wht do you think of this

an9i77

Whilst I am a leftie on most issues I have to say this one gets my vote. I know that most people on the dole would rather be in work and not everyone's a !!!!less shirker, but if people are able to work why should they get benefits to sit on their behinds all day long. I agree that there should be a period of time when people are left to their own devices to find work, as there is, but after a certain period of time, yes if capable of working they should be doing something. Rather it was some community/charity based project though than working for big companies such as the supermarkets. And perhaps it wouldn't have to be full time, could be eg three days per week leaving two days for job seeking. But they shouldn't be allowed to sit at home doing nothing ad infinitum, no.

dizzyrascal

Whilst this might all sound good I wonder how a person who is long-term unemployed can afford the travel costs to get to work. Where I live it would cost a minimum of £25 a week on bus fares but if they are earning nothing this money would have to come out of their already low benefits. ed in going There are other expenses involved in working, especially if they haven't worked for some time. Appropriate clothing etc. Is help to be given for this?
If they earn nothing whilst working I can see that there might be problems with this formula

LadyMissA

pitkin2020 wrote: »

Thats your parents decision to charge you rent and if they wish to that then they can but I very much doubt you are paying anything near what you would be if you were living in a flat on your own.

They don't pay peoples rent when they live friends or family because its a very easy to earn benefits you aren't entitled to. Most families would help each other when they are out of work (for short periods) so you could easily be claiming that you are paying rent and claiming HB when your not being charged anything.

and thats also how a lot of 18-24 yr olds become homeless when their parents chuck them out.

HB would be a lot more for the Govenement to pay though than just a token to the family - and yeah I have have a spreadsheet of what I owe, but that's my concern. I was only pointing out not everyone gets to live rent free and all my firends thought I got housing benefits and one even called me a liar when I said I didn't.

Carl31

About time too

Ok its not ideal, but the other option is people getting paid to do nothing, sit at home unmotivated and fed up, perhaps leading to depression and further problems

which is more beneficial to everyone?

I dont think a whole working week should be forced, maybe a 3 day week

pitkin2020

LadyMissA wrote: »

and thats also how a lot of 18-24 yr olds become homeless when their parents chuck them out.

HB would be a lot more for the Govenement to pay though than just a token to the family - and yeah I have have a spreadsheet of what I owe, but that's my concern. I was only pointing out not everyone gets to live rent free and all my firends thought I got housing benefits and one even called me a liar when I said I didn't.

Thats a moral issue though that your parents have decided to charge you rent even though your not working. They didn't charge you rent when you were 12 and living at home I expect?? Nor are they paying any extra because you live there. Contributing towards what you eat would be no different to anyone else on JSA they would also expect to live off there benefits payments for day to day living.

At the end of the day why should the government pay extra for you to live at home?? Your being helped with JSA which comes from a pot of money that every tax payer pays into.

Obviously your parents may also be teaching you a good life lesson, by charging you rent to push to get into work, who knows.

pitkin2020

dizzyrascal wrote: »

Whilst this might all sound good I wonder how a person who is long-term unemployed can afford the travel costs to get to work. Where I live it would cost a minimum of £25 a week on bus fares but if they are earning nothing this money would have to come out of their already low benefits. ed in going There are other expenses involved in working, especially if they haven't worked for some time. Appropriate clothing etc. Is help to be given for this?
If they earn nothing whilst working I can see that there might be problems with this formula

They can (IIRC) claim for travel expenses and work wear. IIRC you can claim towards travel expenses etc when going for interviews and stuff so they will help if you ask for it. Its a very valid point though.


It is a very good idea but the work they set for people on JSA has to be able to lead somewhere either towards being offered a full time position (obviously if they show the skills and willing) or towards some sort qualification or skill.

If they merely offer jobs with no prospects (and i don't mean to be rude to anyone who does these types of jobs as they are still invaluable) like trolley collecting or delivering charity bags I can see far too many people saying I may as well continue to do this and just claim my JSA. Rather than seeing it as start as a trolley collector, get on the tills, become a supervisor move to store manager. (hope that made sense lol)

I expect of lot of people who have been on long term JSA have some reasonable desires of what work they would like to do and if they could be placed (as in work experience) as close to that as possible it may give them confidence and encouragement to chase after that job or get the skill/qualifications needed to get into that job.

As they say give a man a fish he'll eat for a day, give him the skills to fish and eat for the rest of his life!!

strangeotron

leasky30 wrote: »

so would you be glad for working at 2.25 a hour ( if over 25, less if your under 25) 30 hours a week for 6 months, and there is already 2 ongoing cases against this type of thing

It's slavery, plain and simple. Forced work. It's the worst of all possible worlds, as the tories want, and solely benefits big business at the expense of the taxpayer. People are just stupid; they believe this idea is great even though they are paying for it. Surely if there are jobs then why aren't they paying a wage?

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

My thoughts on it...

1 - Even though they're getting their JSA they won't lose any other benefits they get. So it's not just £2 an hour for some / a lot of people as they'll be getting their JSA and other benefits.

2 - It'll help some people get back into working and there's the chance some will be offered a job at the end of it.

3 - It'll also force the work shy lazy !!!!s, who don't want to work, into getting out of bed and doing something useful; instead of sponging.

4 - It's being offered to the wrong places. It should be offered to the smaller privately owned businesses who need the extra staff but can't justify the wages instead of some of the bigger companies who can afford it.

1. doesn't apply to everyone, and still isn't enough, nor does it answer the question as to why they cant be paid properly by the employer getting the free labour.
2. its very existence negates any chance of a job being offered. It's not going to help anyone. It's just forced labour. And you'll note that it won't include high level jobs - it will simply be shelf stacking for the likes of Tesco who make billions in profit. You won't get a chance to do a workfare position in Tory HQ!
3. This is just prejudice and bigotry and as such has been reported. The people that apparently don't want to work (Daily Mail bogeymen) aren't going to change because of this. All that will happen is they willbe further alienated from society and you'll see more antioscial behaviour which will end up costing you the taxpayer even more than just paying them a few quid a week
4. that will never happen, and why should it. How is someone supposed to feel working alongside a few other employees in a closer environment when they know everyone but them is earning a wage?

Notmyrealname wrote: »

The only people doing this who would be getting paid £2.25 an hour would be a single person on JSA who lived at home with their parents rent free. Everyone else would be getting more than that because of the HB and CTB they'd be claiming.

Most HB is claimed by people in work. Like CTB it isn't paid on behalf of the claimant. CTB is for the kids and HB goes directly to the landlord.
This also assumes everyone on JSA receives either or both. I certainly don't.
If someone is receiving CTB they have childccare responsibilities, who will cover those if the parent has to go out to work 30 hours a week on the say so of the DWP? Likewise who will meet the costs of getting to that placement and providing lunch etc? It would cost me £35 out of a £65 a week JSA to travel to town to do such a job. Completely absurd.

strangeotron

an9i77 wrote: »

but if people are able to work why should they get benefits to sit on their behinds all day long.

How do you know what every JSA claimant does during the day?

Carl31 wrote: »

About time too

Ok its not ideal, but the other option is people getting paid to do nothing, sit at home unmotivated and fed up, perhaps leading to depression and further problems

which is more beneficial to everyone?

I dont think a whole working week should be forced, maybe a 3 day week

So we motivate people by forcing them into crappy dead end jobs and without a wage? How does that benefit everyone? How does it benefit you? Are you the boss of Tesco? Poundland perhaps?

pitkin2020 wrote: »

They can (IIRC) claim for travel expenses and work wear. IIRC you can claim towards travel expenses etc when going for interviews and stuff so they will help if you ask for it. Its a very valid point though.

They won't help for this. I doubt they even pay the cost of travel to interview anymore. They certainly dont' subsidise up to 6 months of expenses for slave labour, but then why should they - that's what wages are for!

pitkin2020

strangeotron wrote: »

It's slavery, plain and simple. Forced work. It's the worst of all possible worlds, as the tories want, and solely benefits big business at the expense of the taxpayer. People are just stupid; they believe this idea is great even though they are paying for it. Surely if there are jobs then why aren't they paying a wage?

Its not slavery at all so don't be so dramatic. Even if it was as you claim it to be its for people who have received over 3 years of benefits already. Even those that had only claimed JSA and nothing else would effectively be working for a lot more than NMW. I would love to get paid for 3 years and only have to work after that and still get paid for the whole time. In reality though most people who had been out of work for 3 years are likely to be in receipt of additional benefits such as council tax and housing benefit so the way rate is a lot more than others are accounting for.



Most HB is claimed by people in work. Like CTB it isn't paid on behalf of the claimant. CTB is for the kids and HB goes directly to the landlord.
This also assumes everyone on JSA receives either or both. I certainly don't.
If someone is receiving CTB they have childccare responsibilities, who will cover those if the parent has to go out to work 30 hours a week on the say so of the DWP? Likewise who will meet the costs of getting to that placement and providing lunch etc? It would cost me £35 out of a £65 a week JSA to travel to town to do such a job. Completely absurd.

Most HB is claimed by people out of work, yes a lot in work claim too but they don't claim the full rate so its far less. Once you start doing so many hours week the percentage of HB you receive drops. With the new LHA a lot of rents are far more than the allowance so people are having to top it up themselves. The LHA in my area is £115 per week (roughly £500 per month) for a 2 bed occupancy, yet 95% of the rental properties for 2 bed are £550 -£600 per month. Thats a big difference to find when on JSA.

If you are on JSA they WILL help towards costs for interviews and they will help towards paying for workwear that is REQUIRED i.e safety shoes. I am pretty sure they will help the same way towards a scheme they are proposing.

pitkin2020

strangeotron wrote: »

So we motivate people by forcing them into crappy dead end jobs and without a wage? How does that benefit everyone? How does it benefit you? Are you the boss of Tesco? Poundland perhaps?

They won't help for this. I doubt they even pay the cost of travel to interview anymore. They certainly dont' subsidise up to 6 months of expenses for slave labour, but then why should they - that's what wages are for!

So your suggestion is not to motivate people?? After 3 years without finding a job those that are serious about wanting to work will be glad for a chance and something to focus on. Those that don't want to work will hate it.

Some will decide they don't want to work in a crappy job for JSA so will actively seek better work whilst the others will do the bare minimum they have to.

They still help with cost to interviews if its NEEDED. They won't pay a taxi fare obviously. As for 6 months of travel I suspect the company would either contribute towards that or the government would IF it was required. Not everyone lives 100 miles from a town so not everyone is going to require help with travel costs.