You can refuse the Work Programme

LadyMissA

imatt wrote: »

There is far to few staff available. This leads to clients not being seen for weeks and some cases MONTHS on end (if the WP is so great, how is this allowed to happen?).

I am an example of that. I have my FIRST real appointment in Jan after somehow slipping off the radar with my provider after my initial assesment (that took place on 2 seperate days due to too many people and not enough staff) for 4 MONTHS & 3 WEEKS!!

I too want to know how this happens as the provider has been doing this kind of thing for 20 years and so their site says are 'experiences, deadicated and professional'. I have a complaint logged with the Ops Director. Can't wait for the reply!

donnajunkie

dseventy wrote: »

I have a few questions to those that are trying to find legalities around the work programme :

1) Objection on passing on details to third parties

Have you objected to passing your details to the bank who pay your benefit? apart from Giro claims which direct payments replaced, you would have filled in your sort code/account number to get paid JSA.

Why are the same arguments about passing details to third parties not mentioned in this context? Banks are private companies (mostly) looking to make profit.

Why no objection?

2) The money the Work Programme costs to taxpayers.

You are asking for the state to pay you money. Thats from tax-payers money. Why the sudden concern about how much things are costing?

Is it really just about having to do something your dole money?

And if it is, why not just say, support will fall with you or not, but at least double standards are not on show. It makes you look desperate and work-shy, IMO and just reinforces the stereotype on JSA claiments.

D70

1. people usually have a legal right to decide who they give their details to and who they dont give them to. you do why shouldnt a jsa claimant?
2. the difference is jsa is needed to survive. the money that pays for a work scheme is a waste if that scheme does not get a large percentage into lasting employment. not wanting to do something that serves no useful purpose doesnt make a person workshy. suggesting that the answer to not liking how high the welfare bill is is to make it even higher is quite stupid if you think about it.

donnajunkie

LadyMissA wrote: »

I am an example of that. I have my FIRST real appointment in Jan after somehow slipping off the radar with my provider after my initial assesment (that took place on 2 seperate days due to too many people and not enough staff) for 4 MONTHS & 3 WEEKS!!

I too want to know how this happens as the provider has been doing this kind of thing for 20 years and so their site says are 'experiences, deadicated and professional'. I have a complaint logged with the Ops Director. Can't wait for the reply!

to be honest if they arent any good you are better off not seeing them for ages.

unclejohn_2

As far as the Maximus JSA work programme is concerned. I believe that you DO NOT have to sign any of their paperwork that they present you with on your first appointment. Especially the 'consent to share'. Attend the course but do not sign anything.
As you maybe be aware the Universal Jobmatch website is a compulsory sign up, but you DO NOT have to share your details & searches with the job centre. The same applies to Maximus.

I myself would be very concerned sharing and allowing Maximus access to my CV and any other personal information about me. Since they have been convicted of fraud.

Chester666666

imatt wrote: »

Sorry, but this is a rather odd argument! In other words, someone on JSA should shut up about ALL aspects of govt expenditure???

The problem with the WP is not just the cost. Is is that as with the New and Flexible New Deal before it, it is very inneficient. Indeed, the Job Centre used to get better results than the current crop of W2W providers. There is far too few staff available. This leads to clients not being seen for weeks and some cases MONTHS on end (if the WP is so great, how is this allowed to happen?). Many staff that are available are poorly trained and incompetent. And as I have mentioned more than once on other threads, some W2W companies, namely A4e and Working Links have been fined for commiting FRAUD (forging signatures).

I strongly suggest you and others listen to this recent program on BBC Radio 4:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b014ggh3

Now maybe YOU think this is an acceptable way to spend or rather squander taxpayers money. I and many others here and elsewhere do not!

Plus that the providers have worked out how to get something for nothing via various cons such as large groups in jobsearch with a tutor that concentrates on other duties

hermitcrackers

They will never stop taking the mick out of you until you say no enough is enough. Its never ending, some people go years unemployed, things happen, lifes change, they won't stop so if you think your currently unemployable you might as well just go to prison or kill yourself. A lot of jobcentre workers don't understand, they don't help or try to find people work they just push you and push you until you have to push back. The whole things been a joke for a few years, the jobcentres the problem, don't let them put the blame on outside companys there not charity's, it doesn't work but can't blame them.

red_devil

hermitcrackers wrote: »

They will never stop taking the mick out of you until you say no enough is enough. Its never ending, some people go years unemployed, things happen, lifes change, they won't stop so if you think your currently unemployable you might as well just go to prison or kill yourself. A lot of jobcentre workers don't understand, they don't help or try to find people work they just push you and push you until you have to push back. The whole things been a joke for a few years, the jobcentres the problem, don't let them put the blame on outside companys there not charity's, it doesn't work but can't blame them.

Its possible to be unemployed and not want to kill yourself bit extreme.

ladypenny

You should be more concerned with the 'Contact future employer' form, which you will be asked to sign when you first meet your EC at your WP provider. DON'T DO IT. you don't have to.

You don't have to sign this form.
If you agree to them contacting your future employer, this can cause no end of problems.

Firstly, this is how they get paid, if they cannot prove you are working by speaking to your employer, they do NOT get paid.
They do not do a job worth paying the thousands of pounds they get so they should not be paid.

They will harass your employer one a month to check you are working there, how long you are working and even asking how much you get paid.

I have known employers let people go from jobs due these tactics.
you are effectively given them permission to speak openly to your employer and ask them anything they want about you.

If you are unemployed at the moment, you may not see a problem with this, but once you do get a job, especially if you have done it off your own back, with no help from your WP provider, its frustrating that they then get paid for a role they have not for filled.

I assure you this is true, I am an ex employee of a WP provider, I left because I could not sleep at night after seeing what they did to the people they are paid to help.

sniggings

dseventy wrote: »

I have a few questions to those that are trying to find legalities around the work programme :

1) Objection on passing on details to third parties

Have you objected to passing your details to the bank who pay your benefit? apart from Giro claims which direct payments replaced, you would have filled in your sort code/account number to get paid JSA.

Why are the same arguments about passing details to third parties not mentioned in this context? Banks are private companies (mostly) looking to make profit.

Why no objection?

2) The money the Work Programme costs to taxpayers.

You are asking for the state to pay you money. Thats from tax-payers money. Why the sudden concern about how much things are costing?

Is it really just about having to do something your dole money?

And if it is, why not just say, support will fall with you or not, but at least double standards are not on show. It makes you look desperate and work-shy, IMO and just reinforces the stereotype on JSA claiments.

D70

you really don't know the answers to those questions?

Or are you really trying to dare someone to admit it's because they don't want to work?

Well it's not because we don't want to work, it's because we don't want to go on a scheme that the governments own figures show it's less effective at finding work for people than if they never went on it, we also don't want to have to go to these places because most treat people as !!!! and have us jumping through hoops for no reason but to punish us for not having a job.

On my WP all we do is it in a room a surf the web for jobs, that I already do at home.

Your real concern should be why are the government paying billions to these private companies for stuff we are already doing.

I have just got a job, it was a job I found myself at home, yet the WP will get thousands for me finding my own job.

Send me a 100 JSA claimants and I bet at least 3 of them will find a job with me not putting any effort in at all, yet for that zero effort the government will pay me around £10,000.

It's not about us being worried about our details being send to 3rd parties, it's about doing all we can to stop this joke of a system, and if a side effect of that is saving the tax payer money then that's a good thing.

i_want_to_believe

From October last year providers do not need your consent to go to employers unless you are Contributions based JSA/ESA or Universal Credit claimant

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/269253/work-programme-memo-139.pdf