We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
just been sanctioned, not my fault
Comments
-
If you're printing out 'matched' jobs, why would they need to use UJM at all? (unless the only way to apply is via the 'apply' button, ie no contact details for employer)
Amoungst other things, my JSAg states 'Check my UJM account for jobs - 7 times a week at least'
Because I don't allow DWP access all that means to me is I have to write 'Looked on direct.gov' each day in the little grey booklet. I will not be logging on to find 'matched' jobs put there by an advisor with the possibility of a sanction for not acting on it.
As KROK keeps stating, that was the point of this thread!
The idea was a paper saving ease for customer. instead of printing them out and then you doing hone and applying, they are saved into the basket and then you go home and apply.
To be honest if an adviser is doing jobsearch and finding jobs then it has to be asked why? If you are jobsearching correctly these jobs would have been found and applied for. JCP should only be finding jobs for people who need assistance with jobsearch.0 -
To be honest if an adviser is doing jobsearch and finding jobs then it has to be asked why?
Perhaps the converse is more accurate.
Not all individuals can engage well with authority therefore the onus should fall on the advisor to be a bit more pro-active and offer help and assistance.
Or would you rather gorge on donuts and coffee while gossiping?Don’t be a can’t, be a can.0 -
Perhaps the converse is more accurate.
Not all individuals can engage well with authority therefore the onus should fall on the advisor to be a bit more pro-active and offer help and assistance.
Or would you rather gorge on donuts and coffee while gossiping?
Why all the insults?
As I have said each adviser has over 120 people on their caseload, they cannot and should not be there to find a job for some-one, they are there to help the person to help themselves. Those who need help with jobsearch will get it, not via the JCP all the time, they will be referred to work clubs and group sessions. Asvisers cannot sit and spend time doing one to one. Those who need a C.V. will be sent some where to get one. there is no magic pot, no bottom less fund for training be realistic. That is all pretty much it!
As for coffee, yes I'm a caffeine addict. As for dounuts no, I am not some obese slob I am a gym bunny!!:D But I do love a gossip!!0 -
That is all pretty much it!
Pretty much pointless then.
If an individual needs help with a cv, why signpost them elsewhere? I am not have a go at you the individual, however the operating model of the industry needs a long hard look at.
Unless i've missed something I don't recall posting an insult at you, perhaps my skin is thicker
Don’t be a can’t, be a can.0 -
Pretty much pointless then.
If an individual needs help with a cv, why signpost them elsewhere? I am not have a go at you the individual, however the operating model of the industry needs a long hard look at.
Unless i've missed something I don't recall posting an insult at you, perhaps my skin is thicker
Why not sign post them some where else? An adviser hasn't the time to do all this for each of the customer on their caseload. I would have though it very proactive to send them somewhere. This means providers need staff which means more jobs. They have over 120 people how much time do you think they can give each one?
The industry does need a hard look at but neither you nor I can change it, universal credit is supposed to be the new hard look so lets see what happens.
As for the insult is suggesting I am a greedy scoffing donuts eating none stop talking rather than working a meant to be compliment?
Perhaps your skin is thicker.
Anyway I am off to spend time with my family in the sun making the most of life as that is what it is all about, i bid you good afternoon.0 -
An adviser hasn't the time to do all this for each of the customer on their caseload.
I didn't suggest helping all customers (nice terminology btw), simply the individuals who need a bit of support while at a low point. Are you implying all your "customers" require a degree of assistance that is impractical for you to provide?
If so, what is the reason for your existance - perhaps to apply pressure to get folks off benefits?Don’t be a can’t, be a can.0 -
The problem here is that When Jobcentres and Social Security offices were merged the government made a huge error, JobcentrePlus is neither a place where the (often poorly trained) staff think it is their job to help people find employment, as the old jobcentre did, nor do they offer the support to vulnerable people and have the understanding of the system that the Social Security offices did.I didn't suggest helping all customers (nice terminology btw), simply the individuals who need a bit of support while at a low point. Are you implying all your "customers" require a degree of assistance that is impractical for you to provide?
If so, what is the reason for your existance - perhaps to apply pressure to get folks off benefits?
The Jobcentre job was really easy and the staff had clearly defined rules that everyone could understand. The staff in Social Security offices had a far more complex system to deal with, and a duty of care that the Jobcentre did not. It is clear from some of the posters above that they should NOT be in the very important positions that they are in.
The entire system of Social Security, and to a lesser extent the jobcentres were put in place by our society to HELP people. It is not meant to be an instrument of terror, nor a instrument of control.
As for UJM, I don't know how many times the point has to be made, the OP signed up and allowed access, as many people have, the advisers have then started sending notified vacancies via the UJM account, and have scope to send other "demands" as I understand it, "alerts".
