Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • t-mids
    • By t-mids 14th Mar 17, 9:57 PM
    • 20Posts
    • 4Thanks
    t-mids
    'Forced' work from Job Center.
    • #1
    • 14th Mar 17, 9:57 PM
    'Forced' work from Job Center. 14th Mar 17 at 9:57 PM
    I have been signed on since Dec 2016 (only receive JSA) and today was my appointment and the lady told me that I have to attend an actual job, which is full time hours for 8 weeks but no pay. She said I have to take this as the government is forcing people to do this. I honestly would not mind doing this job, however not for free.

    Is this right? I really do not want to work for anybody for free. I have heard of the work programme but this does not sound like it. I don't even know the title of this program as she said she could not show me any information on it as her computer was not working at the moment. She just written down an address and phone number and told me to go there.

    I hope this is in the right forum also.
Page 2
    • Mersey
    • By Mersey 15th Mar 17, 1:17 PM
    • 1,573 Posts
    • 763 Thanks
    Mersey
    easy solution, get a job. When being paid by the taxpayer, play by the taxpayer rules.
    Originally posted by jonmoneybags


    By that logic all council staff should be happy with below NMW too.


    Bonkers, of course.
    Please be polite to OPs and remember this is a site for Claimants and Appellants to seek redress against their bank, ex-boss or retailer. If they wanted morality or the view of the IoD or Bank they'd ask them.
    • jonmoneybags
    • By jonmoneybags 15th Mar 17, 1:38 PM
    • 291 Posts
    • 248 Thanks
    jonmoneybags
    By that logic all council staff should be happy with below NMW too.


    Bonkers, of course.
    Originally posted by Mersey
    by your skewed logic possibly that is a comparison.
    • takman
    • By takman 15th Mar 17, 1:54 PM
    • 2,713 Posts
    • 2,267 Thanks
    takman
    Everyone going on OP living off "free money" and "taxpayers money" - why do you assume OP was not a taxpayer himself/herself for years before?
    Originally posted by gettingready


    The goverement is currently running at a deficit so any money that was paid in the past has already been spent and more!. So any money they are receiving now is from other people who are working and paying tax.
    • motorguy
    • By motorguy 15th Mar 17, 2:11 PM
    • 15,545 Posts
    • 8,896 Thanks
    motorguy
    Right, because its that easy...

    Especially when there are employers who are more than happy to take her on as free labour for a few months but apparently not willing to actually give her a real job!
    Originally posted by Red-Squirrel
    Maybe the work experience will lead to a potential job? Happens regularly.

    Surely better than sitting in the house.
    You are not special. You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake.
    • gettingready
    • By gettingready 15th Mar 17, 2:27 PM
    • 10,860 Posts
    • 16,223 Thanks
    gettingready
    The goverement is currently running at a deficit so any money that was paid in the past has already been spent and more!. So any money they are receiving now is from other people who are working and paying tax.
    Originally posted by takman

    Ermmm and?

    Some people before were getting JSA or whatever from OP's taxes now OP is getting some help from other people's taxes etc etc

    Just because the government overspends - does not mean OP is getting free money as he/she may have been working for years before and is entitled to help now.

    Stop that whiter than white attitude as nobody knows who is next to be out of work and needing help.
    • takman
    • By takman 15th Mar 17, 2:44 PM
    • 2,713 Posts
    • 2,267 Thanks
    takman
    Ermmm and?

    Some people before were getting JSA or whatever from OP's taxes now OP is getting some help from other people's taxes etc etc

    Just because the government overspends - does not mean OP is getting free money as he/she may have been working for years before and is entitled to help now.

    Stop that whiter than white attitude as nobody knows who is next to be out of work and needing help.
    Originally posted by gettingready


    Ofcourse the OP is entitled to JSA while unemployed and looking for work. But whatever tax that they have paid in the past is irrelevant because that isn't a requirment of claiming JSA.


    So technically it is "free money" and it is current "tax payers money". I'm not saying that is a problem but whether or not they paid tax in the past still doesn't make those statements false.
    • gettingready
    • By gettingready 15th Mar 17, 2:49 PM
    • 10,860 Posts
    • 16,223 Thanks
    gettingready
    Ofcourse the OP is entitled to JSA while unemployed and looking for work. But whatever tax that they have paid in the past is irrelevant because that isn't a requirment of claiming JSA.


    So technically it is "free money" and it is current "tax payers money". I'm not saying that is a problem but whether or not they paid tax in the past still doesn't make those statements false.
    Originally posted by takman
    And the bold bit is what is wrong in this country.

    Believe it or not but in some countries JSA is a percentage of previous salary of the claimant.

    People that never worked get the bare minimum and people that did and contributed - get a percentage of their average previous income for the first year.

