ESA - Pathways to Work - What a waste!

hanny83_2

John, I myself work for DWP. Believe me, the flaws in the system are voiced to the Senior Managers at every conference/meeting that I've been to, but unfortunately they do not listen to us.

If it's "cost effective", "hits targets" or fits into whatever category of business they want it to fit into, they won't listen to the advice of those in below grades, don't ask me why, they just don't.

Hence the words 'people power'. I.E the more customers that voice their opinions the more the government would have to bend backwards.

In regards to PTW, it definitely has it's pros and cons, like any scheme brought about to help people in to work.

NASA_2

john539 wrote: »

To the people who work for the DWP implementing the System, why don't you do something to change it ?

You MUST know there are fundamental things wrong with the System.

It's no good saying it's the System & it's just the claimant's problem.

You are complicit in implementing the System, you are part of the problem.

What a load of crap.

Low level workers have no say in how the system operates. We are given management diktats. We have to suffer the abuse, from claimants, because management !!!!ed up and didnt predict what would happen.

I go to work everyday dreading what I have to do. Wear a headset and listen to people complaining about not having money. While most of them are perfectly nice people and I feel sorry for them - some of the rest are just vile, unemployable wastes of lives. Usually they are the ones who complain the most despite having done nothing in their lives to alleviate their own self made poverty.

I'm hopefully moving jobs (inernally) soon and wont have to deal with the public - if that doesnt happen then maybe I will join the whiners claiming the sick.

Note: I am not having a go at those who are genuinely sick and have been !!!!ed over by the ESA system. Just those who dont appreciate that most staff genuinely do want to help but because of the system in place arent able. Its truly depressing.:sad:

Uncertain

bigredhen wrote: »

The whole point is that the pathways system is designed to see what work you are capable of....they don't care whether you have a job to go back to as they will see if you can do any other type of job, and quite rightly so.

The fact that you have paid into the system for 30 years is great and you will have a state pension, you will also be entiltled to claim and receive ESA if you are entitled and that means that you have to be incapable of work...any work... not just your usual occupation.

People who are really far too sick to work will be exempt from pathways, the others will be capable of doing something and will be offered advice and retraining.

Sorry, but this is even more crazy!

Let's think this through for a moment.....

Without going into too many personal details, I probably do fit your first paragraph. Yes I would be able to do a basic job at the moment.

So, the system would have me resign from my reasonably senior and fairly well paid job and take something basic so that they could "tick their box". It is very unlikely that this would pay even half my current salary so the loss in tax revenue would vastly exceed the £60.50 per week I am currently getting in ESA!

In any case the amount of the ESA is being stopped from my (currently half) salary. Under my contract this would not happen if I was not entitled to the benefit. So, by claiming I am saving my employers some money but the only advantage I get is that the £60.50 is tax free.

Should we reach a point that my employer stops paying me, I could understand your point a little better. The state would rather I had a simple low paid job than be deemed too ill for something more demanding. Whether or not this would be in my best interest is another matter!

Foyzone

john539 wrote: »

To the people who work for the DWP implementing the System, why don't you do something to change it ?

You MUST know there are fundamental things wrong with the System.

It's no good saying it's the System & it's just the claimant's problem.

You are complicit in implementing the System, you are part of the problem.

ROFL:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

I tell you what ill knock up a white paper and wizz it up to Westminster tomorow shall I??

What a ridiculous statment. In 20 years as a Civil Servant I have been asked my opinions on the best way to implement change but at the end of the day the government does whatever it sees fit without looking at the consequences.

I work on Pathways to work and for the record, think its a fantastic programme, for those it is applicable to.

One of the fundamental problems now since ESA came in is the facility to "waive" an interview has been removed. This used to be useful for those returning to work in the immediate future or those so ill it would be impossible for them to participate in any work focused activity. EVERYONE now has to attend ( unless you are on HR Care DLA) whether its relevant or not. And THAT is the problem. Oh and yes I did happen to mention that before they changed the law :rolleyes:

Uncertain

Foyzone wrote: »

ROFL:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

I work on Pathways to work and for the record, think its a fantastic programme, for those it is applicable to.

One of the fundamental problems now since ESA came in is the facility to "waive" an interview has been removed. This used to be useful for those returning to work in the immediate future or those so ill it would be impossible for them to participate in any work focused activity. EVERYONE now has to attend ( unless you are on HR Care DLA) whether its relevant or not. And THAT is the problem. Oh and yes I did happen to mention that before they changed the law :rolleyes:

I'm sure it is, as you say, for those applicable.

