After the Work Programme

AP007

red_devil wrote: »

when you go back to the jc after the work programme your in for a shock. They do their best to make life so bad you sign off and occassionally it works.

They care only about shaving abit of the bill here and there.

They have special advisors who are picked for their hardness and nastiness yes its true.

that is not true imo

red_devil

AP007 wrote: »

that is not true imo

it is in mine.

Hell bent on sanctioning while being incompetent himself. Work prog was different.

Morglin

sensibleadvice wrote: »

Have you considered just how employable and motivated to find work are these people who find themselves on WP. From my experience many are virtually unemployable and/or don't want work, from application to CV and the biggie for me..bad attitude.

If someone walked through my door canvassing work and were well presented, keen, articulate and had evidently made an effort with their speculative admin I'd certainly keep their details and invite to interview when temporary or permanent posts became available which is quite often in my line. In fact if the presented themselves that way I'd ask them to follow periodically as vacancies do arise and if they did that they'd bump themselves further up such that they may bypass the agency route and eliminate the majority of their competition in the process.

Sure the jobs are basic, but at 20% above minimum wage not to be sniffed at. Not their line of work - fine if they're keen and fulfil a temporary business need until they move on that's good for me and good for them because at least they get employment on their CV and a current reference.

I agree with much of what you are saying - which is why WP's need to be more tailored, and not 'one size fits all'.

Having worked at the DWP, I know what some claimants are like - all about entitlement, and nothing about responsibility.:mad:

But, due to the financial state we are in, and due to less manual jobs than ever before, and, also, it has to said, foreign workers often accepting less than the minimum wage, it's not always simple to get a job, however positive you are.

Once someone has been unemployed a while, it's even harder, as employers can fish from a wide applicant pool.

So, I would think a proper programme of literacy/numeracy (not daft courses that teach nothing), for the undereducated, proper courses in IT, and help for those with all the skills, as there is little point in sending a middle manager guy off to do basic literacy, but perhaps need a bit of help that recognises that some unemployed are a little older and getting passed over just because of age etc.,

For those who just don't want to co-operate at all, and cannot see that you do need to present as clean, tidy willing, and positive, well, perhaps then there is a need for a more rigid approach - but sanctions and worthless courses are not the answer alone - they still need to understand that, in the end, they have to pay their way, as we all did.

However, this is difficult because if they have kids, should we really be punishing those, as stopping the benefits from their parents would do?

Not easy.

There is also the point that these crazy threats from our delightful government re sanctions, every day/all day attendance at JC's etc., are silly - people have to be given money to eat, and no JCP I know could cope with daily signings from all!

It's depressing at the moment, as I donate to our local food bank and it is full of people, some working, some not, but most struggling because of DWP delays and errors - perhaps the DWP could improve it's own performance as well.:mad:

Sometimes I am ashamed of Britain the way it's going, with the government's main answer to it all being to demonise and harass anyone out of a job, at the expense of taxpayers, to keep DM readers happy.....:wall:
Lin

jacques_chirac

AP007 wrote: »

that is not true imo

I expect your experience is different to that of red devil because you treat people with respect, and you are treated the same in return. Treat others as you wish to be treated - a lesson some on here could do with learning.

tomterm8

sensibleadvice wrote: »

Question is would the 2% that did have done so had they not?

I believe so, yes. I believe it on the basis that the historical figures show a higher percentage of long term unemployed people being employed prior to the work program than after its introduction.

I'd put that down to the state of the economy, but I don't see any statistical evidence that the work program on average helps people get a job.

AP007

jacques_chirac wrote: »

I expect your experience is different to that of red devil because you treat people with respect, and you are treated the same in return. Treat others as you wish to be treated - a lesson some on here could do with learning.

I speak to everyone as if it was a professional meeting or a meeting you would have at work with the head of accounts etc.

Sounds stupid but I dress that way too.

I have never raised my voice or anything like that as I hear others do when I am at the JC.

They have not made my life a misery but have tried to help and are up against a large wall so cant really do anything.

Just got back from seeing my advisor and now booked in for next week as not seen her since November (as she says she don't need to see me)

She showed me a job today that the job brokers get and the advisors show people. I asked if the JC has contacts with that company and she said no its the broker looking online for jobs. To which I said 'well I do that anyway so whats the point in that' and the reply was 'you'd be surprised how many people day they cant find anything, so we show them what we have found'

This is probably how they are catching out certain people for not applying for enough jobs in the 2 week period. The job she showed me was one I had already applied for and showed her on my listing.

She took a note of the agency who have put me forward for another job but also one point about the UJM that I found out today......................

If you apply for a job that's a 3rd party advert and it expires from the UJM site the JC can not find the advert even if you have the job ID.

However, as long as you have the company name which I did and date you applied they can search the company and see all adverts that have expired.

Always make sure you have the company name in full from the UJM advert and there will be no problems.

sensibleadvice

Morglin wrote: »

I agree with much of what you are saying - which is why WP's need to be more tailored, and not 'one size fits all'.

Having worked at the DWP, I know what some claimants are like - all about entitlement, and nothing about responsibility.:mad:

But, due to the financial state we are in, and due to less manual jobs than ever before, and, also, it has to said, foreign workers often accepting less than the minimum wage, it's not always simple to get a job, however positive you are.

Once someone has been unemployed a while, it's even harder, as employers can fish from a wide applicant pool.

So, I would think a proper programme of literacy/numeracy (not daft courses that teach nothing), for the undereducated, proper courses in IT, and help for those with all the skills, as there is little point in sending a middle manager guy off to do basic literacy, but perhaps need a bit of help that recognises that some unemployed are a little older and getting passed over just because of age etc.,

For those who just don't want to co-operate at all, and cannot see that you do need to present as clean, tidy willing, and positive, well, perhaps then there is a need for a more rigid approach - but sanctions and worthless courses are not the answer alone - they still need to understand that, in the end, they have to pay their way, as we all did.

However, this is difficult because if they have kids, should we really be punishing those, as stopping the benefits from their parents would do?

Not easy.

There is also the point that these crazy threats from our delightful government re sanctions, every day/all day attendance at JC's etc., are silly - people have to be given money to eat, and no JCP I know could cope with daily signings from all!

It's depressing at the moment, as I donate to our local food bank and it is full of people, some working, some not, but most struggling because of DWP delays and errors - perhaps the DWP could improve it's own performance as well.:mad:

Sometimes I am ashamed of Britain the way it's going, with the government's main answer to it all being to demonise and harass anyone out of a job, at the expense of taxpayers, to keep DM readers happy.....:wall:
Lin

I can agree with much of that too. However, sometimes people need to understand there are consequences to their actions of lack of. Fore I'll use the word you used....Consider demonising someone into a job that would otherwise not have bothered...

Morglin

sensibleadvice wrote: »

I can agree with much of that too. However, sometimes people need to understand there are consequences to their actions of lack of. Fore I'll use the word you used....Consider demonising someone into a job that would otherwise not have bothered...

I take your point, but unhappily, the government are demonising everyone on every type of benefit, regardless of whether it's their fault or not - which, in my view, is immoral and spiteful.:mad:

Particularly, as politician, generally, are greedy bugaars, scamming whatever they can....:wall:

The real scroungers that truly don't give a toss about supporting themselves don't worry about what anyone thinks anyway - so government bile and spite is being misdirected lol

And, from experience, I would say that most of those real scroungers are earning money anyway through thieving/drugs, so won't worry too much about sanctions and threats.

Lin

KevInChester

AP007 wrote: »

that is not true imo

My assigned advisor (at JCP) as I arrived towards the end of the work programme was lovely on 2 ocassions, then she changed and started looking for any reason to sanction me. One of the times she tried to sanction me for not applying for a job... fair enough right? Well the job had gone live that day, I had noted that I was going to apply for it as soon as I got home (was just about en route to the job centre).

I was told by my advisor that if the job had gone up at say 9am, then I should have applied for it before I arrived at the job centre (10.30am signing, about an hour to get to job centre) . So that would have left me in an ideal world 30 minutes to fill in a lengthy application form.

I am extremely polite and well mannered, I also listen attentively and take on board what people say to me. The exit report from the work programme even mentioned as such, also stated that I was compliant and very helpful to other attendees. As listed previously I was doing so much to find work (which eventually succeeded once I found some respite).

Some people thrive on having to apply for loads of jobs, others don't. I can get mentally fatigued very quickly, I can take my prescription dexedrine but then I end up with severe rebound depression and dangerously high blood pressure!

red_devil

jacques_chirac wrote: »

I expect your experience is different to that of red devil because you treat people with respect, and you are treated the same in return. Treat others as you wish to be treated - a lesson some on here could do with learning.

You expect means you dont know anything about individual jobcentres and staff and people on here at all so you cant comment.

The post is for experiences after the work programme.

The advisors are hit squad material they are especially taken on for the role its a fact. Theu are often trying to lord it over people who even have held better jobs than them.