    Here - everyone gets the same regardless and that is extremely unfair and simply wrong.
    • gettingready
    • By gettingready 15th Mar 17, 2:51 PM
    • 10,860 Posts
    • 16,223 Thanks
    gettingready
    This is what happens when everyone gets the same in the name of equality

    • takman
    • By takman 15th Mar 17, 3:08 PM
    • 2,713 Posts
    • 2,267 Thanks
    takman
    And the bold bit is what is wrong in this country.

    Believe it or not but in some countries JSA is a percentage of previous salary of the claimant.

    People that never worked get the bare minimum and people that did and contributed - get a percentage of their average previous income for the first year.

    Here - everyone gets the same regardless and that is extremely unfair and simply wrong.
    Originally posted by gettingready


    Another way to look at it is that the more that someone earned before they lost their job the more they could save so they wouldn't have to rely on benefits as much.


    The same result could be achieved by everyone saving a percentage of their salary every time they are paid and then alot fewer people would need to claim JSA at all when they loose their job.


    The system you describie is good for people who are poor at budgeting and can't save money themselves so they are forced to do it by paying a higher level of tax. But i personally would rather keep the current system and save the money myself than pay a higher level of tax.
    • ACG
    • By ACG 15th Mar 17, 3:14 PM
    • 15,508 Posts
    • 7,858 Thanks
    ACG
    This thread has made me smile. My first thought was your getting paid to do nothing at the minute and you are happy with that, but you are not happy to work and get paid less than NMW.

    But as I read more replies, I thought about it a little more. I can not remember how much I have paid in Tax, NI, Council tax, corporation tax, tax on goods, fuel, stamp duty etc etc and I would be a bit peeved if someone told me I had to go and work for free (or £2 an hour).

    But then I kept coming back to the same thing, last month I was quite ill - nothing serious just a pretty bad cold. I was too tired to go out, but by the 3rd day I was THAT bored I just went for a walk to the end of the road and back (20 minutes!) just to get out of the house. I hate doing nothing, if my options were JSA and sitting at home or JSA and working for free, I would chose the latter every time. If nothing else it gets me out of the house, it goes on my CV and I might end up meeting new people or getting a job at the end of it.

    Im not going to judge (not that you would care anyway hopefully), but maybe look at the bigger picture rather than just the next 2 months. As the old saying goes, it is easier to get a job if you have one.
    • Doshwaster
    • By Doshwaster 15th Mar 17, 3:44 PM
    • 4,734 Posts
    • 3,861 Thanks
    Doshwaster
    And the bold bit is what is wrong in this country.

    Believe it or not but in some countries JSA is a percentage of previous salary of the claimant.

    People that never worked get the bare minimum and people that did and contributed - get a percentage of their average previous income for the first year.

    Here - everyone gets the same regardless and that is extremely unfair and simply wrong.
    Originally posted by gettingready
    That is why many people who were on higher salaries don't bother signing on as they will have redundancy payments and/or savings to live off for the few weeks it takes to find another job. When I last finished a job I went to the airport to take a holiday rather than go to the Job Centre to sign on.

    I appreciate that it is difficult if you are on a low income but for those on decent money there really shouldn't be any excuse not to build up an emergency fund of 2-3 months expenses
    • Mersey
    • By Mersey 15th Mar 17, 4:06 PM
    • 1,573 Posts
    • 763 Thanks
    Mersey
    But whatever tax that they have paid in the past is irrelevant because that isn't a requirment of claiming JSA.

    So technically it is "free money" .
    Originally posted by takman


    Incorrect.


    That's why it's called contributions-based JSA.


    The very entitlement to it, is indeed based purely and only on what they have contributed in NICs in the past.


    Income-based JSA is, however, based on a means test and not previous payment in the past.
    Please be polite to OPs and remember this is a site for Claimants and Appellants to seek redress against their bank, ex-boss or retailer. If they wanted morality or the view of the IoD or Bank they'd ask them.
    • takman
    • By takman 15th Mar 17, 4:33 PM
    • 2,713 Posts
    • 2,267 Thanks
    takman
    Incorrect.


    That's why it's called contributions-based JSA.


    The very entitlement to it, is indeed based purely and only on what they have contributed in NICs in the past.


    Income-based JSA is, however, based on a means test and not previous payment in the past.
    Originally posted by Mersey


    Yes i know there are two types of JSA but past contributions only dictate what type you claim. So considering you can still claim JSA if you have made no contributions then what i said was correct.


    So considering i never mentioned contribution based JSA in my post you are in fact incorrect by saying i was incorrect!
    • Doshwaster
    • By Doshwaster 15th Mar 17, 5:04 PM
    • 4,734 Posts
    • 3,861 Thanks
    Doshwaster
    Incorrect.


