Sanctions

Dovah_diva

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

On the surface of it it would appear to be unfair. Did you fulfill all the criteria, other than writing a date wrong? Did you explain the mistake to the advisor?

No offence meant, but I honestly do find it difficult to believe that someone would be sanctioned for four weeks JUST for making a mistake in writing down a date. Are there any other issues?

I sincerely apologise if this really is all there is to it.

I agree and if you are telling us the whole story, then I would certainly be appealing this decision.

Dunroamin

*gem* wrote: »

I have just been sanctioned for 4 weeks because I wrote down the wrong date on a work searching activity. Unfortunately for me I have had an extremely bad week dealing with my ASD son and the 20+ phone calls from the school last week regarding his behaviour, preparing for a school meeting with several officials, head of year and SENCO and just the daily issues of dealing with him, my other children and being in education has all taken its toll on me and my concentration has been affected. I have always followed my advisors advice to the letter but made a small mistake.

Does my example count as unfair, if it's not it's certainly a bit on the harsh side?

How would you have coped with all these family problems if you'd been at work?

exarmydreamer

Dunroamin wrote: »

How would you have coped with all these family problems if you'd been at work?

You manage, I have 3 boys with ADHD and ASD. At least OP is trying her hardest, was it over Easter by any chance as the job centre staff were offered Easter eggs as bonuses for sanctioning people. Plus they have to have at least a 5% sanction rate now.


Patrick Wintour, political editor
The Guardian, Friday 22 March 2013 19.50 GMT
Jump to comments (876)

Jobcentre staff have contacted the Guardian to say it is widespread practice for managers to set targets for removing benefits. Photograph: Rex Features
Labour responded to fresh evidence suggesting jobcentres around the country are being given targets to find reasons to take away jobseeker's allowance from claimants by demanding that the government speed up and widen the remit of an independent review into the regime of benefit sanctions.

Liam Byrne, shadow work and pensions secretary, said his party would table amendments in the Lords on Monday to widen the terms of the proposed inquiry if ministers did not give an undertaking "to get to the bottom of every sanction issued by a jobcentre where targets were in operation".

The shadow cabinet member was responding to an internal email from a jobcentre manager published in the Guardian this week that appeared to indicate that there were targets and league tables of sanctions being deployed in Walthamstow jobcentre. An adviser manager in the jobcentre had written: "As you can see Walthamstow are 95th in the league table out of only 109 [jobcentres in London and the Home Counties]."

Jobcentre staff have since contacted the Guardian to say that it is widespread practice for managers to set targets for removing benefits, sometimes under the guise of benchmarks or expectations for the number of sanctions levied. A separate investigation suggests there is evidence from jobcentres around the UK that pressure is being applied on staff to remove more people's benefits.

It was also reported that staff in a jobcentre in the West Midlands were this week told that the team who submitted the most Stricter Benefit Regime "Refusal of Employment" referrals would be rewarded with Easter eggs. The staff were told there was drive on this particular type of sanction.

A jobcentre source said: "This is an abhorrent trivialisation of the impact of such sanctions on the most vulnerable people in our community. We are not selling time share or insurance policies, these are people's livelihood being rewarded by confection."

Iain Duncan Smith, the work and pensions secretary, was confronted over the initial revelations in the Commons on Friday. He said: "I can absolutely commit to the fact that there are no targets for any sanctions whatsoever. To emphasise that, I should point out that the head of Jobcentre Plus has issued a reminder to everybody in the estate that there are no targets and that there will be no targets, and that anybody using those targets will be disciplined."

Pressed again, he said: "Anybody caught imposing a target will be dealt with. That is absolutely clear. That message has already gone out. It went out before on innumerable occasions."

In the same debate Stella Creasy, Labour MP for Walthamstow, urged jobcentre workers to come forward to describe the situation in their offices. She said: "The email is not the work of one over-enthusiastic member of staff. When it mentions league tables and the role of divisional managers, it is clear that this is not happening by accident.

"I trusted ministers when, on Tuesday, they claimed that there are no targets whatsoever. I now see that means that they are either simply admitting that they do not know what goes on in their own department, or that they were not giving us the full truth on Tuesday in this house.

"We need an independent review to get to the bottom of this problem, and to understand just how out of control this toxic Work Programme is."

On Thursday, the Department for Work and Pensions said it would set up an independent inquiry into the use of sanctions this week in return for Labour supporting emergency legislation deigned to clarify the right of the DWP to impose mandatory work activity.

Emergency legislation is being passed to prevent the DWP having to repay nearly £130m in benefit claims following the court of appeal's "Poundland" ruling that people had unlawfully been made to work unpaid.

