Is it really compulsory to go on the Work Programme

LadyMissA

Parva wrote: »

I don't suppose that anyone saw 'Look North' tonight (the regional BBC news, last night now)? It featured an article on 'a4e' which highlighted the fact that they are making millions yet falling short of targets. For anyone that doesn't know 'a4e' are one of the 'Work Programme' providers. In particular the report was aimed at Sheffield where a4e were supposed to get a 34% return to work figure, they indicated that they had achieved a figure of 24% but the real figure was alleged to be 9%!

So out of 100 'clients' they managed to get 9 back into employment - and what percentage of those actually found employment under their own steam and not as a result of what a4e had done?

The government has to be seen to be doing something, we all know this. Alas, what they are actually doing is a huge failure....

there is a much easier way to do 'something' which I have been saying for ages and that's give the actual employer the incentive to take someone who is unemployed and pay them 50% of the 1st years salary once they have been there 18mths. Far cheaper than paying the providers £14k for everyone regardless of who it was who actually got the job (ie with no help from the WP).

leasky30

the government have the youth contract thing, that is coming out, which will be run by these contractors, there is the mandatory work activity scheme which the job centre uses, you may have to do work experience at one point when on the work programme, and from 2013 there is the community action programme as well

carolannie

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

One of the interesting points made on the Look North programme was that Emma Harrison had paid herself a huge bonus and was about the only person who benefitted from the scheme.
It would in my opinion be better for the Government to run community work shemes where people get NVQs and experience, working at the rate of the NMW. The cost of this would be instead of the billions pumped into the work programme.
I think it would be more honest for the Government to say that for the majority of unemployed people the situation will not change for a long time to come. Its around 1/4 - 1/3 of all adults who are of working age who are out of work which is massive amount. If you take into account 2.62 million on JSA and 9.5 million economically inactive.

:T:T:T i agree. WP providers shouldn't be making money off the back of the unemployed.

gingerandrubarb

GotToChange;50958935]Whilst it is great that you are seeing the positive side, what on Earth do you think a few weeks sorting clothes in the back room of charity shop will do to enhance her CV? (It cannot have been so bad, that this role is seen as an improvement can it?

>Well the experience my mum gained was vast. Your just looking at the type of job rather than the bigger picture. My mum had never worked so in this 'back room clothes sorting job' she gained team work and team building, organisation, time keeping, working to timescales, till work and customer service when they where busy and also design. She learned how to sew and customise items also and working with other companies locally such as rag bag companies, the local churches etc.... So for someone who had NO experience this is a lot and is skills that can be passed to another job.

Aside: It gets my goat when the assumption/generalisation is that "the unemployed" do nothing all day... Granted, it is hard to fulfill some life goals whilst unemployed and therefore broke, but no-one with half a brain does nothing with their time and it is insulting to suggest so.

Also not everyone 'assumes' that the unemployed do nothing. I am unemployed. A lot of people i know of are on benefits and like my mum relied on them rather than going to find work. Now i know that there are people who go onto benefits for a variety of reasons so you assuming that i meant everyone is wrong. Can i ask if you assumed that i was a worker because i had positive things to say and because i mentioned that some people do nothing??

dandelionclock30

Im pleased your Mum got something out of it. Did she get a job afterwards or has she gone on to do other things?

GotToChange

gingerandrubarb wrote: »

GotToChange;50958935]Whilst it is great that you are seeing the positive side, what on Earth do you think a few weeks sorting clothes in the back room of charity shop will do to enhance her CV? (It cannot have been so bad, that this role is seen as an improvement can it?

>Well the experience my mum gained was vast. Your just looking at the type of job rather than the bigger picture. My mum had never worked so in this 'back room clothes sorting job' she gained team work and team building, organisation, time keeping, working to timescales, till work and customer service when they where busy and also design. She learned how to sew and customise items also and working with other companies locally such as rag bag companies, the local churches etc.... So for someone who had NO experience this is a lot and is skills that can be passed to another job.

Aside: It gets my goat when the assumption/generalisation is that "the unemployed" do nothing all day... Granted, it is hard to fulfill some life goals whilst unemployed and therefore broke, but no-one with half a brain does nothing with their time and it is insulting to suggest so.

Also not everyone 'assumes' that the unemployed do nothing. I am unemployed. A lot of people i know of are on benefits and like my mum relied on them rather than going to find work. Now i know that there are people who go onto benefits for a variety of reasons so you assuming that i meant everyone is wrong. Can i ask if you assumed that i was a worker because i had positive things to say and because i mentioned that some people do nothing??

No, I did not assume that you were working; as I have stated, I loathe assumptions altogether and specifically those which seem to encompass "the unemployed" - that is why I started my comment about this with "Aside:" as I was not feeling inclined to start a fresh comment, maybe I should have done as I was trying to ensure that you could see that that part of what I was saying (in a reaction to the prevailing mindset towards people who are not working....) was not a reply to you specifically (so, failed), although I stand by what I said about the "work experience" in a charity shop - a big p--- take in my opinion.

Edited to add:
OK, I have just re-read your post - and you stated that your Mum's job was "three days a week sorting clothes in the back"; my response was to that description of the "work". Now you are saying that she learnt a broad range of skills which encompass far more than sorting through second-hand clothes... which of course may give her some skills to transfer to another job - possibly in another charity shop?

And, whilst you didn't say outright that "the unemployed" do nothing, you did apply an insulting description to those who may not be working and it matters little that you fall into that category yourself, in fact is somehow worse...