    That's why it's called contributions-based JSA.
    Originally posted by Mersey
    If paying tens of thousands of pounds in NI qualifies you for 70-odd quid a week then it doesn't seem to be a very good insurance scheme. No wonder a lot of taxpayers are resentful.
    • Sleazy
    • By Sleazy 15th Mar 17, 5:08 PM
    • 6,403 Posts
    • 6,205 Thanks
    Sleazy
    Incidentally, the Mandatory 'workfare' schemes were abolished 16 months ago, so even if your advisor has been away on maternity or other leave, she has no excuse for not knowing this:


    www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/dwp-scraps-mandatory-work-for-your-benefits-scheme-without-fanfare-a6750041.html
    Originally posted by Mersey
    Unless she's an elephant
    • Mersey
    • By Mersey 15th Mar 17, 5:34 PM
    • 1,573 Posts
    • 763 Thanks
    Mersey

    So considering i never mentioned contribution based JSA in my post you are in fact incorrect by saying i was incorrect!
    Originally posted by takman


    You stated past conts were "irrelevant" - I was merely pointing out to others why that was wrong.


    Conts determine entitlement as I explained. Hence it's name!


    I'm glad you realise this - but it is not what you wrote.
    Please be polite to OPs and remember this is a site for Claimants and Appellants to seek redress against their bank, ex-boss or retailer. If they wanted morality or the view of the IoD or Bank they'd ask them.
    • gettingready
    • By gettingready 15th Mar 17, 5:57 PM
    • 10,860 Posts
    • 16,223 Thanks
    gettingready
    Another way to look at it is that the more that someone earned before they lost their job the more they could save so they wouldn't have to rely on benefits as much.
    Originally posted by takman
    Sure - so people who work have to scrape and save and people who NEVER worked can enjoy their Jeremy Kyle... sure...
    • paddedjohn
    • By paddedjohn 15th Mar 17, 7:59 PM
    • 7,042 Posts
    • 7,717 Thanks
    paddedjohn
    If I was out of work I wouldn't bother signing on just for £73 a week. Far easier to live off savings until another job comes along and then you don't have to take part in any of these job centre schemes.
    Originally posted by Doshwaster
    Idiotic post to say the least, you assume everyone has savings and also assume that those that do can make them last until they find a job. Idiot.
    Be Alert..........Britain needs lerts.
    • Red-Squirrel
    • By Red-Squirrel 15th Mar 17, 8:07 PM
    • 1,741 Posts
    • 4,697 Thanks
    Red-Squirrel
    And the bold bit is what is wrong in this country.

    Believe it or not but in some countries JSA is a percentage of previous salary of the claimant.

    People that never worked get the bare minimum and people that did and contributed - get a percentage of their average previous income for the first year.

    Here - everyone gets the same regardless and that is extremely unfair and simply wrong.
    Originally posted by gettingready
    Benefits should be based on need, not on how much somebody (who?) decides they deserve. The people who have earned the most are surely the most likely to have savings and better job prospects anyway, why should they be given more while some of the most disadvantaged people in society who've had it the hardest are left with barely anything?
    • Red-Squirrel
    • By Red-Squirrel 15th Mar 17, 8:11 PM
    • 1,741 Posts
    • 4,697 Thanks
    Red-Squirrel
    This thread has made me smile. My first thought was your getting paid to do nothing at the minute and you are happy with that, but you are not happy to work and get paid less than NMW.

    But as I read more replies, I thought about it a little more. I can not remember how much I have paid in Tax, NI, Council tax, corporation tax, tax on goods, fuel, stamp duty etc etc and I would be a bit peeved if someone told me I had to go and work for free (or £2 an hour).

    But then I kept coming back to the same thing, last month I was quite ill - nothing serious just a pretty bad cold. I was too tired to go out, but by the 3rd day I was THAT bored I just went for a walk to the end of the road and back (20 minutes!) just to get out of the house. I hate doing nothing, if my options were JSA and sitting at home or JSA and working for free, I would chose the latter every time. If nothing else it gets me out of the house, it goes on my CV and I might end up meeting new people or getting a job at the end of it.

    Im not going to judge (not that you would care anyway hopefully), but maybe look at the bigger picture rather than just the next 2 months. As the old saying goes, it is easier to get a job if you have one.
    Originally posted by ACG
    When I was on JSA I wasn't sitting at home doing nothing! I was applying for jobs every single day, I was volunteering, I took some courses. I would have been rather peeved to have had to stop doing my productive, job hunting activities to go and provide free labour for an employer that should be taking people on if it has work that needs doing!

    From what I understand, these 'work placements' are hardly ever at places where useful skills can be gained or that would enhance most CVs. I think they are only ever remotely useful for people who have literally never worked and need to be able to demonstrate that they can turn up on time each day and follow basic instructions. Even people in that situation though should be paid the NMW for their work.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

293Posts Today

3,412Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @LordsEconCom: On Tuesday Martin Lewis, Hannah Morrish & Shakira Martin gave evidence to the Cttee. Read the full transcript here: https?

  • Ta ta for now. Half term's starting, so I'm exchanging my MoneySavingExpert hat for one that says Daddy in big letters. See you in a week.

  • RT @thismorning: Can @MartinSLewis' deals save YOU cash? ???? https://t.co/igbHCwzeiN

  • Follow Martin