working for you for next to nothing.

[tezza1234]

How subjective is that.

 

Deal in facts

 

If you believe the government statistics JSA claimants are decreasing.

 

Yes because as mentioned zero hour contracts, seasonal work ect..... the facts are correct, As AMAZING as this site is, it is not perfect, someone could happily come along and say 'Hi, i turned up for my fortnightly JSA signing on, drunk as a skunk and they sanctioned me, how unfair is that, how can i appeal and get it all back' and people would offer help to argue why the sanction is unfair, how backward is that. Long term unemployment brings its own problems and of course these people need help with skills ect...... but don't pretend their is only a tiny minority playing the system because the number is bigger than you think.

[tezza1234]

This is something I don't understand. The unemployed have to "earn" their JSA, but employers don't have to "pay" their workers? And they say it's the claimants that are getting something for nothing.

 

Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I believe that if you have a job that needs to be done, you pay someone to do it. You don't try to weasel out of your responsibility to society by coercing the unemployed into working for you for next to nothing.

 

Sorry i am confused, who are you blaming, the government or the shops/charities these jsa claimants are sent too, and i said after x time, then yes you should earn jsa and not just be given it, you are getting paid after all, jsa plus it will give you routine and working experience and skills.

[essexmat]

Yes because as mentioned zero hour contracts, seasonal work ect..... the facts are correct, As AMAZING as this site is, it is not perfect, someone could happily come along and say 'Hi, i turned up for my fortnightly JSA signing on, drink as a skunk and they sanctioned me, how unfair is that, how can i appeal and get it all back' and people would offer help to argue why the sanction is unfair. Long term unemployment brings its own problems and of course these people need help with skills ect...... but don't pretend their is only a tiny minority playing the system because the number is bigger than you think.

 

In the grand scheme of things it IS only a small % that 'play the system' but of course these people make it worse for genuine claimants that have maybe fallen on hard times and maybe have never claimed before. The system stinks, there is no easy 'cure' but it is an unfair system. Also, propaganda will tell you (from our lovely Tory government (unelected of course) that the unemployed and those on benefits are the problem in this country when in REALITY the spend of welfare is small compared to other demands. The % of benefit fraud is also negligible (although should be invesyigated and dealt with) How about concentrating on tax evasion for starters?

[essexmat]

Sorry i am confused, who are you blaming, the government or the shops/charities these jsa claimants are sent too, and i said after x time, then yes you should earn jsa and not just be given it, you are getting paid after all, jsa plus it will give you routine and working experience and skills.

 

Well if you have to work for your JSA then by LAW it should be minimum wage so if over 25 and on £72.40pm JSA that is 11-12 hours work maximum - right?

[tezza1234]

yes you are spot on their, the spend of welfare is less than 5% total ive heard, more is spent on Pensions, Military, the EU, NHS and tax evasion, but tax evasion although more in money terms is only a small % of people, rich people, who can afford to fight it, real average joe bloggs is easy to blame, we have no brunt, but yes whatever the answer is in the greater interests will not suit everyone and 'some' people will be worse off for it. as for NHS and EU spending this can be controlled with appropriate measures (leaving the EU and actually controlling migrants)

[SabreSheep]

Yes because as mentioned zero hour contracts, seasonal work ect..... the facts are correct, As AMAZING as this site is, it is not perfect, someone could happily come along and say 'Hi, i turned up for my fortnightly JSA signing on, drunk as a skunk and they sanctioned me, how unfair is that, how can i appeal and get it all back' and people would offer help to argue why the sanction is unfair, how backward is that. Long term unemployment brings its own problems and of course these people need help with skills ect...... but don't pretend their is only a tiny minority playing the system because the number is bigger than you think.

 

 

Actually you have this wrong.

First of all, the DWP and all its resources makes the rules (That must abide by the law)

If they do nto follow the rules and break the law it is only fair that they be held to account, especially if they ar ein a position to enforce the rules themselves. THAT is morally correct.

Those that live in greenhouses should not be throwing stones and all that. After all WE pay them money to make sure the right things happen at the right time.

