After the Work Programme

red_devil

csmw wrote: »

Read the 1st line in my post.

My point is if you really just want to work, why spend valuable time wasting it in just trying to be difficult with the advisor over access. I really don't see what the big deal.

You seem to think giving access makes it easier to impose a sanction, or the only reason an advisor needs access is to sanction. Which it just nonsense.

Who says its nonsense. Fact sanctions have risen and they ate looking to sanction you for any little thing.

mro

csmw wrote: »

Read the 1st line in my post.

My point is if you really just want to work, why spend valuable time wasting it in just trying to be difficult with the advisor over access. I really don't see what the big deal.

You seem to think giving access makes it easier to impose a sanction, or the only reason an advisor needs access is to sanction. Which it just nonsense.

When was last time you were unemployed, living & surviving on benefits, dealing with Jobcentre, using bad UJM system and random advisors different blase interpretations of what is acceptable and constant threat of sanction with loss of only financial support, leading to multiple crises, unable to pay bills & rent ?

When was last time you or any JC advisor used UJM to look for jobs ?

Morglin

donnajunkie wrote: »

well had my fun ujm session at the jobcentre today. the people who took it were horrible people setting out to instill fear into the group. trying to make out if you dont give them access to your ujm account that that increases the chances of you being sanctioned, so you should give access. they said if we phone you about a job and you arent home to answer the call you will get sanctioned and that if you give them access that wont happen because they can send the message via ujm instead. i thought yeah and what if the message arrives after i have logged off for the day? you can miss a message in whatever form it takes. then they proudly boasted that both of them have no problems at all with dishing out sanctions. ap007 would have loved them. i was sat there thinking i wish ap007 was here so i could watch them giving these pair of tw*ts grief. oh and i was right i didnt learn anything i didnt already know.

Then use the complaints system, and make them accountable, if it happened like that!

Nothing will change unless people register proper complaints.

Lin

scooby088

I guess that I will get sanctioned, cant believe that the jc and my provider never communicate with one another I signed off around 6 months ago after finding a job. Imfind it hilarious that I still got an appointment letter through the post this morning, and no doubt I will still have to explain yet again over the phone when I fail to attend the appointment.

Morglin

From reading all these posts, here and elsewhere, it is clear that the current system is expensive, not really working, and that the WP appears worse than useless.

But, it us fairly pointless turning the whole thing into a war of attrition with JCP advisors - they have to follow current regulations, sent down from 'above'.

From my time with the DWP, I keep in touch with people now doing this job, and many of them are unhappy with the whole thing as well.

They get endless flak from claimants, and they know, realistically, that most claimants are not going to be placed in any sort of meaningful jobs, and everyone is going through the motions, until they change the rules yet again (as changing governments usually do).

That doesn't, of course, excuse the 'Little Hitlers' found in all offices, including JCP - but they are not all like that, and, as I keep saying, there are complaints procedures to address their behaviour.

As regards UJM, it appears fairly useless as many decent firms don't use it to fill posts.

But this 'privacy/why should we give them access'? argument puzzles me a little - in order to get ANY benefit, we have to all give over private information, much of it personal stuff.

With my ESA and DLA, I have had to disclose and verify very, very personal stuff, that I would sooner not have!:eek:

But, it is a condition of payment that I do that, and allow them unfettered access to my medical records as and when they like.

It's part of the deal, I'm afraid.

Lin

Jerry_Mander

Morglin wrote: »

It's part of the deal, I'm afraid.

Lin

No it isn't Lin, you've fallen for the propaganda and are now trying to convince everyone else it's true as well!

Being on ESA you, of course, have to provide personal details to prove your condition, that is obvious.

But if you are claiming JSA the only (and I really do mean ONLY) information you have to give is your name, address and NI number. No phone number, no email address etc. JSA is not conditional on providing that extra information.

Stop feeding the trolls by attempting to propagate false information as the Jobcentre does all the time to unwitting claimants.

Jerry_Mander

mro wrote: »

When was last time you or any JC advisor used UJM to look for jobs ?

When my adviser and I have a job search session together what do you think he uses? UJ perhaps? Not at all, he uses Indeed like everyone else! :rotfl:

stix62

Morglin wrote: »

..........why should we give them access'? argument puzzles me a little ....

I doubt anyone has a problem with them having access if it was ONLY to look at recorded job seeking activities.
The reason I won't allow access is because an advisor can message you about a job or recommend you apply for one (through UJM) and if you don't act on that you will be sanctioned.

If it wasn't for that one and only reason I would have no problems whatsoever allowing access.

stix62

Jerry_Mander wrote: »

When my adviser and I have a job search session together what do you think he uses? UJ perhaps? Not at all, he uses Indeed like everyone else! :rotfl:

I was at another quick 10 minute session with the WP this morning having a quick shuftie through Indeed :rotfl:

I told her to use Reed instead, you can filter out the agencies

Morglin

Jerry_Mander wrote: »

No it isn't Lin, you've fallen for the propaganda and are now trying to convince everyone else it's true as well!

Being on ESA you, of course, have to provide personal details to prove your condition, that is obvious.

But if you are claiming JSA the only (and I really do mean ONLY) information you have to give is your name, address and NI number. No phone number, no email address etc. JSA is not conditional on providing that extra information.

Stop feeding the trolls by attempting to propagate false information as the Jobcentre does all the time to unwitting claimants.

I am not feeding anyone - the Government and DWP lay down the regulations and rules for claiming x benefit. The staff follow the rules, and claimants have to do the same.

Staff have to obtain the things the rules/regulations require, and in the case of JSA, it's about working towards getting a job - a phone, email and CV are things that would obviously be required, as part of that process.

Previously, the things you list would have been enough, but now claimants have to prove their willingness by providing extra info. than before.

If a claimant wishes to refuse to supply them, that's fine, but they will be subject to sanction, so up to them.

The primary condition of JSA is that a claimant shows they are actively job seeking - and that means proving it. It might be strict, it might be all sorts of things, but that is how it is, and it will not get any easier.

The system might be crap, worthless etc., but it's what we have got at the moment.

Of course, a claimant can also choose to close their claim, if they want to.

To be honest, years ago, if you went for a job anywhere, you always had to show your CV and give a phone number, so what's the big deal with it?

If it comes to it, set up a Mail account just for this process, then they haven't got your personal one, a phone number is obvious and so is a CV.

I have to supply a phone number and a mail addy for my ESA, despite it being nothing to do with my health.

I cannot see the problem with them checking x amount of jobs have been applied for either.

Lin