Likely outcome of refusal to supply cv to working links

bigadaj

I was not implying anything in particular, just stating a fact, in my opinion your friend should be making every effort to take any reasonable jobs, and stop whinging about a perceived threat to his human rights.

Chrissiew

I dont think anyone can give a true answer to the original question because it seems no one has been through it, so the only real answer to the question is if hes willing to take the risk then just try it and see what happens.

Emmzi

FOX HOUND, you seem to already have all the answers to everything so I have no idea why you are posting except for some light trolling fun.

If there is anything you *actually* want advice on, please tell us what, and state your current understanding of the position.

exprog

bullbar wrote: »

Errr wasn't that what happened with the old IB system? Did it not become abused?

Not really.

The real problem with sickness benefits was that guilty politicians and civil servants wanted to hide the inevitable consequences of their lunatic economy-wrecking policies.

So they spent decades encouraging as many unemployed claimants as possible onto sickness benefits so they wouldn't feature in the unemployment statistics.

Only when imbeciliic business and banker types completed their wrecking of the global economy did the misruling liblabcons intensify their diversionary attacks upon the victims.

bullbar wrote: »

Need I say anymore?

Any chance?

Morlock

bullbar wrote: »

What is it? 71% of those who have or who are producing MED3's are found fit for work, now or in the short term?

With around 40% of those decisions being overturned on appeal.

rogerblack

bullbar wrote: »

as they have made out and 2 out of 10 are downright fraudsters claiming that they are too sick to work when in fact there is nothing wrong with them!

Legislative changes happen.
For example, prior to March 28 2011, you could get ESA if you were in a wheelchair, and could wheel it over 200m repeatedly.

Prior to this January sometime, people who were 'just' blind were not automatically entitled to ESA. (if they can't read braille)

The guidelines changing do not mean people are 'trying it on'.

The figure of claimants who do not succeed in going on to ESA - is misleading to a large degree.
For example, it omits everyone who claims ESA for a short-term illness, and lumps them in with those who are 'trying it on'.

Then there are the issues that people do not understand the ESA criteria, and these are manifestly unfair and lead to perverse results.

Consider three people.
John has an epileptic fit every 5 days or so, but is otherwise fit and well-educated.

Mary has injured herself playing sports, and can't lift her arms as if to put something into a shirt pocket. (but can type, and use her arms freely otherwise)

Donald uses a wheelchair, and can't walk, he can slowly wheel himself over 200m. He can only work for 90 minutes at a time before becoming utterly exhausted. He has difficulty conveying or understanding more than simple messages from strangers. Once every couple of months has a sudden accident where he loses control of his bowels. Can barely operate a washing machine. Several hours a day he can't cope with trying to talk to new people.

Which one is in which group?
One gets no points and is completely fit for work, one gets put in the support group and is not expected to work, one is expected to perform 'work related activity'.

Most employers would disagree.

Expecting people to be able to fully understand the criteria for benefit is a nonsense given the brief descriptions of the benefits given out by the DWP.
This leads to many claims that will not succeed due to the DWPs not informing people of the criteria.

wouldbeqaulitymoneysaver

You can be looking for work as JSA conditions state but NOT sign the Data Protection Waiver.

wouldbeqaulitymoneysaver

and taking yourself along to Work Programme etc.
I would sign up at Benefits and Work for advice, also CAB for a more unbiased opinion then lurk here for answers.

BurnleyBob

The 'beef' appears to me, and I imagine anyone else with the ability to read simple English and who possess two or more functioning brain cells, is that he doesn't want his personal information shared with anyone that Working Links arbitrarily decides to.

He would prefer Working Links to furnish him with details of available job opportunities that they, having read his CV, believe are commensurate with his skills and circumstances - then he would choose whether to apply for them and he would decide what personal information to disclose.

rogerblack

bullbar wrote: »

All I'm saying is that that 22% would have been quite happy drawing their £100 a week IB year in, year out with not a thought about informing the DWP that their health had improved and that they were more able to get back into the workplace!

This is a lie.

The conditions of entitlement for IB, and ESA differ.
You can be entitled to IB, and not to ESA, on the same condition.

You are not required to inform the DWP if there has been no change in your condition, but your entitlement may alter due to legislative changes.

People do not magically get fitter when moved to ESA, the goalposts move.