 

Secondly, If someone was legitimately sanctioned then of course help would be given to help them understand the process. They have the right to appeal etc. At the end of the day these are basic rights. If they were legitimately sanctioned according to the rules then the appeal would not be upheld now would it.

 

I find restricting peoples rights to knowledge and fair treatment backward, do you not then?

 

And my comments about the statistics was made to prove a point. Actually when it comes to reality they are wrong. The whole government approach is wrong. Unemployment is indeed decreasing. HOWEVER because of the way it is, UNDEREMPLOYMENT is RISING. Income tax receipts are dropping due to the low payment jobs and the tax payer is paying OUT MORE in welfare benefits, esp to those in work.

 

Now interestingly you cannot have it both ways. You say first that the amount of people notbothering and just claiming jsa in a somethign for nothign culture is increasing from the people you see, yet you then declare the governments stats showing unemployment reducing is correct. The "people" you see are either working OR just claiming benefits. Not both at the same time (we hope) May I suggest you have also invented Schrodinger JSA claiment

[tezza1234]

Well if you have to work for your JSA then by LAW it should be minimum wage so if over 25 and on £72.40pm JSA that is 11-12 hours work maximum - right?

 

you didn't answer the question, but yes, in the scheme of things what would be the problem with that, i assume it does not work like that now, but even if it did a huge % of jsa claimants would still moan about it.

[SabreSheep]

you didn't answer the question, but yes, in the scheme of things what would be the problem with that, i assume it does not work like that now, but even if it did a huge % of jsa claimants would still moan about it.

 

a Huge % would moan about it? Being offered the chance to work for minimum wage?

 

I suspect you are very out of touch. And also your "the huge majority would complain" actually shows you are voicing opinions based on stereotypical views and not based from actual fact.

[estellyn]

Abolish zero hour contracts

Enforce the minimum wage

DO away with recruitment agencies

Bring Work Providers back in house that are not motivated by profit but only by results.

Change the sanctions regieme so that the sanction only goes live AFTER the appeals process has been exausted OR the Sanction is accepted.

Stop wasting tax payers money on stupid courses that do not apply to the 90% of those sent on them.

Tailor support to the individual and aim to get them into Sustainable work

MWA restricted to those that DO NOT want to work. Make it so that the MWA is done serving a charity and no private business.

Scrap UJM - Its pointless and full of fake [problem] jobs. OR have every job vetted before posting BAN agencies from advertising on there.

 

Agree with most of this, but I also think the right type of jobseeker support is important. It would be much more appropriate to have work experience placements rather than 'work activity placements', and it would also be more useful to offer comprehensive support and training in new careers where there are more job opportunities rather than try to push the 'most able' candidates into shop work rather than a job they are more suited for. Not only is it better for the first candidate, it's also better for those that have limited skills and miss out on a job because someone overqualified has got it instead. The work providers don't care - they just want their payment and will push the most likely prospects to get them their payout, into any job available.

[tezza1234]

Actually you have this wrong.

First of all, the DWP and all its resources makes the rules (That must abide by the law)

If they do nto follow the rules and break the law it is only fair that they be held to account, especially if they ar ein a position to enforce the rules themselves. THAT is morally correct.

Those that live in greenhouses should not be throwing stones and all that. After all WE pay them money to make sure the right things happen at the right time.

 

Secondly, If someone was legitimately sanctioned then of course help would be given to help them understand the process. They have the right to appeal etc. At the end of the day these are basic rights. If they were legitimately sanctioned according to the rules then the appeal would not be upheld now would it.

 

I find restricting peoples rights to knowledge and fair treatment backward, do you not then?

 

And my comments about the statistics was made to prove a point. Actually when it comes to reality they are wrong. The whole government approach is wrong. Unemployment is indeed decreasing. HOWEVER because of the way it is, UNDEREMPLOYMENT is RISING. Income tax receipts are dropping due to the low payment jobs and the tax payer is paying OUT MORE in welfare benefits, esp to those in work.

