Job Centre Rant

lukieboy96

with if no mobile it is expensive to phone 0845 number. I think there should be 01 number. What if no mobile and stuck in jam. Sorry but job centre need to change. Stop blaming jobless.

mollysue23

If any jobseeker disagrees with the jobseeking process then they need write to their local MP and don't shot the messengers in the Jobcentre. They are only doing what they are asked to do by their boss like the rest of the working population in the UK and what is wrong with wanting to look after your job...sounds pretty clever and clued up to me!!!

Confuseddot

Cloudydaze wrote: »

I suspect there is a strong correlation between the IQ/level of career progression of those who blindly do as they are told and those who question the rules when they make little sense.....


So why didn't you question the rules when signing the agreement ....
There is a difference between questioning the rules and failing to carry out actions you previously signed an agreement to carry out. V few employees would still be in a job if they decided not to follow the rules as they made little sense to them.

Cloudydaze

The agreement I signed says "I know I must actively seek work by doing at least 3 things a week". Pretty clear and reasonable I thought.

I went away and I arranged several meetings with recruitment agencies which has resulted in 4 job interviews. I thought I had EXCEEDED the requirement. So when my Advisor informed me that the 4 interviews only count as ONE thing because I had only contacted recruitment agencies, I began to question & posted on here to vent.

In my jobs, I've always questioned the systems and rules. It's what dynamic, forward-thinking, successful companies expect of their employees. Being proactive and improving efficiency has always been encouraged and rewarded. I appreciate this is not something that is encouraged in the public sector!!!

MissMoneypenny

fedupnow wrote: »

Why are the advisors called personal advisors if they don't offer personal advice?

And why is it called a 'Job Centre', if they don't help people find jobs?

MissMoneypenny

Cloudydaze wrote: »

I was merely commenting on the irony of the situation. Me rushing in from interview and getting warning for being late. Lady next to me rolls out of bed still wearing pyjamas but arrives on time. She got it right, I didn't.

:rotfl:oh the irony.

missapril75

Cloudydaze wrote: »

In my jobs, I've always questioned the systems and rules. ...Being proactive and improving efficiency has always been encouraged and rewarded. I appreciate this is not something that is encouraged in the public sector!!!

I've always done that too. Sadly it usually held me back as I was seen as a troublemaker or bit of a rebel.
Once upon a time, DSS was actually very active in encouraging and rewarding initiative and efficiencies.

Back in the 1970s and 80s I remember people getting a couple of thousand ££ reward for staff suggestions when I had been operating the ideas suggested for years.

It just seemed the sensible thing to do to me. So I did it.

Now you just have to do what you're told.

Or you might end up on the other side.

Still, it might make a change to be able to sit astride a high horse to sneer at and be condescending towards people actively employed.

Not including Cloudydaze in that. She has made some valid points.

osdset

The point here surely is that claiming a benefit that has been, (unless the claimant has never contributed any National Insurance) PAID FOR by the claimant by virtue of many years NI contributions, should be subject only to the claimant actively seeking work, which is why the benefit title changed from unemployment benefit ( which implies entitlement) to Job seekers allowance ( which implies handout)

JCP and some of it's more zealous staff have taken it upon themselves to add more and more layers of conditionality to claimants that have already fulfilled the regulation by demonstrating that they are actively seeking work.

No doubt the Daily Mail reading benefit bashers would like to see the job seeking unemployed wearing sack cloth and ashes and a ball and chain for having the audacity to claim what is rightfully and lawfully theirs, clapping their hands in glee at the prospect of some poor sod getting a four week sanction for turning up late to sign on.

If Universal Credit ever manages to see the light a good many JCP staff will find themselves surplus to requirement, and can look forward to be rewarded for their loyalty by joining those they sanctioned in the past.

For whatever one sows, that will he also reap.

MissMoneypenny

osdset wrote: »

If Universal Credit ever manages to see the light a good many JCP staff will find themselves surplus to requirement, and can look forward to be rewarded for their loyalty by joining those they sanctioned in the past.

That's what's worrying my friend; if her daughter loses her job at the job centre. Nice girl, but she struggled to get a job when she left school; even Poundland wouldn't employ her.

missapril75

osdset wrote: »

JCP and some of it's more zealous staff have taken it upon themselves to add more and more layers of conditionality

Nothing to do with legislation then, just staff suddenly wielding power on a whim.

It's interesting that over many years, with so many different benefit systems, we hear so often that the number of appeals overturning a decision regarding disability or 'sickness' type benefits is 'evidence' of wrong decisions, yet I can't recall anything similar regarding the disallowances and sanctions over the same period in the various 'unemployment' type benefit systems.

There have been a few scandals for things like work programs and A4e and the various other cons, but in terms of reasons for leaving work, not doing enough to find work etc I really can't think of any time that overturned decisions has been advanced as examples over zealousness.

I wonder if this might be because there's never been any issue of over zealousness regarding those issues.