Can you refuse job applications that the jobseekers set you up for?

yer_maw

Yeah sorry that wasnt aimed at you.

dugdale_2

Anoneemouse
Customers in the age group that you mentioned are expected to be actively seeking work if they're claiming Jobseekers allowance. If they're over 50 and don't want to get a job then they wouldn't be entitled to JSA. I wouldn't use your choice of word "harassed" but yes they're asked to provide evidence of their jobsearches and are submitted to suitable vacancies.

dugdale_2

yer_maw wrote: »

Yeah sorry that wasnt aimed at you.

No problem, I got quite confused when I first read your post

WhiteHorse

RacyRed wrote: »

Sounds like one of those questions where there are right and wrong answers.

Q. Are you willing and able to travel before public transport starts running?

Right answer: I'm willing but as I do not have my own transport I'm not able to. Gets JSA

Wrong answer: I'm not willing because I'm not able to if there is no public transport. Risks sanction

Get the difference?

Oh yes. That's why I asked for clarification ...

dugdale_2

RacyRed wrote: »

Sounds like one of those questions where there are right and wrong answers.

Q. Are you willing and able to travel before public transport starts running?

Right answer: I'm willing but as I do not have my own transport I'm not able to. Gets JSA

Wrong answer: I'm not willing because I'm not able to if there is no public transport. Risks sanction

Get the difference?

I think there's a little bit of confusion here.

As I mentioned a few days ago the fact that a jobseekers owns their own transport is irrelevant to their travel to work area. Why I ask if they have their own transport is for me to find suitable vacancies for them to apply to, nothing at all to do with sanctioning benefits.

Where I live the buses don't start running until 6am so it would be pointless me suggesting someone applies for a job on the other side of the city if it's a 6 - 2 shift and the jobseeker is reliant on public transport. If they have their own transport they might be able to travel across the city to start at 6am. If they haven't got a vehicle they probably wouldn't be able to accept the position if it was offered to them

dx052

dugdale wrote: »

Apologies to the OP as this is aimed at other posters in this thread.

There's a lot of talk about people being sanctioned for not applying to vacancies given to them by JCP staff because they weren't relevant. The Jobcentre staff do not just give you jobs to apply for, or throw jobs at you to apply for. You as a jobseeker must accept them from the jobcentre staff member. If they're not suitable for you because they ask for skills or qualifications that you don't possess politely inform the staff member that you don't have the skills / experienced required and could they MATCH you with a vacancy that you are able to apply for. You could always be really cheeky and ask your adviser to act as an advocate on your behalf and phone the employer up for you to arrange an interview. It'd be interesting to be a fly on the wall listening to an adviser explaining that no you don't have the skills, qualifications or experience required but they thought you would be an ideal candadate for the vacancy.

I like that! I am might try that myself if forced into an uncomfortable corner, although I am actually quiet sincere in my quest for employment. That made me chuckle!

langsmith

RacyRed wrote: »

In this recession there is a new breed of unemployed. Those who HAVE spent most of their lives being productive achievers and now find themselves without work. Unfortunately, job centre policies are not geared up at all for these people.

This is not the fault of the JC+ staff - most of the ones I came into contact with were good and helpful people who openly admitted that they despaired themselves that the system as it stood was destroying me and many like me.

After the last recession there were serious skill shortages in many areas of the economy because people with those skills had been driven into other work. When you have been forced to tip your whole life on its head and finally found some stability you are NOT going to flippantly risk that because your old backstabbing profession now decides that it really does need you after all.

So what is the best way forward? Is it to push people into any old job just to get them off JSA? Or take a serious look at what skills are likely to be required once the recovery starts and try to help posessors of those skills to find work which will enable them to revive those skills when they are required?

Sorry to those who are about to accuse me of being elitist, but tough, it took me years of really hard graft in my own time (working a full time job and studying evenings and weekends) to get the qualifications and experience I got. If you had done the same you would understand where I'm coming from.

:T

I agree with this post all the way. I myself am in the same position as the OP. I have covered myself with MPP and paid down the most of my mortgage. I am after nothing from the state, and maybe unknowingly applied to rashly for JSA - paid 3 months notice on redundancy.

If I had known the situation + 13 wks, I would not have bothered, especially with my savings in tow. It really does not pay to provide for yourself and dearest, if all the JS+ team want to do is stuff your career by trying to get you to applied for minimum wage jobs, when you have the skills others may not or will never have, but for the sake of figures they try to entice you to apply for none relevant positions.

