Question Time

StevieJ

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Found them.

http://www.publicinterestlawyers.co.uk/news_details.php?id=200

Pro Bono apparently.

BobQ

Generali wrote: »

No, the point was that the guidance to be given to people that are required to do some work experience should be different. That was what the court ruled.

The point of the policy is 2 fold IMHO: to make is less attractive to sit on benefits and to give people something to put on their CV so they can get a job. The latter seems to have worked in this instance as the woman got some work experience in retail and now has the start of a career in retail.

I agree this is the legal outcome and intent. When I said,,,,,

Originally Posted by BobQ
Surely the point in this case is that it was not a job. It was a placement with an employer under a programme...........

I was commenting on someone who described the placement as a job. In fact I made this mistake myself previously since I thought they were being given temporary jobs to achieve the above rather than being ordered to work for benefits.

A lot of the information of the DWP site focusses on the scheme being based on suppliers bidding for exclusive contracts in each region to sub-contract employers to offer a service intended to get people back to work. The suppliers get paid by whether the referals subsequently get a job (whether due to the scheme or not), but there appears to be no guarantees for those referred, They could be offered just work experience (as free labour) or they might get an element of training. The statistics on those who get a job are I gather not encouraging overall compared to the expectations when contracted.

BobQ

Generali wrote: »

No, the point was that the guidance to be given to people that are required to do some work experience should be different. That was what the court ruled.

.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jan/10/job-ready-claimants-priority-work

Interestingly an academic study came to the same conclusion as the judge that.......

A lot of clients were just being sent along to the work programme provider with little information about what to expect, without knowing what was compulsory and what was not.
"That creates a problem for the provider staff on day one, because they get someone in front of them who, at best, is ignorant, because they do not know what is going to happen, and, at worst, worried. Even worse, they are hostile, because they have been given no information, perhaps not full information or sometimes wrong information."

StevieJ

chewmylegoff wrote: »

The fact that the govt can't get its ducks in a row is more concerning than anything else here. I also have a problem with the role the courts have played in this. Clearly the govt intention was that people should be required to participate or lose their benefits.

A failure to implement the policy can only mean the govt is fundamentally incompetent, the courts are unfit for purpose, or most likely, both.

This has also happened with the deporting of foreign criminals, May blames the judges but Labour warned her last June that her short cutting would fail.

"It is depressing that the steps we have already taken should have been insufficient to produce that result. The inevitable delays inherent in passing primary legislation will mean that there will be many more foreign criminals who successfully avoid deportation on the basis that they have a family here.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/feb/17/theresa-may-attacks-judges-deportation
So why didn't you start the Primary legislation process last July?

Moby

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

I've said before on here; this country has an appallingly bad attitude to those in low-paid and unglamorous jobs. I have two degrees but have done plenty of low end stuff in my time; bar work, cinema usher, data entry, housekeeping (ie making beds and cleaning toilets) etc. The latter was in the US one summer when I was a student- there they really appreciate the earning of an honest dollar, an attitude we would do well to emulate.

If you've done a mucky, boring menial job I'm sure it improves your workplace skills later on; I always make eye contact and smile with cashiers, and say good morning to office cleaners. It shocks me how many people do not. I've worked with many senior people who clearly have no idea how to interact with those paid less than them.

Its because we are a class ridden society.

Generali

Moby wrote: »

Its because we are a class ridden society.

Because you choose to be. It's crazy IMHO but Brits seem to love it.

chewmylegoff

Generali wrote: »

Because you choose to be. It's crazy IMHO but Brits seem to love it.

Is it really that different elsewhere? Whilst younger countries may not have the "old money" types, wherever you go there always seems to me to be a definite gulf between e.g. The professional middle classes and blue collar types. Australia is definitely like that in my view. There are poor white, immigrant and aborigine "underclasses", a distinct blue collar working class which did not go to university, and a profesional middle class. Maybe I'm just imagining this because I am British and therefore tend to see things in the same terms as they are here.

michaels

This debate was on BBC Have Your Say following Ian Duncan-Smith's comments yesterday that there was nothing wrong with being a supermarket shelf stacker. Based on the rated HYS comments the majority of readers think there is somethign wrong with being a shelf stacker and that is is perfectly reasonable for a geology graduate to hang about in a museum all day at our expense rather than accept work experience stacking shelves.

johnny_storm

StevieJ wrote: »

Is it just me or do other people cringe when the likes of the QT panel talk about demeaning jobs in Poundland? I cannot help but think of those employees who turn up every day to do a job there just to have their efforts undermined

I dont watch lefty propaganda, but yes I would have cringed too.

Demeaning is where workers are taxed at ridiculous levels to give people like her an easy life and she effectively is a parasite. Demeaning isnt having to do a job to pay your way, whatever the job is.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

michaels wrote: »

This debate was on BBC Have Your Say following Ian Duncan-Smith's comments yesterday that there was nothing wrong with being a supermarket shelf stacker. Based on the rated HYS comments the majority of readers think there is somethign wrong with being a shelf stacker and that is is perfectly reasonable for a geology graduate to hang about in a museum all day at our expense rather than accept work experience stacking shelves.

I thought IDS was right to point out on Marr that Geology graduates shouldn't think themselves better than shelf-stackers. Incidentally, some of the brightest people I've worked with did not have degrees.