After the Work Programme

donnajunkie

sensibleadvice wrote: »

So expecting people to keep their side of JSA is taking liberties now is it?

another 2 year old moment here. if they shouldnt require 7 days and then put 7 days they are taking liberties.

red_devil

donnajunkie wrote: »

no, as a result of what i said in the post everything should be crystal clear. nothing should be left to interpretation and anyone sanctioning due to opinion is wrong. this is because unfairness can occur.

It does alot and incompetence. Incompetence is rife in dwp.

donnajunkie

sensibleadvice wrote: »

From what you say you've got 2 days of job seeking with reduced competition. Why wouldn't you want to take an advantage in job seeking like that?

Why wouldn't you perceive your "doing all you can to find work' includes looking at weekends?

i am not saying its wrong to search on a weekend. i am not telling people they shouldnt search on a weekend. i am saying they shouldnt be legally obliged to search on a weekend.

donnajunkie

sensibleadvice wrote: »

Yes. The one they called a troll. Perhaps lacking from the POV the advice that doesn't fit minimalist job seeking. Someone will no doubt be along to fix that soon.

no they wont. they will always set a minimum that you must do to qualify.

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

Like we have the time, do you know how long it takes to write up the referral paperwork?? Advisors would be happy if we never had to reffer for sanctions. But unfortunately it's a part of our job and with a lot of the comments on this forum you can see why the government has made things a lot tougher.

this is coming from someone who will sanction someone if they dont make a copy of every app they do and bring it in when they sign.

donnajunkie

sniggings wrote: »

no one minds tough but a bit of fairness wouldn't go amiss either.

i think tough suggests a person is doing something wrong.

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

A customer could have applied for 100 jobs during the first 3 days of the period, they then do nothing for the remaining 11 days. They would be referred also for not ACTIVELY seeking.

and this is an example of a stupid rule. one person does 100 apps gets sanctioned. another person does 10 apps doesnt get sanctioned.

donnajunkie

sniggings wrote: »

so my point is wrong, you can not get a sanction for failing to apply for one matched vacany and evidence does have to be provided for that job's details to the claimant and the decision maker...thought not so that's unfair, my point has been made, you go on and dodge the issue about unfairness if you want, it's not me feeding my kids with money gained this way.

the poster is talking rubbish. you can get sanctioned for not applying for a job you were refered for. you can get sanctioned for not applying for a reasonable number which is likely to be stated on your agreement. if you have applied for all jobs you were refered for and you have applied for the number stated on your agreement they cant sanction you based on doing a search there and then and finding a job you didnt apply for listed.

donnajunkie

sensibleadvice wrote: »

I think what csmw is saying is, in that case it wouldn't be about the one job but the underlying pattern of not applying for that one job may reveal. Such as, for example claimant attitude to the job seeking process, refusing access to UJM, presenting insufficient or minimal evidence of job seeking over the last period, not applying for advertised jobs.

they are not rule breaks so you cant be sanctioned for not breaking the rules.

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

The whole point of the sanctions are because you not following the rules you signed up to .

Remember jsa is not a benefit, there is no underlying entitlement. It is an allowance

only because they changed the name to excuse unfairness.