Also, as I hope I've made clear, I am not in any way having a go at the front end staff.

So, you are saying there is no scope in the system at all to waive these interviews for people like me? Even at a much more senior level? Is it worth taking it "to the top", not just for my benefit but for those who are less able to smile about it?

atomicsheep

I think some of these people need to think back across all the jobs they've had previous.

Im pretty sure there have been backward systems they've had to work with at times. Then had customers complaining about it.

Just remember what it was like for you

-BA-

Foyzone wrote: »

ROFL:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

I tell you what ill knock up a white paper and wizz it up to Westminster tomorow shall I??

What a ridiculous statment. In 20 years as a Civil Servant I have been asked my opinions on the best way to implement change but at the end of the day the government does whatever it sees fit without looking at the consequences.

I work on Pathways to work and for the record, think its a fantastic programme, for those it is applicable to.

One of the fundamental problems now since ESA came in is the facility to "waive" an interview has been removed. This used to be useful for those returning to work in the immediate future or those so ill it would be impossible for them to participate in any work focused activity. EVERYONE now has to attend ( unless you are on HR Care DLA) whether its relevant or not. And THAT is the problem. Oh and yes I did happen to mention that before they changed the law :rolleyes:

This is definitely the most relevant part of any post in this thread. There is a massive knock on effect to this as many staff have recently been taken off the sickness benefits side to work on the massive influx of JSA claims. By implementing ESA's "interview everyone" approach, the advisers that are left are snowed under to say the least. Consequently their time is taken up with interviews that have to be conducted when previously these customers would have been waived for whatever reason. This has diluted the caseloads of the advisers which makes it harder for them to refer people on to useful outside resources. What is even sadder is that some of these people who are not at all fit for work are moving through the system and then being found fit for work even though they are still receiving chemotherapy, been signed off for a set period of time following heart surgery or in similar circumstance.

-BA-

Uncertain wrote: »

I'm sure it is, as you say, for those applicable.

Also, as I hope I've made clear, I am not in any way having a go at the front end staff.

So, you are saying there is no scope in the system at all to waive these interviews for people like me? Even at a much more senior level? Is it worth taking it "to the top", not just for my benefit but for those who are less able to smile about it?

Sadly for the advisors it might be that they simply don't have the time to follow through individual complaints. Their diaries are booked up weeks in advance with an obscene number of appointments. If you have an individual business case of why you feel you should be waived, it might prove more useful to take it up with your MP. With the current recession seeing huge job losses and more to come the situation is going to get far far worse not better. Implementing ESA couldn't have come at a worse time than at the start of a recession where mass job losses will mean mass competition for the few jobs that are left.

Perhaps we could employ a couple of million people to put their fingers in the holes of the dam of New Labour before it breaks for good.................

Foyzone

I'm sure it is, as you say, for those applicable.

Also, as I hope I've made clear, I am not in any way having a go at the front end staff.

So, you are saying there is no scope in the system at all to waive these interviews for people like me? Even at a much more senior level? Is it worth taking it "to the top", not just for my benefit but for those who are less able to smile about it?[/quote]

No Im afraid there isnt. The waive facility was removed on 10/12/08 to bring IB in line with ESA. The only option available is a very short deferral. I have used this in cases were people are immenently going to go back to work, and only after I have interviewed them initially. Lets use a bit of sense, if your on £30k, have a home and family, you wont want to be hanging around on £60.50 for long if you CAN return to work. If say someone was pretty certain they would be going back in x weeks then I may defer until after that date but really as an advisor thats the only option I would have. Anyone who wasnt so clear has to attend all interviews. A PP was correct, its only if the public cause an outcry will anything happen, they do not listen to staff

Bethankim

Before i became ill and spent 2008 in a fog of nervous breakdown, i worked in the voluntary sector - i helped score some bids for supporting people back to work.

I have just had my esa stopped,im not surprised and i am appealing it. I dont expect to win the appeal, but many bits of the new system are flawed and need challenging.

So i have applied to become a CAB advisor as a volunteer, finally i can use my knowledge of the system to support people going through it.

Most of the ESA contarcts pathways to work are contracted out - biggest player is work directions - i cant possibly put what i really think on a public forum..but i would love to.

I understand and accept in principle people need to be supported to work or becone active insome way even if its voluntary work as it can help with health conditions especially mental health. But and its a big but,we need to do more about removing the stigma for people trying to get back to wrok after a long illness.

The CAB or welfare rights services are a first port of call, the more appeals put in, the more evidence the cab etc can build up then the more the policy makers can be challenged. Its not someone elses responsibility to do something, its yours and mine.