Work Experience while on Jobseekers Allowance (WORK PROGRAMME)

SarEl

t0rt0ise wrote: »

I think it would be degrading and I wonder if that's why others don't like the idea of it too. And having people assume that if I've been out of work for a while I will have forgotten how to get up in time is just a little bit offensive. I'm not sure whether having it on the CV would be a help or a hindrance, depends how it's seen by the employers.

Maybe - but being unemployed is degrading too! I can't imagine that there is anything fun in having to go and sign on and explain yourself and what you have done to get a job. Struggling to pay your bills and buy food must also be degrading. Not being able to buy the children Christmas presents must be degrading. Nobody is arguing that unemployment per se isn't awful. Nor is anyone saying that there aren't unemployed people who will work and work and work until they get back into employment, even if it means taking a lower paid job or doing something they don't really want to do. And taking handouts from the taxpayer ought to be degrading. But for some people it is a way of life, and not at all degrading.

Great on you for not being one of them - but these programmes are supposed to support people back into work, and if necessary force people who don't want to work back into work. Some people do need support, whether they think they do or not, and some people do need putting to work because they would happily live off me and you for their entire lives given half a chance. How are we to tell the difference between genuine job-seekers and people who know how to play the game?

What we have may not be the best solution and it may not be the only solution, but it is a solution. I don't think many people begrudge the tax money is costs to provide a safety net for people who are out of work through no fault of their own. But nor do I think it unreasonable that they be expected to do something for the money they get. There are other options - get a job or don't claim benefits. Personally, given what these programmes appear to cost - I heard a quote of £31,000 per job seeker, I would increase JSA to the NMW and put everyone out of work over six months to work doing the socially useful work that never gets done, done well, or often enough. We can't afford, it would appear, to have streets kept clean, or old people looked after properly in hospitals and care homes etc etc. It may not be what they want to do - but there is still the option of finding better work, and society would benefit from their labour. If we want a decent society, and we want to support those who cannot work through age, informity, or loss of employment, we cannot do so on a rapidly dimishing number of people in employment paying the bills for the rest - no matter how deserving those people may be.

JoJox

t0rt0ise wrote: »

I think it would be degrading and I wonder if that's why others don't like the idea of it too. And having people assume that if I've been out of work for a while I will have forgotten how to get up in time is just a little bit offensive. I'm not sure whether having it on the CV would be a help or a hindrance, depends how it's seen by the employers.

Thank u for understanding! I hav sooo much experince in admin and if the work programme tell ur doing a work experince then u hav no choice but to do it. So wen they say im doing one then if i say no DO I lose ALL my benifts? It dont seem fair but i will never giv up on finding a job!

I've worked since i was 16 and lost me job last Jan 2010. Giv me credit people lol :money::T

JoJox

I was even told by the jobcentre that i was over qualified for admin lol. Class! :P

DCFC79

JoJox wrote: »

I was even told by the jobcentre that i was over qualified for admin lol. Class! :P

So despite you having experience in admin the JC say your over qualified.

SarEl

Arg wrote: »

Sounds pretty judgemental to me and for all your bleatings about taxpayers money you would think you would complain about the amount going to these failing programmes.

And I also do not care about your judgemental opinion! I see no reason why we should simply accept that everyone out of work is genuinely seeking work and doing everything they can to find it, conrary to all evidence. Since "these programmes" have only just started then I have no idea whether they are "failing" or not - and neither do you. I do have concerns that they should, as I said, deliever the support necessary to get people back into employment - bith because they are costly and because people need jobs. But nor do I accept that everything done to support or even force people back into work is wrong either. There is no right to live off others. If that is a "judgement" then so be it - we cannot afford to pay for our hospitals, health care, social services and so on, so how do we afford to pay for people who put nothing back? I have never said that we haven't a responsibility to support people out of work and trying to get back into employment, or the elderly or infirm who cannot work - but the mathematics doesn't add up. If we can't afford the basic standards of a decent society then how do we support non-contributors who take from those services but put nothing back?

If the rpogrammes don't work then organise and say so. Highlight it and make better suggestions. But don't bleat about how unfair it is to have to do something in order to receive your benefits - life is unfair, and that applies whoever you are and whether you are in work or not.

dandelionclock30

How long is it for?
If its just for a week or two you could think of it as a way to have another upto date reference? I believe myself that if theres a job that needs doing then their is a person that needs paying properly.
I would'nt put work programme down on the c.v, I would put temp contract at

---

company.
I would ask what the chances are of being taken on afterwards? and ask absolutley loads of enthusiastic questions, about policies and procedures, health and saftey etc. If they genuinely want somebody they probably will take you on properly.If they dont then they will get shut of you for being too eager! Theres more than one way to get what you want.
These schemes will overall not help the unemployment problem,I think they will eventually evolve into all the unemployed being forced into a workfare type situation like in the USA. Then employers will have a constant supply of total slave labour.

