The Work Programme New Thread

donnajunkie

out_of_cash wrote: »

Hi donnajunkie,

I think its exceptionally sick that a provider think they can make a medical decision about your current state of well being, highly presumptious.

They seriously havent a clue as to how to conduct themselves with people in genral as has been pointed out on this site and all over the net.They will be in serious crap soon as grayling said the other day hes expecting providers to pull out due to their lack of success finding placements etc.It would seem they have figured them out doing the bums on seats courses game =£££££££££££££ and no jobs.

it is always the same on these type of schemes. they bury their heads in the sand. they act like everyone is a head hunted scientist. they refuse to accept that it is virtually impossible to get some people into work whether it be due to illness, length of time out of work or some other issue. i think their job description prevents them from being realistic. i have seen people in their early 60's with health issues who havent worked for a very long time being told they have a good chance of getting a job. you can tell from the look on their faces that they fall into one of 2 categories. they either fall for it and think great i'm going to get a job(even though we know they are not) or they realise its bo**ocks and think why cant you just leave me the f**k alone. you idiot.

donnajunkie

out_of_cash wrote: »

This is to keep them going, a cash spinner for them, goverment are just waking up and realizing its a money spinner for providers getting paid by zero results, they know they cant deliver whats expected from them,only the idiots in goverment slung £5 billion at them and thought they could get mass employment.

Still waiting for the providers to release the official figures of how many permanent jobs have been found though the WP.

That will be very interesting.

they may make money from the in house courses.
i dont think telling people to independantly enrol on a course elsewhere makes any money for them. i think they do it coz it makes it look like they are doing something. they also may believe the crap they spout about it giving people a better chance of getting a job.

dandelionclock30

donnajunkie wrote: »

it is always the same on these type of schemes. they bury their heads in the sand. they act like everyone is a head hunted scientist. they refuse to accept that it is virtually impossible to get some people into work whether it be due to illness, length of time out of work or some other issue. i think their job description prevents them from being realistic. i have seen people in their early 60's with health issues who havent worked for a very long time being told they have a good chance of getting a job. you can tell from the look on their faces that they fall into one of 2 categories. they either fall for it and think great i'm going to get a job(even though we know they are not) or they realise its bo**ocks and think why cant you just leave me the f**k alone. you idiot.

.

Yeah thats about right, I once went to a presentation by jobcentre plus about getting hard to reach groups back to work. Anyway they discussed the "myth of there being no jobs" etc!
I was talking to one guy who worked at the jobcentre and he said that he was sent a woman (who had shunts to drain water off the brain) because she was declared fit to work. He said that she had to go to hospital twice a week and she had these tubes hanging out of her head.
I mean how bad is that !
I think even if you have a good work history and no barriers then you will struggle in this climate.

donnajunkie

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

.

Yeah thats about right, I once went to a presentation by jobcentre plus about getting hard to reach groups back to work. Anyway they discussed the "myth of there being no jobs" etc!
I was talking to one guy who worked at the jobcentre and he said that he was sent a woman (who had shunts to drain water off the brain) because she was declared fit to work. He said that she had to go to hospital twice a week and she had these tubes hanging out of her head.
I mean how bad is that !
I think even if you have a good work history and no barriers then you will struggle in this climate.

i know someone who got refered to fnd while he had serious kidney disease. he also had to go to hospital regularly. although to be fair in this case the fnd advisor said he shouldnt be there and helped him get on the sick.

Modster

Got a reply from the Regional Operations Manager, investigation is underway, should get a response in a week or so.


Apparently the manager of my WP office is on holiday till next week and she gave me an appointment for the day after she returns, this appointment was made over the phone last week. To my knowledge all mandatory activity like appointments has to be in writing and handed direct or sent by post to the participant. I requested written confirmation but she just seemed eager to get out of the office and as they are at fault here I dont see any reason that I have to attend.

kazzah60

Summerstage wrote: »

OK, here goes, may not be a popular post but trust me when I say it is meant to assist and nothing else.

The WP as we know is targeted to get "clients/customers" into a job, the same way as an Employment Agency is.

Agencies are only interested in those they can place successfully with an Employer, to ensure payment and also repeat business from the Employer.

So it goes without saying that skills/qualifications/experience are important, but a large part of ensuring the Employer is satisfied is the how the potential employee fits in - with the culture of the company, any existing staff, customers, contacts etc.

So I would say that no matter how you may feel at having to go to these places (WP), use them to your advantage.

As most of the WP staff are ex-recruitment agency staff, the attitude you display is key to them helping you. So in sending letters of complaints to Directors or whatever, asking for specialist treatment, or in any way standing out as someone who may be potentially "trouble" to an Employer, they most probably would not "vouch" for you. As in an Agency, they look for the most "placeable" candidates.

I understand that this is not how it should work, but I live in the real world and as such understand that this is unfortunately the way it goes.

Just feel that if someone really feels they are banging their head against a wall, trying to get back into work and getting nowhere, then it may be very clever to "shine" at future WP appointments.

