Labour To Bring In Proper Paid Guaranteed Jobs For Jobless Long Termers

Generali

TBH I think it's a good idea. What I don't understand is why this is slavery when the Tories do it but ok for Labour.

DecentLivingWage

What were Labour doing? errr... all the productive measures the Cons scrapped (such as the Future Jobs Fund)

SingleSue

Gentile wrote: »

What about single mums sitting at home and popping one out every year ? No schemes for them to do some work ?

Not all single mums are popping babies out every year.....and they are not all just sitting on their bums (yes, even those reliant on benefits).

SingleSue

In theory, it is actually not a bad idea....at least there would be a feeling of being paid a 'fair' wage for doing the work, even if in essence, financially, it would be not too much different to the current scheme (taking into account LHA/CTB/JSA etc) where you appear to being paid nothing for doing something.

In practice though, you will always get an employer or two (or more!) who would take the pee and see it as an opportunity to make money.

ntb1

As an employer I wouldn't touch any of these schemes with a barge pole.

I'd be employing the unskilled immigrants rather than a lazy sod who wants it all on a plate.

Labour spent years destroying this country and just !!!!ing our taxes up the wall. For me and my business the current coalition government is doing no harm.

When it comes to employing staff I actively avoid the jobcentreplus and nearly all come from personnel reccomandations.

DecentLivingWage

ntb1 wrote: »

As an employer I wouldn't touch any of these schemes with a barge pole.

I'd be employing the unskilled immigrants rather than a lazy sod who wants it all on a plate.

Labour spent years destroying this country and just !!!!ing our taxes up the wall. For me and my business the current coalition government is doing no harm.

When it comes to employing staff I actively avoid the jobcentreplus and nearly all come from personnel reccomandations.

Maybe you are a little outdated? A large percentage of honest WorkSeekers are now graduates, mum returners, dads who have worked hard all their lives and have now been laid off through no fault of their own but through Cons blunders that now even the IMF say are wrong. These WorkSeekers will be very hurt to hear to hear you insulting them - badly done, badly done Even Ukip wouldnt have said that!

A._Badger

DecentLivingWage wrote: »

Maybe you are a little outdated? A large percentage of honest WorkSeekers are not graduates, mum returners, dads who have worked hard all their lives and have now been laid off through no fault of their own but through Cons blunders that now even the IMF say are wrong. These WorkSeekers will be very hurt to hear to hear you insulting them - badly done, badly done Even Ukip wouldnt have said that!

Probably not - if only because UKIP members are likely to be grown-ups who realise that governments cannot create jobs. All they can do is create the conditions in which jobs can grow.

This, of course is quite beyond infantilised Labour supporters, who still worship at the imaginary money tree.

DecentLivingWage

A._Badger wrote: »

Probably not - if only because UKIP members are likely to be grown-ups who realise that governments cannot create jobs. All they can do is create the conditions in which jobs can grow.

This, of course is quite beyond infantilised Labour supporters, who still worship at the imaginary money tree.

I am genuinely and humbly surprised at the number of experts and pundits from BOTH sides who have hailed Labour's plan as a great idea - thanks Righties , credit where it's due for having the good grace to applaud it.:)

PS I can link to them,quote them if you want?

Graham_Devon

After reading some other threads on this, I have to say, I'm genuinely perplexed and genuinely amused!

Y'see, what labour are proposing will bring self esteem to those out of work for longer than 2 years, it will help them better themselves and join back into society. Yet when the coalition bought the same principle in, it was claimed it was slavery and intimidating.

So wheres the difference? Howcome labours "go on the placement we offer or you will lose your benefits" isn't intimidating and slavery when the colaitions "work on the placement we offer or you will lose your benefits" is.

Well, it all appears it's about thw wording. Labour word the placement as a "job". The colaition worded the placement as what it is, a "placement". Either way, both were temporary, but as labour are stating a "job" it's ok, and suddenly offers self esteem and opportunity to the individual.

But some can still be caught out, suggesting the coalition scheme was slavery and this is opportunity. So, what to do then? Well....again, labour can't lose according to some. Labour are more compassionate and haveb't actually pledged this scheme, therefore, they won't actually do it, whereas the coalition would. Therefore, labour trumph again. Bizarely, they triumph merely because they have suggested something even they won't do. So labour win the moral high ground again.

Utterly bizzare. It's all stemmed down to labour suggesting it's a "job". Not a temporary placement. That play on words has won the day and labour win again. The fact they won't even implement it themselves appears to pass their apologists by!

Moby

DecentLivingWage wrote: »

Labour is planning to roll out a raft of measures to ensure long term unemployed work seekers are offered a proper Paid job for an initial six months. These new workers will be paid at the Minimum Wage, not suffering the demeaning,humiliating,low self-esteem causing 'jobs' which the coalition have been trying to offer for benefits. Labour are saying that anyone who fails to take up this great opportunity without serious good reason (eg genuine disability) will face losing benefits.

Hopefully this will raise optimism in the economy as workers start to invest in the homes and futures and at last boost growth! Under the present coalition, the deficit is rising ever-upwards as the economy sinks. (Frightened Broke Voters Dont Spend.) If it worked in the US, well it seems Obama Right,Osborne Wrong?

Heres the details of Labours Guaranteed Jobs For Minimum Wage to bring hope for anyone out there who I know is genuinely desperate for work - despite the sneers of the Cons coalition we have for the moment :

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jan/04/ed-balls-welfare-work-scheme

I think its good news. Something positive for once. I don't like the threat to withdraw benefit attached to it though. Time and time again Govmts/politicians generally think they can be punitive to look good to the tax payer without there being any blow back. There is always blow back. You make a chav benefit scrounger suffer and their kids will pay society back time and time again through crime, anti social behaviour etc ...In my job I see it every day....but people don't think of that ...they just see the headline policy...apparently protecting the interests of the hard pressed tax payer...but people need to think a bit more long term!