Work Experience while on Jobseekers Allowance (WORK PROGRAMME)

dark_lady

SarEl wrote: »

I looked everywhere in the post you quoted and I can't find the word "workshy" anywhere. It describes how many of the long term unemployed who attend the particular programme(s) that this person is involved in organising have significant barriers to employment which includes problems with literacy, lack of interview experience, or group activities - all of which are pretty significant barriers to successfully gaining employment. Do you think that it is wrong to help people to address such barriers and overcome some of the things that are contributing towards their long-tern unemployment? And is doing that calling them workshy - because right now the only person I can see calling them workshy appears to be you.

The implication was there. The words generations of worklessness was used. Im willing to bet that no work placement provider would willingly voice that opinion in the "classroom". Much easier to implicate and twist words and discriminate behind a keyboard.

saintjammyswine

dark_lady wrote: »

The implication was there. The words generations of worklessness was used. Im willing to bet that no work placement provider would willingly voice that opinion in the "classroom". Much easier to implicate and twist words and discriminate behind a keyboard.

Wrong again, I was talking about specific examples of people who grew up in "generations of worklessness". They have told me this, how else would I know? I am obviously not going to give you names but I have never generalised. (:D) Get it?

SarEl

dark_lady wrote: »

The implication was there. The words generations of worklessness was used. Im willing to bet that no work placement provider would willingly voice that opinion in the "classroom". Much easier to implicate and twist words and discriminate behind a keyboard.

Well I am failing to see any implication there either. Perhaps it is in your head? The "work placement provider" is not in the "classroom" here, and cannot easily be identified - and has never shown much evidence of mincing their words in their many posts on numerous threads - so why would they now on this? The fact is that they said no such thing. You cannot deny that there are now families in which multiple generations have never worked. It didn't occur to me that this made them workshy, it didn't occur to Saintjimmyswine - in fact the only person linking multiple generations being out of work and being workshy has been you. Similarly, there are certainly people who are "workshy", but as far as I am aware there has been no evidence demonstrated of a genetic tendency to this. If you know of one you should really let us know.

saintjammyswine

SarEl wrote: »

Well I am failing to see any implication there either. Perhaps it is in your head? The "work placement provider" is not in the "classroom" here, and cannot easily be identified - and has never shown much evidence of mincing their words in their many posts on numerous threads Thanks, I think :rotfl:- so why would they now on this? The fact is that they said no such thing. You cannot deny that there are now families in which multiple generations have never worked. It didn't occur to me that this made them workshy, it didn't occur to Saintjimmyswine - in fact the only person linking multiple generations being out of work and being workshy has been you.totally agree. Similarly, there are certainly people who are "workshy", but as far as I am aware there has been no evidence demonstrated of a genetic tendency to this. If you know of one you should really let us know.

I may not be very good at PC talk and as you point out, I do try and be direct in what I say. So I will spell it out. I am NOT generalising, I am not saying people who are unemployed are workshy although some clearly are, as are some of the people who are in work, . I am not saying anything different here than I discuss with people in the "classroom", why? Because they are facts based on evidence which I can back up and not simply opinion.

Caroline_a

Totally agree with SarEl and saintjammy here. Darklady you come across as very bitter about your employment and unemployment experience, but also seem unwilling to accept that some people really don't want to work.

I've actually had it said to me on quite a few occasions 'why should I work?' So would you consider someone with this attitude workshy, or just hard done by? One could argue that they are paid too much benefit maybe. I have every sympathy with people who are trying to get work and through no fault of their own are having no success, but I do know that there is a section of the population who are on benefits yet working on the side, doing booze runs across the Channel and selling their purchases, and playing the game with the JobCentres and the advisors.