 

Now interestingly you cannot have it both ways. You say first that the amount of people notbothering and just claiming jsa in a somethign for nothign culture is increasing from the people you see, yet you then declare the governments stats showing unemployment reducing is correct. The "people" you see are either working OR just claiming benefits. Not both at the same time (we hope) May I suggest you have also invented Schrodinger JSA claiment

 

Ok so the DWP set the rules and have to abide by the law and should do whats morally correct, do you seriously suggest that we all do things which are wholly morally correct, all of the time, we all do things to suit ourselves, even if we do help others from time to time, so for me, its pot, kettle, black, we expect them to be perfect but we can be imperfect and use any scrap of a loophole to not be punished for it.

[essexmat]

I would happily work for minimum wage (although I feel I shouldn't have to but that is another story) ....BUT, it would have to be a FULL TIME job of at least 36 hours and also not cost half my 'wages' getting there. You see sometimes it isn't MW that is the problem but the hours offered and location. Why would you work say 12 hours on MW for £70-80 plus have to work horrid hours AND pay for travel - surely there is no sense in that? I certainly WOULD NOT do it (others may though just to get off JSA)

[SabreSheep]

Ok so the DWP set the rules and have to abide by the law and should do whats morally correct, do you seriously suggest that we all do things which are wholly morally correct, all of the time, we all do things to suit ourselves, even if we do help others from time to time, so for me, its pot, kettle, black, we expect them to be perfect but we can be imperfect and use any scrap of a loophole to not be punished for it.

 

It is not about using loopholes. It is about following the rules. At the end of the day those who police the rules must follow them or they have no crediability. When they do things incorrect then that is what the appeals process is there for. To correct mistakes.

 

I really struggle to find what you are getting at. Are you saying we should not help people who have been wronged or unlawfully bullied just because they are a JSA claiment?

[tezza1234]

a Huge % would moan about it? Being offered the chance to work for minimum wage?

 

I suspect you are very out of touch. And also your "the huge majority would complain" actually shows you are voicing opinions based on stereotypical views and not based from actual fact.

 

Yes because the minimum wage pays less than JSA when you consider what else you get on jsa, rent/council tax paid ect...... the minimum wage is not worth working for, it should be a living wage. And come on, please, i can spend 10 minutes on the net to find 10's of thousands of jobs offering part time, minimum wage positions, why arnt people taking them, because its not worth it to them. It is a difficult argument to put in to words, but i am most certainly not out of touch at all lol...... if only you knew me.

[essexmat]

Also, slightly changing the rhetoric of the thread do *YOU* as contributors think it is fair that:

 

Person 1

Aged 25, only done a few hours per week on the off chance, built up no NI contributions, never worked full time or paid in to the system gets £72.40pw

Person 2

Aged 40, worked full time for 20 years, fully up to date NI and tax contributions gets £72.40pw

 

I know I know, what do I suggest? Well surely there needs to be some form of 'credit' on top of the JSA payments for people that have contributed/

[SabreSheep]

Also it is not pot kettle black. The claiments are not being paid to enforce the rules now are they. The claiments also did not make the rules. You ignore the power in the relationship between the claiment and the DWP advisors. The rules are there to protect the claiment as well. They only do that if they are enforced and infringments challenged

[SabreSheep]

Yes because the minimum wage pays less than JSA when you consider what else you get on jsa, rent/council tax paid ect...... the minimum wage is not worth working for, it should be a living wage. And come on, please, i can spend 10 minutes on the net to find 10's of thousands of jobs offering part time, minimum wage positions, why arnt people taking them, because its not worth it to them. It is a difficult argument to put in to words, but i am most certainly not out of touch at all lol...... if only you knew me.

 

First off

 

People on minimum wage are entitled to housing benefit, working tax credits and more. People ARE taking these jobs. THATS why unemployment figures are decreasing BUT WELFARE spending increasing.

 

Second of

 

I cna look on UJM now and find the same job advertised 10 times within the space of a week by different agencies. I can find victiious jobs that turn out to be training. Did you watch Wotchdog last week to see the employment agency [problem] there?

 

Also 1000s of those jobs are zero hour or part time. IF they pay less than JSA then can you blame them when JSA is the amount assessed to be the minimum amount u need ot live on?

[SabreSheep]

As for knowing you, I do not profess to. It does not matter, I am mearly repliying to the points you raised.

 

You still did not answer the question. Should we stop as you imply helping people to fight sanctions on the basis that they are a jsa claiment?