On my interview two weeks ago, I was fuming. I have and continue to apply for roles that are in my field, which they do see, but because the JS+ team have no clue, it’s what I now expect. On my last review last week, I spoke to the ladies boss. I told her I was stressed out by what I had been told by the advisor last week and that I had not slept properly until last Sunday. She was very apologetic and understood my concerns, as previously she had seen my cv and a role(s) I had applied; and interviewed for, as an Operations & Planning Manager.

She asked whether I thought the lady had been having a bad day, to which I replied no. I did not put a complaint in, but I could have as her attitude was well out of order. Plus she stunk of alcohol last week, not what I would expect from a customer facing rep full stop !

dawyldthing

Its a difficult situation to be in, but there are ways to help. For example, if you are over 25 you can apply for working tax credit, and over 50's get an increase in working tax credit which makes it pay to work in a minimum wage job. They also sometime pay some of your rent and council tax (I don't know the full ins and outs of it, but I know that help is available, its just knowing what and how to apply for it).

http://taxcredits.hmrc.gov.uk/Qualify/DIQHousehold.aspx

This can help you find out if you are applicable for it. I must admit it is difficult out there, but in my honest opinion - you have to apply for anything, no matter what your qualifications, background or anything to keep you going. I'm currently working in a factory through a temping agency on minimum wage (but i get shift premium if i work shifts) to keep me going, as its all there is available. I have my degree, 3 a-levels, 9 GCSE's but the only jobs out there are pretty much minimum wage jobs so i, like many others, have 2 options - a) apply and hopefully get a job, or b) hope something comes about in my field (and even if it does, loads of people apply (i've heard of 75 teachers applying for one post before, and its the same in most fields)

red_devil

its daft when they expect that you will find work in another area dont they know people in that area will be looking too.

RacyRed

dawyldthing wrote: »

you have to apply for anything, no matter what your qualifications, background or anything to keep you going.

But that is the point, it doesn't keep you going.

If you have made provision for the bad times then you have insurance to cover some of your expenses, mortgage etc. These are based on your having had a certain level of income.

Say for instance someone has been earning £35,000 before being made redundant. When first unemployed they have some savings, a pension pot, maybe an old endowment policy which they hope will give them a decent cash sum when they are nearing retirement.

You are made redundant. You claim JSA. No housing benefit, no council tax reduction, nothing else is available because you saved for a rainy day. You cut your cloth and thank god you have MPP so at least your home is safe, even if you are having to really struggle to survive on JSA.

Soon you realise the only work available is at or around NMW so you are looking at a salary of around £12,500 per year, £20,000 less than your usual lifestyle is based on. What happens if you accept such a job? Your MPP stops, you cannot afford to pay your mortgage any longer so your home is at risk. You find yourself cashing in endowments and pensions to help make ends meet. But you can't. Very quickly you face either trying to sell your home in a dead property market or have it repossessed. Your entire life is turned upside down. Everything you tried to achieve is gone. A year or so later the economy starts to recover and your old skills are in demand again. This time when you go for interviews employers look at your CV and ask why you have been doing completely unrelated work for a while, ask what you have done to maintain your skills. With all of the turmoil going on it would have been hard to expand your skills to make yourself attractive to those employers.

Then you think, if only I had been helped to survive as I was, living on basic JSA, I'd still have my home, my pension would still be there when I retire. I would have been able to spend time training to expand my skill base in a relevant way or doing a bit of charity work to keep my work ethic going and I'd be able to compete properly for the jobs becoming available.

The cost of that to the state? about £3,500 per year. Is that really too much to pay to keep skilled people afloat during this recession? Or are we really so vindictive that we are going to make hard working people sacrifice everything rather than pay that small amount?

You look around and see people who have lived on benefits all of their lives. Nothing has changed for them. They even have a better standard of living that you have now because they never owned anything that put their benefits at risk.

I know that this is a very simplified example, but the basis of it is as it is. Lets ask ourselves what kind of message we send out to hard working, self motivated people if we tell them it was all for nothing because we are unwilling to provide a life belt when they really need it.

So ask yourselves again. Should people really be forced to accept any job that comes along? Or is that a very short sighted and detrimental attitude for our society to take.