In a letter to Duncan Smith on Friday, Byrne said scandals such as the one published in the Guardian were "exactly why we sought and secured independent review of the sanctions regime written in to the jobseekers' bill.

"In the light of these latest revelations, can I ask you to guarantee – today – that this independent review will get to the bottom of every sanction issued by a jobcentre where targets were in operation."

Byrne also asked why if the instruction banning targets had been sent out on innumerable occasions it was simply being ignored by managers – and if the DWP would, in the light of Duncan Smith's comments, discipline managers imposing targets and also allow staff to speak up about the imposition of targets without fear of being disciplined.

Ministers have given little detail of how long the inquiry will take or its composition.

*gem*

Dunroamin wrote: »

How would you have coped with all these family problems if you'd been at work?

I would hope that I wouldn't lose 4 weeks money for writing the wrong date down as it was a genuine mistake and my employer would be able to see this.

As a single parent, I have found finding work extremely difficult. For a start no childcare provider in the area will except my son for childcare because of his disability and providing I can find work within school hours it is not a problem as a rule. Obviously I hope I would be allowed time off to attend my sons meetings with psychologists, CAMHS, school, couselling sessions etc.

I don't know if you have any experience with ASD or PDD but I have to get my son up at 5am to get him ready to leave the house at 8am in order to get the bus to school with myself and my other children. He consistantly refuses to get ready, has meltdowns, causes massive arguements that go on for days, runs away so I have to chase and attacks himself and members of the family especially myself.

I don't know what you want me to say but as you can see holding down a job would be extremely difficult to his unpredictable behaviour. I don't know what to do, I just try my best and take everyday as it comes!

*gem*

Dovah_diva wrote: »

I agree and if you are telling us the whole story, then I would certainly be appealing this decision.

That is the whole story. I did everything that is written on my agreement. I only got the letter yesterday so will go and speak to the jobcentre tomorrow.

Dunroamin

*gem* wrote: »

I would hope that I wouldn't lose 4 weeks money for writing the wrong date down as it was a genuine mistake and my employer would be able to see this.

As a single parent, I have found finding work extremely difficult. For a start no childcare provider in the area will except my son for childcare because of his disability and providing I can find work within school hours it is not a problem as a rule. Obviously I hope I would be allowed time off to attend my sons meetings with psychologists, CAMHS, school, couselling sessions etc.

I don't know if you have any experience with ASD or PDD but I have to get my son up at 5am to get him ready to leave the house at 8am in order to get the bus to school with myself and my other children. He consistantly refuses to get ready, has meltdowns, causes massive arguements that go on for days, runs away so I have to chase and attacks himself and members of the family especially myself.

I don't know what you want me to say but as you can see holding down a job would be extremely difficult to his unpredictable behaviour. I don't know what to do, I just try my best and take everyday as it comes!

You really have my sympathies with your situation but your last sentence perhaps says more about the overall reason for the sanction than just writing a date incorrectly. In the circumstances, I doubt that JSA is the correct benefit for you to be claiming.

*gem*

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

On the surface of it it would appear to be unfair. Did you fulfill all the criteria, other than writing a date wrong? Did you explain the mistake to the advisor?

No offence meant, but I honestly do find it difficult to believe that someone would be sanctioned for four weeks JUST for making a mistake in writing down a date. Are there any other issues?

I sincerely apologise if this really is all there is to it.

No issues that I know of. I have done everything that it says on my agreement so can't see what else I could have done wrong. My fault for putting the wrong date down and not double checking and triple checking.

I haven't had chance to speak to my advisor but will do.

*gem*

Dunroamin wrote: »

You really have my sympathies with your situation but your last sentence perhaps says more about the overall reason for the sanction than just writing a date incorrectly. In the circumstances, I doubt that JSA is the correct benefit for you to be claiming.

Thank you but I don't see how my life could have caused the sanction when i've done everything my agreement asks me to and I am available for work as I should be. JSA is the only benefit I am able to claim. I'm not sure what you think I should be claiming.

seven-day-weekend

If you feel you would not be able to 'hold down a job', and would need loads of time off,as you say in your post number 165, then maybe you really should not be claiming Jobseekers Allowance.

Would you be eligible for Carers' Allowance or Income Support as your son has a disability?

Dunroamin

*gem* wrote: »

Thank you but I don't see how my life could have caused the sanction when i've done everything my agreement asks me to and I am available for work as I should be. JSA is the only benefit I am able to claim. I'm not sure what you think I should be claiming.

I agree with 7DW that CA sounds a more appropriate benefit for you to claim.

I can't really see how you can be avilable for work and also say "as you can see holding down a job would be extremely difficult to his unpredictable behaviour" and I wonder whether this may be part of the cause for your sanction. I really don't think that you should expect to be able to get a job where you'd get all the time off for meetings etc as you hope.