Sanctions

anonymousx3

skintmacflint wrote: »

Not sure what you mean about people needing time to adjust and learn new demands. Is turning up or being on time for an appointment at the Job Centre a new demand?

Well, it certainly is quite a different routine for some and quite possibly for some working people too. However, what I was referring to was with regards to mandatory work placements and increasingly demanding job searches (i.e. implicitly requesting that the claimant search other counties and possibly be willing to migrate to them to fulfill their life of work). You must at least admit that the threat of sanction for being late to an appointment is over-the-top. For most, their JSA is the only means for their survival.

Oh, and not to mention the disabled claimants who are now being shifted onto ESA work-related activity groups: they are much more likely to require the time to adjust to these demands that they haven't had to face before.

princessdon

anonymousx3 wrote: »

Well, it certainly is quite a different routine for some and quite possibly for some working people too. However, what I was referring to was with regards to mandatory work placements and increasingly demanding job searches (i.e. implicitly requesting that the claimant search other counties and possibly be willing to migrate to them to fulfill their life of work). You must at least admit that the threat of sanction for being late to an appointment is over-the-top. For most, their JSA is the only means for their survival.

Oh, and not to mention the disabled claimants who are now being shifted onto ESA work-related activity groups: they are much more likely to require the time to adjust to these demands that they haven't had to face before.

Why, my OH took a job in London to provide for us. I'd rather have him home but until a job exists he does what is needed. People need to widen their horizons, people have been on long term benefits for years, if no jobs then they surely need to widen their search?

skintmacflint

anonymousx3 wrote: »

You must at least admit that the threat of sanction for being late to an appointment is over-the-top. For most, their JSA is the only means for their survival.
.

Some of us are of an age to be 1 generation away from the 30's when there were none of these 50 odd welfare benefits available and absolutely no work to be found either.

So I don't think it's over the top. There's a big bad competetive work world out there now and if people can't turn up on time once a week or fortnight when asked despite knowing they'll be sanctioned then they can't need their JSA to survive.

If someone is sanctioned just to make up weekly numbers, that's a totally different matter.

skintmacflint

anonymousx3 wrote: »

That is not irrelevant. It is an example of how government's attempt to stretch its population of a poor as far as possible before the poor demand more from the government themselves. Government's want as much as they can and to get away with that as best as they can also. With these fools fighting each other over whether one must work to survive, the government would soon have a bunch of workhouses (e.g. Foxconn factories) setup here for them to live in. I was merely suggesting what it may become if government has its way with the poor.

Government doesn't control private industry. The private global cartels do. We'll only end up with no welfare if there isn't enough tax revenue to support it which is why they're making cuts. The welfare and public spending we've had over the past decade has been considerably more than we could afford as a nation. Get used to having less, as all of us are having to do in work or not. it.

But if it should ever come to that situation due to market forces , I'm sure the Chinese people who've endured hard working conditions producing all the cheap imports you've probably bought won't loose any sleep if and when the positions are reversed.

seven-day-weekend

skintmacflint wrote: »

Some of us are of an age to be 1 generation away from the 30's when there were none of these 50 odd welfare benefits available and absolutely no work to be found either.

So I don't think it's over the top. There's a big bad competetive work world out there now and if people can't turn up on time once a week or fortnight when asked despite knowing they'll be sanctioned then they can't need their JSA to survive.

If someone is sanctioned just to make up weekly numbers, that's a totally different matter.

....then they don't stand much chance in the workplace either. They will just be seen as not being able to get to work on time.

anonymousx3

princessdon wrote: »

Why, my OH took a job in London to provide for us. I'd rather have him home but until a job exists he does what is needed. People need to widen their horizons, people have been on long term benefits for years, if no jobs then they surely need to widen their search?

If that is indeed true, then why does the JCP not at least properly correspond clients with the jobs? I mean, shouldn't it at least try to learn what jobs are actually suitable for clients (i.e. whether they are over-qualified for some, under-qualified, etc). They are after all, a job center, so perhaps they should start acting like one. Oh, not to mention however that perhaps there aren't enough jobs that can be divided into the entire population, i.e. while there may perhaps be a number corresponding to the size of that population, not all members of the population will coincide with that population of jobs. So you will definitely have periods of unemployment. If the economy wants new jobs to be taken, then shouldn't the DWP then refer the clients to courses that will enable them to successfully apply for these jobs?

I mean, what else do you want these people to do? Work for no pay and be grateful for the pittance they receive whilst on workfare schemes?

anonymousx3

skintmacflint wrote: »

Some of us are of an age to be 1 generation away from the 30's when there were none of these 50 odd welfare benefits available and absolutely no work to be found either.

So I don't think it's over the top. There's a big bad competetive work world out there now and if people can't turn up on time once a week or fortnight when asked despite knowing they'll be sanctioned then they can't need their JSA to survive.

If someone is sanctioned just to make up weekly numbers, that's a totally different matter.

If those people are unable to fulfill those criteria set out by the JCP and its work programmes, then they are clearly unfit for work. What else are they supposed to do? This will invariably result in sick and disabled being coerced into work programmes who are not fit for them, who are inevitably sanctioned and who end up homeless and starving on the streets.

It is certainly a big bad competitive work world and I do agree with you here. However, it cannot be eluded that there billions sitting with the wealthy that can quite easily pay for austerity costs without the poor having to face abject poverty. Shouldn't it be them that face increased taxes and the poor not facing sanctions?

anonymousx3

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

....then they don't stand much chance in the workplace either. They will just be seen as not being able to get to work on time.

So, let us get these straight: if some individuals cannot cope with managing time properly, they should be sanctioned of their benefits (which can be extended to three years for a third "offence"), have no access to hardship payments, possibly no access to housing/council tax benefit and thus be punished with abject poverty? Why don't you just admit that you think they should be executed for not properly complying with state demands? Plenty of these people have no other alternative aside from committing to crime, and that isn't even a choice for some of them either (i.e. not all may be capable of such). So left with no other option to enable survive, they die -- this is what I'm getting from you people here. Why is it that some of you believe that this is rightly so?

seven-day-weekend

Because if they are fit to work they should also be able to get there on time. If they cannot manage their time properly to the extent that they can't keep appointments with the Jobcentre, how are they supposed tlo manage in the workplace? Clearly if they are this bad at managing toime, then they are NOT fit for work and should be claiming some other Benefit and not Jobseekers' Allowance.


If they are not ill or disabled, they should get their act together and get out of bed on time, unless they want a sanction.

anonymousx3

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

If they are not ill or disabled, they should get their act together and get out of bed on time, unless they want a sanction.

What if they simply can't, even if they want to? Should they be eligible for nothing, for their sole inability to meet the demands of work? What if they can do some work but can't do work to what is a modernly accepted standard, are not accepted as being sick/disabled but just simply can't do it?

I find this to be quite paradoxical because this would be the case for a sick/disabled person, so shouldn't that individual be regarded in that group? They're fit for work if they are able to do the work, i.e. if they themselves prove themselves to be fit.

Otherwise they are not fit. If they cannot cope with the demands of 40 hours a week on workfare with the threat of sanctions, then wouldn't that mean that they are not fit for work?

I mean, how are you to know whether they are deciding not to work to stay on benefits or are genuinely unable to meet the criteria of work demands? Both claims are equally subjective (apart from the explicit sick/disabled supported by health care providers and documentations), and there quite literally no way to determine if they are trying to avoid work intentionally.