SarEl

JoJox wrote: »

Thank u for understanding! I hav sooo much experince in admin and if the work programme tell ur doing a work experince then u hav no choice but to do it. So wen they say im doing one then if i say no DO I lose ALL my benifts? It dont seem fair but i will never giv up on finding a job!

I've worked since i was 16 and lost me job last Jan 2010. Giv me credit people lol :money::T

Good for you. But surely it doesn't harm your skills or experience to do a placement like this? It gives you something else to put on your CV that is more recent, it keeps your skills up to date, and it gives you something to talk about in interviews that isn't "My last job XX months/ years ago..." It may even open the door to a job. Rather than think about what you won't gain, think of it as having nothing to loose either. It would be nice to be back to full employment (whenever that was) but it isn't on the cards any time soon, then "not my first option" may be the only option for now.

WPN

JoJox wrote: »

I am on Jobseekers allowance and I'm on The Work Programme. I've been told that i am doing work experience nxt week. And I am doing office work BUT I want to know if i can refuse work experience?

They are paying for my travel there. But wot rights hav i got while on the work programme? If i don't like the place do i hav a right to not go anymore? Do i lose my benefits? And also what times can they make me do a day or can i choose?

If anyone knows PLEASE can they let me know! Thank u all x:money:

You have been told a lie. Work Programme is a Section 17A workfare scheme. That means you must work for your benefits.

Work Experience - regardless of it being mandatory etc. - is aimed to give you experience/recent reference. workfare is about making you work for below than minimum wage for your benefit whilst taking the place of a real job paid at NMW.

The ONLY reason why people on the Work Programme isn't doing fulltime work each week, every week for 2 years is because there are not enough placements available. Work Programme is new - there will be some "employers" setting up shop to exploit these people specifically... and there will be many "wonder around town picking up litter" positions whilst a paid employee watches as this doesn't require any overheads with exception to equipment (litter pickers, bin bags).

They are paying for my travel there. But wot rights hav i got while on the work programme? None. They are even restricting legal aid to discourage judicial reviews. To an extent you will have rights in regards to H&S but also responsibilities for H&S for yourself and others.

If i don't like the place do i hav a right to not go anymore? No. You dont get that choice. Failure to participate is a benefit sanction.

Do i lose my benefits? A sanction keeps your claim open but you lose all payment for a certain period (from 2 weeks ... up to 6 months at current.. plans to extend this to 3 years).

And also what times can they make me do a day or can i choose? They can make you do between 30-40 hours including weekends, however, they cannot force you to go instead of a religious event or doctor/hospital appointment.

WPN

SarEl wrote: »

And I also do not care about your judgemental opinion! I see no reason why we should simply accept that everyone out of work is genuinely seeking work and doing everything they can to find it, conrary to all evidence. Since "these programmes" have only just started then I have no idea whether they are "failing" or not - and neither do you. I do have concerns that they should, as I said, deliever the support necessary to get people back into employment - bith because they are costly and because people need jobs. But nor do I accept that everything done to support or even force people back into work is wrong either. There is no right to live off others. If that is a "judgement" then so be it - we cannot afford to pay for our hospitals, health care, social services and so on, so how do we afford to pay for people who put nothing back? I have never said that we haven't a responsibility to support people out of work and trying to get back into employment, or the elderly or infirm who cannot work - but the mathematics doesn't add up. If we can't afford the basic standards of a decent society then how do we support non-contributors who take from those services but put nothing back?

If the rpogrammes don't work then organise and say so. Highlight it and make better suggestions. But don't bleat about how unfair it is to have to do something in order to receive your benefits - life is unfair, and that applies whoever you are and whether you are in work or not.

I agree with long term claimants working for their benefits... as long as its a non-profit company or community based and not replacing a real paid job... AND that they are getting the NMW per hour. This would be for example 10 hours per week and not 30 or 40 hours.

These schemes have all failed in the past. Government is not allowing the providers to disclose statistics on the success... something to hide? I personally think so.

donnajunkie

vax2002 wrote: »

It gets you in the spirit of getting up every morning and out to work, where you will be alongside those who pay your JSA.
Dont forget to thank them.

lol, this is really funny. thank them? so while they are working for £67 a week they should thank someone doing the thing for £10 an hour? :rotfl: