Labour's "Job Guarantee"

tomterm8

The_White_Horse wrote: »

what about their "human rights innit"? how can they be forced to do slave labour?

No one would be forced to do anything. Everyone could choose to accept the job or not. If you don't take the job you don't get state money. But you might choose to insure or self-insure (by saving) against unemployment.

Grizzly, we already have a huge supervisory infrustructure managing the current system. Our current system seems much more wasteful.

Graham_Devon

I don't know how this may work.

But I do know how it shouldn't work, as labour have told me on many occasions when opposing the coalition trying to do the same thing.

So inessense, whatever their plan is, it shouldn't, by their own standards involve the following:

A) Inventing a job which could have otherwise been done by someone not on welfare. So what's basically being said here is the job created should not be a job that could have been fulfilled in another manner.

Should not act as a punishment. Therefore, any jobs such as litter picking etc that may be used as community service type jobs should not be used.

C) Should not be to the benefit of the employer. I.e. should not be cheap labour for Poundland, Tesco etc.

So I guess it must be something else considering they have complained bitterly of the above.... god knows what that could be though.

grizzly1911

tomterm8 wrote: »

No one would be forced to do anything. Everyone could choose to accept the job or not. If you don't take the job you don't get state money. But you might choose to insure or self-insure (by saving) against unemployment.

Grizzly, we already have a huge supervisory infrustructure managing the current system. Our current system seems much more wasteful.

That system won't go away do you think you will be able to trust the hardcore? Do you think they will actually contribute or just play the system.

If they don't play ball what are you going to do with them then? They won't just dissapear.

tomterm8

All systems have !!!!!!!!!!s, just the nature of life. If we build a system which actually helps the 90% of people who want a job to get a job we will have a vastly better system than the one we have now.

Edit: hm, filter system is a bit zealous. F r e e l o a d e r s, nothing rude about that.

Out,_Vile_Jelly

N1AK wrote: »

JSA over 25 is £71.70. The current minimum wage is £6.19. So you could 'guarantee' 12 hours work for the equivalent of £74.28 instead of JSA for people who had been unemployed for over 12/15/18/whatever months. The work could be:

• 4 hours in a school on 3 days helping with cleaning, setting up rooms etc
• 6 hours on 2 days working in a library
• 6 hours on 2 days cleaning streets
• 6 hours on 2 days doing data entry for councils

The hours could be increased (perhaps capped at 24 hours) for people with larger benefit allowances (housing, child etc). They could be offered places on training, apprenticeships etc which count as 1/2 an hours work; this is not below NMW pay because you're giving them an allowance to get educated/trained not employing them.

Interesting ideas. Do you think these are jobs that are currently not being done properly, or that lend themselves to having someone tagging alongside an existing worker?

I once got talked into having a colleague's teenager foisted on me for a couple of weeks in the holidays to earn money "helping in the office." It ended up being a tedious waste of my time as I had to constantly think up tasks, explain how to do everything, supervise, check and in the end redo a lot of stuff. Never again.

antrobus

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

I heard Ed Balls on the radio talking about this on Saturday morning, and Harriet Harman mentioned it on Marr yesterday.

The details are here -
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/69052/ed_balls_britain_needs_real_welfare_reform_that_is_tough_fair_and_that_works.html

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

.. Balls said something like "a guaranteed job or you lose your benefits- now that's welfare reform!".

That's correct. It's a "compulsory Jobs Guarantee for the long-term unemployed".

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

...Leaving party politics aside, can someone explain to me exactly how a gorvenment can "guarantee" a job...Does anyone know how this could possibly be implemented?

That's easy. Government will be"working with the private and voluntary sectors to ensure there is a job paying the minimum wage for every long-term unemployed person".

antrobus

PaulF81 wrote: »

Isn't this no different welfare to work which Labour were slamming 12 months ago?

You don't understand. If the Conservatives propose making it compulsory for people to carry out some kind of work in order to receive benefits, then that's workfare, a denial of human rights etc, and a truly evil act that must be fought. If the Labour propose a jobs guarantee that just happens to be compulsory then that is One Nation politics at its finest.

PaulF81 wrote: »

Idiots.

It's called triangulation. New Labour habits die hard.

Graham_Devon

antrobus wrote: »

The details are here -
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/69052/ed_balls_britain_needs_real_welfare_reform_that_is_tough_fair_and_that_works.html

So they are taking the slave labour route then?

grizzly1911

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So they are taking the slave labour route then?

If private and publi institutions are going to be forced to carry extra workers it will depress the wages of those not on the scheme too.

tomterm8

Antrobus, I don't think the conservative party policy is fair or effective: it is not fair because they ask people to work full time for wages equivalent to 12 hours a week at minimum wage; it is not effective because people who go on these programs simply are not more likely to get permanent jobs than those who do not. Or at least that is what the governments own figures suggest.