Is it really compulsory to go on the Work Programme

falko89

GotToChange wrote: »

It is hard to see quite how the WP deliverers are meant to be able to "find" work where none exists - or where such as does actually exist is available in the public domain.
I see that they try to justify their existence by offering "support" in breaking down personal "barriers" to employment for some people - i.e. shifting the blame to the individual and yet, paradoxically, also attempting to raise self-confidence (?). But the main hurdle to "overcome" is lack of genuine opportunities across the board.
Anything that the provider may offer is patronising bull----, designed to provide employment for themselves but that's all they can realistically hope for.



(Excuse my abundance of "s ... the subject matter seems to warrant their use )

What it does do is actually stop the creation of jobs, Why employ someone when you can get them for free on the work programme.

GotToChange

falko89 wrote: »

What it does do is actually stop the creation of jobs, Why employ someone when you can get them for free on the work programme.

Yes - agreed; but I am meaning the actual "Work Programme" as opposed to the work experience that these providers may assign people to - I fully agree with your point though.
And, as per my post yesterday, this is now spreading like the evil red weed (War of the Worlds anyone?) with "employers" now posting positions via the DWP "job"search website, which offer NIL or BENEFITS as a "wage". Seriously - what is going on here???!!!!!!!!!!!!

It sucks to the highest level!

falko89

GotToChange wrote: »

Yes - agreed; but I am meaning the actual "Work Programme" as opposed to the work experience that these providers may assign people to - I fully agree with your point though.
And, as per my post yesterday, this is now spreading like the evil red weed (War of the Worlds anyone?) with "employers" now posting positions via the DWP "job"search website, which offer NIL or BENEFITS as a "wage". Seriously - what is going on here???!!!!!!!!!!!!

It sucks to the highest level!

Yes I have noticed this myself, and the sad thing is they are basic jobs I wouldn't mind doing and would apply for it they paid a wage. The basic paying jobs are disappearing and being replaced by these. Now we are left with jobs for nurses, care assistants etc jobs for people with experience, its shafts a large section of society.

saintjammyswine

And yet some employers (large national) are using this as an addition to their recruitment process. Where there are vacancies, they are using this to provide work experience (usually 2 weeks) and then recruit from the cohort. About 75% of work experience attendees get a job or apprenticeship from this scheme. Not always the horror stories we hear!!

GotToChange

saintjammyswine wrote: »

And yet some employers (large national) are using this as an addition to their recruitment process. Where there are vacancies, they are using this to provide work experience (usually 2 weeks) and then recruit from the cohort. About 75% of work experience attendees get a job or apprenticeship from this scheme. Not always the horror stories we hear!!

Really?
Two weeks work experience in this case sounds like a two-week long interview to me.
Only one step up from the unpaid scenarios we are talking about....
Work experience does not replace a job with requisite training - and, let's face it, most jobs require some kind of training/getting up to speed.

saintjammyswine

GotToChange wrote: »

Really?
Two weeks work experience in this case sounds like a two-week long interview to me.
Only one step up from the unpaid scenarios we are talking about....
Work experience does not replace a job with requisite training - and, let's face it, most jobs require some kind of training/getting up to speed.

Some people will find the negative in anything!
Yes, in effect it is a two week interview for people who, in many cases, would not get the opportunity without this scheme because of background (many aspects), experience or qualifications.
Not sure about your last comment though. It is 2 weeks work experience which, in 75% of cases to date, leads to permanent, full-time employment or an apprenticeship.

GotToChange

In case you hadn't noticed, the whole employment situation is pretty "negative" (see my signature for my take on things in general - brought on by circumstance, not my nature).
As for your statistics, provide reports and I may believe it - and I maintain that a two-week interview is taking the p---- and is insulting to potential employees.

bargainbetty

My flatmate recently completed his two-week placement/work experience/extended interview last Friday. He starts with the company as a trainee next Monday, having passed a HSE training course and two other exams to demonstrate mental and practical aptitude for the role. The two weeks included lots of training and information about the organisation and it's work, plus practical on-site work for experience.

The company take pains to recruit from the unemployed workforce, using the job centre assessment days as a method of doing 40 interviews in a day and selecting the best half a dozen for futher assessment/training. They want to get people off the dole rather than nicking other company's people, and prefer to train people from scratch.

Saintjimmy is right, it's not all horror stories. Doesn't make such good headlines though - Job Centre Work Placement Scheme Helps Person Get Job! Far better to focus on the other stuff and get the Daily mail all frisky.

GotToChange

This is pretty much the same as people saying "my aunt smoked and lived to 120!" - when the many thousands who are killed by smoking go unremarked upon.

The reason your above headline would not be used is how rare an occurrence that may be - noting use of singular "person".....and is unrealistic in representing a trend.

ETA:
Question - was your flatmate paid - the going rate for the job - during this two-week period?
If so - then good, as it should be: If not - why not?

saintjammyswine

GotToChange wrote: »

In case you hadn't noticed, the whole employment situation is pretty "negative" (see my signature for my take on things in general - brought on by circumstance, not my nature).
As for your statistics, provide reports and I may believe it - and I maintain that a two-week interview is taking the p---- and is insulting to potential employees.

Barratt David Wilson Homes Southern Division are one of the companies. The last cohort had 8 complete and 6 are now employed. One example of someone for whom this was of benefit was a guy that had been in trouble with the law (a lot) and so didnt get many interviews and fewer jobs. He came through the training, got employabiilty skills & a CSCS card. He then went through the work experience, found a trade (groundwork) he really enjoyed. The foreman of the gang was really pleased with him and he has been taken on. His mum told him to stop wearing his hi-viz and boots when coming home etc. and he told her that he wore it to prove to everyone else on the estate he could hold down a job. Now tell me this process and a 2 week interview doesnt work and change people's lives. That 1 person makes it worth it to me.