After the Work Programme

donnajunkie

iammumtoone wrote: »

Those do sound fair and reasonable. When doing this does the adviser tell you the job(s) they thought you should have applied for so you get to answer the questions regarding the jobs you are being refer to sanction for not applying for?

i am pretty sure you would only get refered to a decision maker for not applying for a job you've been refered for. so my advise to everyone is just apply whether its suitable or not. in the unlikely event that you hear from the employer you can then explain to them what issues there are. you will find they are more likely to have common sense than a jobcentre worker who often has none.

donnajunkie

iammumtoone wrote: »

This is what I struggle to understand that a claimant can be sanctioned for not applying for jobs but not allowed to put their side across why they didn't apply for those jobs. I am not saying that the case shouldn't be referred but the claimant should have the right to put in a defense so the DM can make an informed decision. There may be a valid reason why they didn't apply for the job(s).

they will get a letter saying theres a doubt on there claim that has space for them to respond. without copies of evidence that prove your case they wont believe you and will always take the side of the jc adviser. always send them via recorded delivery as well as they have a habit of purposely losing them.

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

Because the customer is meant to be applying for everything they are capable of, if a customer applies for 5 jobs over the fortnight but we find 20 that they could of ie meets there hours, no experience required etc. Then the way its seen is the customer cant have been doing everything possible to look for work. if an advisor can find those jobs in 20 mins etc. why couldn't the customer over the 2 weeks.

you would have to prove they saw them surely? the fact that they should have been able to find them isnt proof they did. secondly you are supposed to be willing to do all jobs you can do. i have never seen anything saying you must apply for every job you can do. you are taking liberties here and must be sanctioning every person you see if you really follow this line. do you realise how many catalogue distributor jobs on ujm there are? legally you must fulfill your jsa agreement and if you can prove you are doing that i cant see a sanction sticking.

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

Customer has only made spec applications

Those are my most common ones

where does it say some of the jobs a person applies for must be advertised jobs? sometimes they give people a log sheet that does not require them to specify whether it was a spec app or not. you just list the job, employer and date applied.

AP007

donnajunkie wrote: »

where does it say some of the jobs a person applies for must be advertised jobs? sometimes they give people a log sheet that does not require them to specify whether it was a spec app or not. you just list the job, employer and date applied.

It says it on my JSA to apply for 10 actual jobs at least per week then there is a list of other things they expect to see.

But then its common sense to actually try to apply for real jobs.

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

Do you think we have never been unemployed and seen it from the other side?

that just makes it even more shocking the way some of you operate.

sensibleadvice

Jerry_Mander wrote: »

You see this is where the problems start with advisers. What you have said is wrong; the hours on the JSAg are binding and the adviser cannot mandate a claimant to apply for a job outside those hours.

This is a case where you would attempt to (wrongly) sanction that claimant because they refuse to apply for the job.

You see how easy it is for an adviser who is unaware of the regulations to abuse the system?

They didn't say anything about mandating applications outside hours. They were talking about reasonableness. Why would a claimant want to unreasonably turn an opportunity down if the hours were just outside what they'd specified but could ultimately manage around?

You see how easy it is for a claimant who is unaware of what is actually being said to nit pick, get it all around their neck then blame someone else for their lack of comprehension.

red_devil

I cant believe anybody would apply for spec ones only and not fill out the applied for jobs.

i know someone who applied for 6 jobs and the on spec ones and they lied and said he hadnt applied for any advertised vacancies. Luckily he could prove he had. What is going on with the jc are they lying or are they incompetent.

donnajunkie

AP007 wrote: »

LOL not normal? No, its called being determined!

Living on benefit and looking for work are two different things.

theres nothing wrong with your determination but you do go over the top. the reason a poster thinks you would be a good adviser is because they think theres a good chance you would be unreasonable and be sanctioning people all day long.

sensibleadvice

Jerry_Mander wrote: »

There's the real adviser attitude showing itself! :rotfl:

The real advisor was right though. Sometimes the ignorant just need to be policed.