Maybe not workshy, but certainly legal-employment-shy!

donnajunkie

Vincent_Buenisedes wrote: »

Self-confidence for a start. The thought of doing exactly the same role as another whilst they receive a wage and you receive JSA is utterly depressing.
We're forever hearing from politicians and the like that work gives pride, gives you self-worth, but always miss out the key detail about work - being paid.
The ultimate reason anyone goes out to work is for a wage and while to someone in work who assumes that jobseekers do nothing with their time than to sit down, crack open a few Special Brews, and watch daytime telly, it actually entrenches the view that they (the people on these schemes) are not worth a wage at all and a good dose of patronisingwill do them good.
I remember just a few years back that full-time employees would treat agency workers like rubbish just because they were agency and could be got rid of at a moments notice. What's the betting with "work experience workers"?

if they want people to be motivated on placements they should provide some sort of financial incentive just like actual employees have. they could pay an extra £50 per week for example and call it a training allowance. they could have a set minimum period people have to spend on placement(4 weeks maybe) after that staying on the placement could depend on performance and be voluntary. many would not want to lose the £50 and would make an effort to keep the placement. the placement should not last more than say 10 weeks in total. also if the employer does not offer them employment then the employer should have to wait at least 4 weeks before they can get someone else on placement. ultimately this idea is still not ideal because employers would still be getting free labour but it would be more successful and fairer on the claimants.
of course this would cost more but surely it would be better to spend 2 billion on something that is successful rather than 1 billion on something that does not work.

saintjammyswine

donnajunkie wrote: »

if they want people to be motivated on placements they should provide some sort of financial incentive just like actual employees have. they could pay an extra £50 per week for example and call it a training allowance. they could have a set minimum period people have to spend on placement(4 weeks maybe) after that staying on the placement could depend on performance and be voluntary. many would not want to lose the £50 and would make an effort to keep the placement. the placement should not last more than say 10 weeks in total. also if the employer does not offer them employment then the employer should have to wait at least 4 weeks before they can get someone else on placement. ultimately this idea is still not ideal because employers would still be getting free labour but it would be more successful and fairer on the claimants.
of course this would cost more but surely it would be better to spend 2 billion on something that is successful rather than 1 billion on something that does not work.

Cool, who will you be giving your £50 to first personally? Of course it would be great to give everyone money for trying to get a job, oh no wait, we already do. JSA. But I digress, if we are to pay people to do the work experience, do we charge them the going rate for the training (see previous posts) they also receive? I can assure you that £50 per week will be swallowed up by the £46 it costs to register each person on a Customer Service exam without the cost of the training itself not to mention the rest of the training they can get.

wouldbeqaulitymoneysaver

First Survival tip for those on JSA *Spot the Right Wing Free Market Doctrine* then counter. Second Survival Tip: of course MSE will have those cuddly Astroturfers, those from ATOS etc aiming to skew opinion their way ie judging and persecuting those on benefits. 3rd Survival Tip: put up with and fight back the crap being on benefits and chosen lifestyle is NOT a cause for nosy busybody interference and curtain twitchers and those who read the Tory Papers such as the Daily Heil. 4th Survival Tip: #ukuncut get the stories from those on benefits real realities not the crap written by High Society twits in charge of daily hate to get at the least a more balanced opinion, at most a complete about turn.
5th Survival tip if you read academic papers as I do you will see it all in glorious technicolour so lifestyle is your choice provided you learn how to budget. Even a life on benefits with no prospects of a career etc needs it's compensations luxuries etc. 6th Survival tip aim for Career job etc with real prospects to buck all the odds the more disabled you are the better and more aged. Susan Boyle a good example. Seek for ways to get lots of good things out of sweet nada. 7th survival tip if you were in their shoes you would give em good advice go do it!! MSE style!!!!!!

dandelionclock30

"Right, when has poundland been mentioned?
Many of the people I work with have never worked or paid taxes(direct) and come from families with 2 or 3 generations of worklessness.
I can give a 100% guarantee that not one person I deal with on these projects is exploited in any way and once the pilot is finished and it is in the media, you can read all about it."

Yes we will be reading all about it,how its failed or the Government will cover its ineffectiveness up in total spin.
I know plenty of professional people who are unemployed.Of course the people on the projects are expolited because they are not a means to an end ie a job, they are an end in itself, and thats a dead end.
The W.P will not make a slightest bit of difference to the unemployed and I bet you a pound on that.

donnajunkie

saintjammyswine wrote: »

many of the candidates sent by JCP have massive gaps in, mainly, literacy.

do you realise how humiliating it is for people who obviously dont have issues with literacy and maths to be forced to sit these are you a dummy tests.