MSE News: Government launches back to work programme

ceridwen

dickydonkin wrote: »

Rubbish.

Please use my complete post rather than use selective quotes that do not reflect my opinions.

As the poll was undertaken by YouGov - who gather their 'statistics' from online respondents - Ask yourself this - which sector of people are less likely to have internet access?

Yes - you have guessed it - the unemployed and benefit recipients - so I will reiterate, the poll is inaccurate by virtue of the selection of the respondents they use.



But only opinions from members of the public who have access to the internet!

Actually - I wonder whether what effect too there would be from the fact that even amongst those with access to the Internet at home that many of the poorest simply won't have the time to contribute to things like YouGov surveys, etc - because they are the "working poor" and are working every hour God sends to earn enough money to survive on and dont have the time/energy/etc for anything that isnt directly related to their own personal survival. I would imagine the "working poor" would also be more likely to understand/sympathise with the position of peeps covered by this.

There was a time when I myself counted as in that position - ie working every hour I could for extra money. These days - I'm just plain "working poor" and just doing a standard level of hours per week. I certainly wouldnt have been prepared to make some of my precious leisuretime available for answering Government surveys when I was in the "working all hours" position. Even though I gave up all that "extra work" a while back - its taking some time to "catch up with myself" from having neglected my own life whilst I was doing all those hours.

I've been unemployed and am therefore well aware that there are perfectly employable/non-workshy people on the dole (as I was one of them) - as well as some who are there by choice.

Richardsct

couldn't agree more

rickbonar

A lot of this propaganda appears in all the new governments and I think it's largely a smokescreen to focus public attention on and blame other groups other than what the government and ministers are doing.

No doubt money comes into it somewhere and the sacking of the jobcentre staff is quite funny if you think about it!

I think positions that are paid right now again they will dispense with.. street cleaners, park gardeners, refuse collectors, and so on I think they may try and get some unemployed on mock up work schemes to do for their dole. With little prospects of ever moving on from being a free dustbinman.

Which actually long term may have a very negative effect in that they sign off it (which is what they want of course) but I do seriously envisage more criminals and career choices along the lines of drug dealers, pimps, prostitutes, con artists, gangstas, hitmen, rogue trader type enterprises.

And which to a lot of impressionable young people especially young people of ethnic backgrounds has a lot more street cred & status than say a burger fryer at Mc donalds and clearly financially more rewarding too.

WPN

Well, the Work Programme is a really BAD deal.

Providers have been forced to enter contract with employers to get potential job vacancies. This means if you think there isn't that many jobs advertised/available at the current, then this will DECREASE rapidly. This doesn't mean speculative applications either as the only people who could apply are those on the Work Programme, meaning if you are unemployed but not a benefit claimant those jobs aren't available. It is also the same if you are a jobseeker who hasn't yet been sent to the Work Programme.
(In the North West employers like ASDA, Royal Mail etc. are expected to be part of this.) This is not right!!! In effect the Government along with these private businesses are ensuring you cannot find work unless you are on the Work Programme and that you have done a 3 month unpaid trial for the business in advance (compared to say a probationary period of a job where you are paid). I think it will be a few years before we see the full effect of less vacancies being available. I question whether this is legit.

Crime will rise, sevenfold. Most unemployed people are not scum but with the proposed 3 month, 6 month and 3 year benefit sanctions as planned people with families etc. will be forced to steal to survive. Lets not bullsh!t here, we know about the revolving door legal system... commit crime of such level, with the risk of getting caught, and a penalty of either LESS than a benefit sanction and/or 100 hours community service (Approx equal to just over 3 weeks work for benefits instead of for 7 years...) seems a very likely prospect.

Soo... this is a bit of a proposition I guess to hard working taxpayers... are you still happy to follow the Tory line of punishing people whom the vast majority are desperately hard to seek work with unfair treatment and benefit sanctions - btw sanctions are for failure/refusing work yet these schemes are treated as a job - and in return risk your house being burgled, your car stolen and you being mugged in the street? Lets face it, should this happen, none of these poor criminals are going to steal from their own as there is nothing in it for them. Does two wrongs make a right? Is this justice? We will see...

imatt

One major issue with the WP is the companies tasked with implementing the scheme. Many (not all) have proven themselves incompetent in delivering the New Deal and Flexible New Deal. It’s no good asking people to conduct X hours of job-searching a day or week. It’s been done before under ND and FND. All that happens is many customers (love that word, it implies choice when there clearly is none under such schemes) achieve the required number of job searches by day two and by day three are left to their own devices. That’s if they have not secured an unpaid placement by then.

The govt and DWP have not fully and clearly thought this one through. As part of his Big Society initiative, Cameron wants local private charities and not-for-profit social enterprises to deliver the WP. Nice idea perhaps. Until one realises that many of these organisations cannot afford to compete esp. with the payment by results structure of the WP. Also, big boys such as A4e, Reed and Serco can undercut charities and social enterprises due to economies of scale.