As I said at the start, this is not meant to start a war, pretty new here, but just posting another point of view x

I think you may labouring under a misapprehension that the role of the Work Programme is to FIND the unemployed jobs - in my husbands experience they have not FOUND him one role to apply for - the advisor told my husband that his area of expertise ( Project Management in the Third Sector) was "way over her head" and to " keep on doing what he is doing"

HOW can that possibly be construed as " finding him employment" ?

Also NONE of the staff my husband has met at Sarina Russo have been "recruitment" agency staff- his current "advisor" was a care home manager for 30 years !

in fact my husband e mailed his "advisor" 3 weeks ago saying he would not be in for his two hour slot to cold call companies he would like to work for ( the type of role he is looking for ALWAYS advertise their roles in newspapers or with agencies)
because it was actually detracting from his job searching at home - and guess what - apart from a reply saying the WP was manadory - he hasn't heard a word from her since

the type of jobs my husband is looking for will not be found at a workplace provider - you may think this is snobby- but it is an actual fact of life.

At no point has my husband been assessed RED ( furthest away from employment) AMBER ( potentially ready for employment) or GREEN - ready for employment , which I have been informed he should have been.

however the "advisor" was VERY interested in the three Interviews he had lined up ( obtained from his own worksearch) and wanted a "contact name and address" - simply so that IF he was offered a job, Sarina Russo ( the provider) could claim a success story and apply for payment for "finding him work"

she was VERY surprised when my husband didn't supply this information - they will be paid when and IF they secure my husband a job - but as they don't seem to have any jobs to offer, that seems unlikely .

My husband is now waiting for confirmation that he has 30 years of NI contributions - if he has he no longer needs to sign on for JSA, he gets no benefit due to a small occupational pension and so only signs for his NI contribution - if he has sufficient contributions then we will be waving the JobecentrePlus goodbye and Sarina Russo and the Work Programme along with it!

LadyMissA

kazzah60 wrote: »

I think you may labouring under a misapprehension that the role of the Work Programme is to FIND the unemployed jobs - in my husbands experience they have not FOUND him one role to apply for - the advisor told my husband that his area of expertise ( Project Management in the Third Sector) was "way over her head" and to " keep on doing what he is doing"

HOW can that possibly be construed as " finding him employment" ?

Also NONE of the staff my husband has met at Sarina Russo have been "recruitment" agency staff- his current "advisor" was a care home manager for 30 years !

in fact my husband e mailed his "advisor" 3 weeks ago saying he would not be in for his two hour slot to cold call companies he would like to work for ( the type of role he is looking for ALWAYS advertise their roles in newspapers or with agencies)
because it was actually detracting from his job searching at home - and guess what - apart from a reply saying the WP was manadory - he hasn't heard a word from her since

the type of jobs my husband is looking for will not be found at a workplace provider - you may think this is snobby- but it is an actual fact of life.

They basically told me the same as they said there was nothing I wasn't already doing that they could tell me.

Also I was made to write a list of (23) companies I wanted to work for (and to be totally honest this is pointless) and they had a business manager who would contact them to see if they had jobs. Me thinking 'I have dont this already'.

They 'sat' on the list for 10 weeks and I chased it 3 times with them and then the person in charge of this part of the business had no idea I was looking for a job in accounts and never even had a copy of my CV - hard to believe since it's on my file in the office she works in. I had already contacted the 23 companies so told her that her one phone call to the one on the top of the list was pointless and did she wanted another list as I had another 50 companies (website addresses, contact phone numbers and emails and even the office address) and I was told no we can't cope with anything like that so do nto bother!

In two months time it will be 1 years since I was transfered to the WP and it's been a total waste of time.

Reverbe

imatt wrote: »

I

I stand by what I originally said. Too many advisors do NOT know how to adequately deal with clients who have a college or university level education and those with more experience than they do. This leads to some clients not beeing seen for weeks on end due to their 'advisor' not having a clue how to help them.

tell me about it. I am being sent on a literacy and numeracy assessment and then a week long all day course to be taught how to apply for jobs and interviews etc !!!!!!. I have a masters degree and find it insulting and patronizing in the extreme.

LadyMissA

Reverbe wrote: »

tell me about it. I am being sent on a literacy and numeracy assessment and then a week long all day course to be taught how to apply for jobs and interviews etc !!!!!!. I have a masters degree and find it insulting and patronizing in the extreme.

If they want to patronise you I suggest you say something or failing that put your hand up at everything they say and say 'I do not understand'!

Reverbe

looby75 wrote: »

I've got to admit that in this day and age there is no real reason why someone doesn't have a mobile. You can get a basic PAYG handset for £15 and most sims only need to be topped up every year or so to keep them active.

I will give you one looby - erm what if you dont have the 15 in the first place nor enough to keep paying it. What if the amount of benefit you get doesnt cover your basic outgoings never mind any luxury.frivolity such as a mobile