I too don't work - I refuse to label myself by that generic description, "the unemployed" (even though I of course am) - but I do far from nothing, I just don't earn any money - and I refuse to work for no pay.

I have two horses to care for, I execrcise like a madwoman, I sew, paint, sing, play piano, write, study the stars and planets, nature and the environment. I am halfway through Diploma of Higher Education with the OU and also am an archer, runner and javelin thrower. Unemployed DOES NOT mean inactive/"doing !!!! all to find work" (to quote you). But I equally know that I am WASTED, as I have intelligence and a range of skills that are not being fully utilised. My main ssues are my age and the area I live in/close to.

gingerandrubarb

GotToChange wrote: »

No, I did not assume that you were working; as I have stated, I loathe assumptions altogether and specifically those which seem to encompass "the unemployed" - that is why I started my comment about this with "Aside:" as I was not feeling inclined to start a fresh comment, maybe I should have done as I was trying to ensure that you could see that that part of what I was saying (in a reaction to the prevailing mindset towards people who are not working....) was not a reply to you specifically (so, failed), although I stand by what I said about the "work experience" in a charity shop - a big p--- take in my opinion.

Edited to add:
OK, I have just re-read your post - and you stated that your Mum's job was "three days a week sorting clothes in the back"; my response was to that description of the "work". Now you are saying that she learnt a broad range of skills which encompass far more than sorting through second-hand clothes... which of course may give her some skills to transfer to another job - possibly in another charity shop?

And, whilst you didn't say outright that "the unemployed" do nothing, you did apply an insulting description to those who may not be working
>Well not really as i told you that was said with regards to SOME people i know and those who do not try. Any experience is beneficial whether it is paid or unpaid. and it matters little that you fall into that category yourself, in fact is somehow worse... Not really because i never said that i too do not try to find work!

I too don't work - I refuse to label myself by that generic description, "the unemployed" (even though I of course am) - but I do far from nothing, I just don't earn any money - and I refuse to work for no pay.- This is your opinion, you do not see me bashing your choices. But with regards to the benefits agency you MUST be available to work in order to get benefits. This includes any work paid or unpaid and going to every interview. This is the benefits rules not mine.

I have two horses to care for, I execrcise like a madwoman, I sew, paint, sing, play piano, write, study the stars and planets, nature and the environment. I am halfway through Diploma of Higher Education with the OU and also am an archer, runner and javelin thrower. Unemployed DOES NOT mean inactive/"doing !!!! all to find work" (to quote you). But I equally know that I am WASTED, as I have intelligence and a range of skills that are not being fully utilised. My main ssues are my age and the area I live in/close to.


> Again i stated that not everyone fits that image, Just because i said does not mean that i feel everyone likes to get free money without putting in effort. As i mentioned some people claim benefits (people i know off and have heard off) but do not continue to work as they think why should they when they get money for not doing anything.

>I do not work but I too! am very busy. I am currently doing an honours degree with the OU as well as evening classes in jewellery and glass design. I am look after my 3 children while battling a couple of serious chronic conditions. You have taken parts of my comments and applied them to your situation and your situation only.
This frustrates me when people assume things also such as your assumption that i think all unemployed don't bother. I know for a fact that i do bother and i try to put in everything i can to find work. Any unpaid work i see as experience and gaining a new perspective. That also includes the voluntary work i do for nothing!

Also my mums skills that she gained for her 3 days work can be transferred into MOST jobs. These skills are the basis for most careers whether they are big or small. Timekeeping, organisation, customer service and working alone and as a part of a team are what most employers look for. Just because it was a charity shop does not de-value the skills she learnt. After all it was a shop and in the retail sector and we all have to start somewhere.

Please note that anything i write is not aimed at you and you alone. I haven't said anything bad or said anything nasty so before you go bashing my mums work experience please consider and respect others including their opinion of work and what is or isn't beneficial. You don't see me saying anything untoward towards your life choices so please don't do so for my family.

GotToChange

My initial comments were my opinion about what I see to be the true value of work experience such as that which you originally posted as that being gained by your mother. I stand by it.

I did not aim my comments re. generalisation of "the unemployed" at you - it was an aside, as I have already said. I did not perceive what you said to be aimed at me, or indeed that you in particular were having a go at people (apart from those who "do **** all..."), thus - again - my comment was made as an aside. I should have separated it out from the comment to you regarding "work experience" in a charity shop. Simply put, your mother should have been paid - in my opinion.

I am not going round in this loop with you - I didn't see what you said as any kind of assumption about me or my situation and beyond your mother being taken advantage of, I have no feelings one way or the other about what she does or you do in lieu of paid employment - I do feel strongly though about unpaid labour (and I [sadly] know all the rules - there really is no need to explain them to me), be it in the disguise of "work experience", "training", "internships" or lending a hand to the voluntary sector (and yes, I did it for four years...).

Call me cynical, world-weary or bitter - it doesn't matter; I just found it odd that you - originally - posted to say how wonderful the three-day (/week?) unpaid work experience (in a back room) had been for your mum. If you have time, check out the Guardian video of a young lad who is trapped in the Work Programme; he sounds brainwashed. I will let you make your own comparison/conclusion.

Have a good day/evening...

red_devil

Does anyone know anything about a City and Guilds Course for people interested in the Care industry? When courses are not mandatory do you go?

Fluffs123

Notmyrealname wrote: »

According to stats there's a 20% success rate so why wouldn't you want to be on it?

walofs make that 3.5% :rotfl:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20499836