Companies such as A4e, Reed and Serco have shown themselves to be poor at delivering previous programs such as pathways to Work, New deal and FND.


See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wWvhWNzt4M&feature=related


Of course, what is worse than an inefficient company is a fraudulent one. A4e a company found guilty of fraud will be tasked with delivering the WP in many areas. Fraud is a serious allegation so I’d better clarify. In 2009, A4e and a couple of other W2W companies were probed by the DWP after A4e’s hull office was caught committing fraud. Discrepancies emerged in ‘confirmation of employment’ forms submitted by A4e. A couple of A4e recruiters completed forms meant for employers who agreed to employ workers. In some cases, employer’s signatures were falsified! One of the A4e recruiters had also cooked up a dodgy deal with a local temp agency.


See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/28/fraud-inquiry-government-jobs-scheme


Sure, A4e were made to pay back £15k. Rightly so. However, they continued to gain contract after contract. And it continues to this day.


Now, some here will know of the above fraud cases. However, A4e and other W2W companies also falsify the types of courses they deliver. You may be told you’re doing a ‘customer service’ or ‘media and design’ course. However, such courses never materialise.

See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVbq-d6MmMA&feature=related


To get round this, your Jobcentre advisor will happily inform you that the jobsearch you do at such centres is a ‘course’. W2W providers do courses such as food hygiene and first aid. However, something such as IT or Web Design cannot be accommodated at such centres.


The poor performance and fraud committed by A4e and others is important to highlight. It shows this government has not learnt from the mistakes committed by the last administration as they insist on using the very same companies with a poor track record in delivering past programs as well as those involved in fraud.

james73

thor wrote: »

This scheme won't work due to the fact that there are far more on the dole than jobs available. It will line the CONservative's friend's pockets no doubt.
If they were really serious about getting more people into work then maybe they could bring in legislation to stop people having multiple jobs and could start with the politicians who can find time to get on the board of multinationals while supposedly working full time as MPs.

Very good points.

LadyMissA

stephyt23 wrote: »

4 hours job seeking? That would be ridiculous! I used to spend all day looking and refreshing pages until it was just dragging me down. Now I spend about an hour in the late afternoon looking, it means I'm happier and can use my free time more constructively.

No its not ridiculous as I do up to 8 hrs a day and now its 00.54 am and I am still looking for jobs.
I look at the following from 8am and refresh each page every 10-15 mins
Reed
Hays
Gaapweb
Jobsite
Totaljobs
Caterer
Totallylegal
Monster
City jobs
Job seekers direct
Gumtree
and a few more sites too

I also look at the Evening Standard online every day at 4pm and the local paper online every Wednesday

I also find a street in London a Google it, zoom in to see what compaines appear then click so the box pops up then click on that to see the companies site to see if they have any jobs to apply for and or register my CV there too.

I have filled in 28 of those Looking for Work booklets and applied to for minimum wage jobs where they will not interview me since I have 20 years experience in accounts. Was made redundant 1 yr ago and applied for over 1300 jobs where there is at least 300 people applying for each job with me.

Agencies do not work on your behalf, but the company who's jobs it is. The company pays them over 20% of the salary to fill the job so if they put forward 10 CV's they know one person will get the job and no care for the other 9 who are still looking.

If there were more jobs and less people applying it would be different

IF you meet the criteria for jobs advertised on job seekers direct and do not get an interview cause you are OVER qualified there is NOTHING the job centre can or will do about it and this has to change! Not that I want to work for £11,600k when I was on over £25k but will do for the time being but no one will interview someone with too much experience as they know you are not going to stay.

I have an interview for the Work Programme in 2 weeks , goodness only know what it is all about!!

LadyMissA

dseventy wrote: »

I class you as "in the same boat", the "you need a job" boat, why is anymore distinction needed?

D70

er no there is a boat where people do jack all EVERY WEEK and yes I see them in the job centre saying 'oh my booklet, erm I forgot it' then there is me who is on the 'I want to work boat' who fills in the booklet every day and has filled in 28 booklets with jobs I have applied for

LadyMissA

m1234w wrote: »

This thread isn't about supervised jobseeking it's about the Work Programme. Can we please talk about this instead of petty childish arguments about an unrelated subject.

Thanks

what is the Work Programme then and how will it help someone who has worked in London all her life and has over 20 yrs experience in accounts ?

LadyMissA

Also how much is this Work Programme costing for each person?

The job centre wont even lend you the £ to go to an agency if the agency wants to put you forward for a job but won't till you have registered with them.

Surely support with registering with agencies would help a long way for a lot of people getting a job instead of some course?