I did not allow access to my account and have NOT (up to now) received any of the stuff I have seen on other peoples accounts while discussing the system with friends at the work program place. No one has a problem with being handed a vacancy on a sheet of paper at the jobcentre, I certainly don't.
What should not be happening is JobcentrePlus trying to trick people with sneaky gimmicks like UJM or unlawful directions like the woman who was to do the bogus tests, or sent on MWA at Poundland.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/01/fake-jobseekers-questionnaire-new-nanny-state
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/30/demonise-demoralise-jobseekers-meaningless-test
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/30/universal-credit-iain-duncan-smith
I would also point out that the whole point of UJM and Universal Credit, is to render a very large number of the staff at the DWP redundant, 20 thousand jobs have already been lost and many more will go when it is fully implemented.
And the personal attack on me, I have paid into the system for more than thirty years, if I had chosen to work for the DWP I would have retired years ago!
I have also worked for years on end in the toughest and dirtiest of jobs, jobs that some people with cushy jobs at the DWP wouldn't touch with a bargepole, which is why my body is now shot.0 -
But you are not seeing it from it from our side, lets go back to the beginning.
The Op does not give the JCP access to his /her account but the job is still printed off rather than saved and issued to the customer, it is still a matched vacancy. It will still closes when it closed and the adviser will still ask for proof as to if they applied. It would still be exactly the same outcome. Either the claimant provides evidence they applied or we ask the employer to verify. How is having access to the account any different?
This is exactly the point we have been making. It really makes no difference if access is given or not. the only reason it is mandatory to register and use UJ is because the system has this 'apply ' button so you are unable to apply for those jobs any other way.
As for insults, you clearly threw them first in this thread. re -read.
As for your health concerns, yes they can be a barrier but plenty of people work with health concerns. A heart attack is no reason for the scrap heap but I feel you are putting yourself on it not me.
You are a typical arrogant bully, just the sort you find in the job centres.
I happen to have no use of my arm due to a stroke and only partial use of my leg, and i might be unemployed but i am not on the scrap heap.
I feel very sorry for you and anyone working with you.0 -
Haha this thread amuses me... So many of you THINK you know what goes on in a jobcentre. Assistant advisors, advisors or advisory team mangers do NOT sanction the customers. An advisor simply reffers to a DM who then checks if the customer has complied with their jsag if not they receive a sanction.... It's in black and white on the 1st page of their es40's. Jobseekers is what it's says it is an ALlowence to seek work.
It's simple really actively seek and be available to take up employment if not sign off!!
It's disgraceful that you are all attacking busy mom for the job she does... We enforce the rules we don't make them.
Advisors may not have the power to issue a sanction, but they are the ones that set it in motion. The decision maker at the DWP is only looking at the JSA of people who are referred to him/her by the JCP staff.0 -
LMAOIt would not surprise me if they deliberately crashed the website occasionally, in order to fulfil their own sanction figures for the day. It seems each desk at the JC has to have completed a particular number of sanctions a day, regardless of the claimants situations.BitterAndTwisted wrote: »What if they slap a notified vacancy on your profile on your signing day and you can't apply for it because it has expired by the time you get home?
/QUOTE]
You would not get a Sanction for something that was unfeasable.
No they are notAny way please let us know what happens because the DWP are throwing sanction out like confetti and forewarned is forearmed.
I would remove itiammumtoone wrote: »I think peoples concerns (mine anyway) with signing up to UJM is you can be sanction for not applying for a job that is totally unsuitable as it has just been sent to you without any discussion first. I appreciate that if you are handed a job to apply for in the JC that the same rules apply (it has always been this way) however at least in this instance you do have a chance to speak to the adviser to refuse the job explaining your reasons why and if there are valid reasons why the job is unsuitable then it can be removed?
Your lossSorry busy mom, but you are still not getting the point of this .
By unticking the box makes all the difference as you can not be sactioned for not applying to a vacancy sent to you via ujm.
If the adviser gives you a job vacancy in writing and you give permission for the employer to give information to the dwp then that is fine.
But if you dont give permission then the employer can not give any information about you. This is covered by the data protection act.
Dont give them another excuse to sanction you.
You are obviously not a Job Seeker.You're a clueless drone running an incompetent bad system which doesn't work, looking after your job, just like the JC advisor who gave the OP a job which expired the same day resulting in a sanction referral.
This jobseeker is paying for the incompetence of that JC advisor.
LMAO - have you checked an advisers salary?You might have a cushy job and be on a nice little earner, but so did the concentration camp guards.
Let's have a go at "busy mom" who is only telling it the way it is. Have a go at me???0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards