After the Work Programme

csmw

donnajunkie wrote: »

where does it say on the agreement that you must apply for every job you see that you can do? how do they prove that you saw them?

where did I say that, I said what is reasonable if someone only applied for 3 but there were 50 they could have applied for there's a bit of a discrepancy there no??

csmw

donnajunkie wrote: »

so will they make available the details of all of these jobs to the claimant? will they show proof that the claimant saw them in the first place?
each day there are tons of catalogue distributor jobs advertised. do you think every claimant applies for every single one of them? i dont. so why dont they just sanction every claimant? expecting a person to apply for every single advertised job they could do is not reasonable and a fair appeal panel would surely agree.

as I said reasonable is the operative word!

csmw

donnajunkie wrote: »

what you are doing is just telling us what we already know. the jobcentre is unscrupulous and corrupt.

Erm wasn't telling you anything as was never responding to you in the 1st place

csmw

donnajunkie wrote: »

but does this ever happen? i have never been asked for evidence for an excused fortnight. is this something sneaky that they are going to start doing to purposely catch people out?

Yes it does just because it hasn't happened to you is irrelevant. You sign for every 2 week period just because you paid early doesn't mean you don't have to look for work

csmw

donnajunkie wrote: »

no offence but the jobcentre is not helpful at all. neither are the outside providers you send people to.

Your opinion and probably that of many...but not of all and

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

Since you felt the need to comment on every single post I made I will reply to all yours, so you and others on here can do what you all normally do and attack every advisor on here even if we are just trying to help.


The answer is YES!!!!! in certain circumstances

i am very fair. if i've criticised flaws it is because they are flaws. i am not one of those people who thinks all jobcentre workers are scum. some are, some arent. the main observation i make is there is a massive lack of common sense among alot of them.
regarding the question of mine you have answered here, it was not unreasonable at all was it. it is an obvious question that would come to mind after reading the info you gave.

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

where did I say that, I said what is reasonable if someone only applied for 3 but there were 50 they could have applied for there's a bit of a discrepancy there no??

true but it seemed like you were saying that a sanction is justified if they dont apply for all 50. i will obviously point out flaws like people are only legally required to do what they have legally declared they will do and what they have been informed they should do.

csmw

donnajunkie wrote: »

true but it seemed like you were saying that a sanction is justified if they dont apply for all 50. i will obviously point out flaws like people are only legally required to do what they have legally declared they will do and what they have been informed they should do.

There were no flaws in what I said, you took what I said out of context as you presumed incorrectly that I am one of the bad advisors that go out my way to shaft people. I put the whole process on here so that the poster I was responding to is aware. and you and AP007 do what you all normally do and try to demonise and patronise someone because... oh dear they work for the jobcentre!!!

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

Erm wasn't telling you anything as was never responding to you in the 1st place

did you not say if someone was sanctioned for not applying for 50 jobs that the decision would find against the claimant. you have also mentioned things like when people get excused that they could get asked for evidence for that fortnight when they next sign. it does not say anything about this on the leaflet about being excused. they never tell anyone this could happen.
the above are just 2 reasons why people see the jobcentre as unscrupulous and corrupt. it is also well known they have targets to sanction so many people per day.

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

Yes it does just because it hasn't happened to you is irrelevant. You sign for every 2 week period just because you paid early doesn't mean you don't have to look for work

i know it doesnt excuse you from looking for work but it does excuse you from declaring for that 2 weeks. there would surely be info telling people they may have to show their evidence next time if that was how things worked. the next time you sign you are only declaring for the previous 2 weeks. you arent declaring for the excused previous 2 weeks.