'Not following Job Centre Directiions'

bitsandpieces

donnajunkie wrote: »

i think a mistake has been made because you only have to play along at these sessions. if they speak to you then reply with an appropriate response and do anything else they tell you to. if they dont say anything to you then you can sit quietly the whole time. when they say you didnt participate they are probably meaning you didnt turn up. that is why a mistake has been made.

It would be rubbish course-leading if they were concerned about you not participating but didn't explicitly involve you - asking questions, encouraging to join in the discussion and so on - too. If it turns out this isn't just a mistake with them thinking you didn't show up, you could mention this when you appeal: if you want people to participate in a course discussion, the appropriate first step to do is to encourage them to do so rather than to punish them :eek:

lili2008

This is a mistake on the part of JCP. They have somehow recorded you as having failed to attend. Very easily done in the current understaffed chaos. Ask to speak to the HEO and ask to see logs of the session, where you completed attendance paperwork. Then get them to contact the DMA office to call any action off.

This is NOT because you didn't speak during the session. Absolutely no way.

mandragora_2

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Ice breakers can be boring, I agree but it can be useful just to find out whether your fellow participants work in accounts or HR as it'll explain some of their thinking in the rest of the activities.

I certainly never think of the work I could be doing because a, training is work and b, it's always good to have a change from routine.

a. Not if the training isn't relevant to your job, but a government directive means that you have to go, instead of being in your classroom teaching two GCSE English classes, with the kids' exams coming up in a month. Sitting listening to 20 people tell me what organisation they work in really doesn't help me. It didn't help my mood one bit when the slow circle of death revealed a preponderance of primary school teachers, and the course didn't even cover any issues relating to children of any age till the afternoon slot.

b. Every day is different enough in my job, and I have plenty to get on with without having my time royally wasted.

donnajunkie

dugdale wrote: »

Some rather strange advice posted in this thread.

Do not accept any job print out from your adviser if it's not suitable. If you don't have the correct qualifications or experience required inform your adviser that you don't meet the criteria. If they insist that you accept the print out again refuse, they might threaten to sanction your claim for refusing employment but don't worry, your adviser can't do that, they simply complete all the paperwork and send it to a decision maker who would then look at the job spec (amongst other things) and then decide what action needs to be taken. If the job spec stated that an NVQ level 3 in (say) childcare was required and you didn't possess an NVQ level 3 in childcare your benefit wouldn't be sanctioned. If your JSAg stated you were only available to work Monday - Friday and the vacancy included weekend work your benefit won't be sanctioned.
I'm an adviser and I only submit customers to a vacancy that they agree to. Quite often I have the opposite problem to what is often posted on this forum, customers ask me to submit them to vacancies that they're not qualified to do. I hate to see people building up their hopes about a vacancy only to have them dashed as the next time I see them they're often feeling even more down than they were before.

As an adviser I should make quality submissions - infact this is monitored at district level. Employers who advertise their vacancies with JCP are contacted and the suitability of the people submitted is questioned. Lots of unsuitable submissions equals an unhappy employer, this results in an unhappy senior management team who pass their feelings down the line until it reaches the advisers manager who would, hopefully, take measures to prevent similar incidents happening again.

who wants to go through the stress of being refered to a decision maker though. this happened to me a few weeks ago and i still havent heard anything either way. i was refered for a job where i couldnt get there for the start time. i explained everything on the back of the letter and sent it back. now i am left wondering what may happen next. this was a few days before i started training. since then i have not been on jsa. so i am wondering are they holding onto it until i am next claiming jsa and then do something.
i got refered to the decision maker when i was signing on and got asked if i had applied for it. i said no and explained why. yet he still refered it to a decision maker. if they find/found in my favour will this incompetent person get any come back?

donnajunkie

mandragora wrote: »

I know that I must come across as rude, because nowadays I just participate in the most brisk manner possible when it gets to my turn. The last one I went to we had to stand up, introduce ourselves and say something about our name - how we got it or some other nonsense. What astonished me was that everyone obediently played along with this idiocy. Well, everyone except me, that is! I sat there fuming at the work I could be doing instead of sitting there listening to 20 people telling me potted versions of their life histories.

i am curious. please tell us what you said? did they give you a funny look?

donnajunkie

bitsandpieces wrote: »

It would be rubbish course-leading if they were concerned about you not participating but didn't explicitly involve you - asking questions, encouraging to join in the discussion and so on - too. If it turns out this isn't just a mistake with them thinking you didn't show up, you could mention this when you appeal: if you want people to participate in a course discussion, the appropriate first step to do is to encourage them to do so rather than to punish them :eek:

i have been to one of these sessions. people really dont have to participate that much if at all. it is just 2 jobcentre staff lecturing a group of people on the basic things they need to know related to jobseeking. they are designed for people who have never been out of work before and useless for everyone else(which will be a large part of the group).

Sambucus_Nigra

mandragora wrote: »

Sorry for going a bit off topic, but it really is a pet hate of mine. It's what meeting organisers, trainers or consultants do as an intro when they're too poor at their job to think of anything else to do.

No it's not!

It's a pet hate of mine when they don't...but the question really should be relevant and not any of the stupid 'tell me something from your past'...

I want a trainer to know why I'm there, what I want to get from the session, and I want to know who else is there as if I'm going to discuss the ins and outs of management decisions [in a meeting for example] - I want to make sure no management are there or if they are, that it is phrased correctly.

I also want to know other people's names, so that I can refer to them by their name rather than 'the lady over there'.

Also, if the trainer has asked me what I want from a session - at the end if they have not covered everything, then I have not been trained properly and thus will request a refund. A good trainer will tailor their session to include things that the people being trained want to learn.

It's not always about lack of inspiration - it's about proper research and communication.

grumpyoldwoman41

A good trainer will tailor their session to include things that the people being trained want to learn.

Yes, they will - if those are within the course spec.

Good trainer will also make people feel comfortable on the course by including them in a way that they feel appropriate and not by forcing them into situations they are clearly trying to resist.

BUT - good trainers work for good companies. Good companies are able to set course prereqs to ensure the participants are on similar level/have similar interests as to the course outcome.

JC "training" just bundles people in together, people who have no common goals, no common interests, no common anything really.

And we know the results.

Sending IT professionals on CV "internet" courses is a joke, sending people with PHD on basic literacy/numeracy courses is a joke.. etc etc

looby75

Sues48 wrote: »

I think that there must have been some misunderstanding here, I have never known anyone be sanctioned for not participating in a BTWS, only for not attending or being ejected for abusive behaviour. The Jobseeker direction letter is produced automatically when the session is booked, I'm pretty sure that the wording states that the jobseeker must attend the session at the date, time and venue stated on the letter, nothing about participating.

I attended a BTWS a couple of weeks ago and the letter did say that I had to attend and participate. I haven't got the letter anymore I had to hand it in when I went for the appointment but I remember it definitely did say and participate, which I thought was a bit strange.

Now I know why. There were only 4 of us in our session, and while the advisor taking it was lovely it was a waste of time tbh. WHat someone said earlier in this thread about grown adults being made to sit like naughty 5 year olds summed it up perfectly.

ceridwen

Well - for anyone who didnt actually need to be told the "basics" of jobhunting (ie most people sent on these "courses" by the sound of it) then I would be oh so tempted personally to define "participation" as taking every possible opportunity to pipe up and make comments about "I remember - when I was hunting for my first job <cough> number of years that I just walked straight into the first job I asked for". "I remember just how many on spec applications/interviews/etc I put in for another job" etc etc
(all comments deliberately designed to show that I had held a variety of jobs/been working for many years now and could probably teach the "trainer" a thing or two:rotfl::rotfl:). I would clearly have "participated" okay - whilst getting the message over loud and clear that my time was being completely wasted...