Dole Queues To Grow Fast Next Quarter As Economy Fails

DecentLivingWage

... its more the case that I cant wait for them to get better ones... and better training,real training on Work Experience and Apprenticeships - Labour are going to introduce a 6 month Job Guarantee scheme. Sadly, Cons dont now have the Maths to win and they lost their chance - it's too late. Econonmy would have needed to turn 18 months ago to work, only now are the lengthening dole queues catching up with the damage they've done.

Generali

DecentLivingWage wrote: »

... its more the case that I cant wait for them to get better ones... and better training,real training on Work Experience and Apprenticeships - Labour are going to introduce a 6 month Job Guarantee scheme. Sadly, Cons dont now have the Maths to win and they lost their chance - it's too late. Econonmy would have needed to turn 18 months ago to work, only now are the lengthening dole queues catching up with the damage they've done.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20905415

Labour has said it would offer the long-term unemployed a guarantee of a six-month job if it was in government.
Businesses would be given subsidies to hire people on a temporary basis, with those refusing a suitable job having benefits docked.
Labour said the move sent a "clear message" about its stance on welfare but admitted it could not commit to the scheme if returned to power in 2015.

Labour didn't say they would introduce this scheme, they said that the Tories should.

You really must think we're a bunch of idiots here that you can just make up any old rubbish and we'll suck it up.

michaels

woodbine wrote: »

its been suggested for sometime now that unemployment will peak later this year at around the 2.75 million mark,and then flatline for a year before any real falls are seen,after all its been above 2.5m for sometime now
the more worrying figure in some respects are the 1.5m people working part time who want/need to work fulltime,these people are adding in no small way to the welfare bill

But has the number in employment actually fallen or is it more people entering the workforce as the 'being unavailable for work' alternatives are reduced?

I seem to remember the Tories have been criticised in the past for moving people off unemployment benefits on to for example disability and now the same people are criticising them for doing the opposite. It almost seems like opportunism?

CLAPTON

michaels wrote: »

But has the number in employment actually fallen or is it more people entering the workforce as the 'being unavailable for work' alternatives are reduced?

I seem to remember the Tories have been criticised in the past for moving people off unemployment benefits on to for example disability and now the same people are criticising them for doing the opposite. It almost seems like opportunism?

it's a complicated picture unless you are DLW

but more people are in work

the number of SAHMs has decreased to an all time low for somewhat unknown reasons: they are now either in the job market or in the umemployment statistics.

Masomnia

CLAPTON wrote: »

it's a complicated picture unless you are DLW

but more people are in work

the number of SAHMs has decreased to an all time low for somewhat unknown reasons: they are now either in the job market or in the umemployment statistics.

The government cut the age your youngest child had to be for you to get income support. It was cut from something like 16 to 12, so mothers with the youngest child over 12 but under 16 were kicked off income support and onto JSA. So were previously economically inactive, and now count as either unemployed or employed.

I think employment fell by something like 2000, so meaningless with it being a survey. Over the year employment is up 488,000.

I think it's time we followed the American standard of reporting the number of jobs added in the economy, rather than unemployment, as it seems a lot less skewed by changes in benefits. Looking at employment says more about the economy than unemployment imho.

grizzly1911

How does net immigration add to the issue increasing the workforce?

We have more employable bods and hence higher unemployment at the same time as higher employment.

DecentLivingWage

So called 'new jobs' are just re-named ones (in our area govt is forcing people to resign, list themselves as self-employed or agency workers, then getting them to sign back up with new, more dodgy,contracts !!

PS it looks as though Mothercare might be next to go under... as dole queues get longer over summer with more job losses as unemployment catches up with the drop in the economy

Generali

DecentLivingWage wrote: »

So called 'new jobs' are just re-named ones (in our area govt is forcing people to resign, list themselves as self-employed or agency workers, then getting them to sign back up with new, more dodgy,contracts !!

PS it looks as though Mothercare might be next to go under... as dole queues get longer over summer with more job losses as unemployment catches up with the drop in the economy

We'll see. You've been comprehensively wrong about job losses leading to a rise in unemployment so far.

DecentLivingWage

Wrong????

Announcement on the 18th that Unemployment had officially risen by 170,000 !

Moby

DecentLivingWage wrote: »

Wrong????

Announcement on the 18th that Unemployment had officially risen by 170,000 !

Exactly! and the fact that more people are in work says little! Its whether the jobs are full-time or not...that's what counts to peoples standard of living.