After the Work Programme

sensibleadvice

Podge52 wrote: »

I'm not too sure what you are getting at with this post.

Let me say I'm professional at all times, even when I am being verbally abused. If I wasn't I would soon find myself looking for work again.

I mean if they're ranting about something being wrong in their opinion, do you agree with them for a quiet life or do you advise them of the facts despite they don't want to hear them.

donnajunkie

Chester666666 wrote: »

actually from reading the thread the supposedly correct jobcentre advisers are effectively attacking anyone who dares ask for help etc on forums as work shy or not interested in jobs and you'd also get the impression that the jobcentre could do no wrong and is just there to help and that sanctions are a last resort as opposed to something they used to threaten anyone who is unemployed

http://derbypa.wordpress.com/2014/01/27/bbc-news-benefits-stopped-to-meet-targets-pcs-union-claims/

donnajunkie

sensibleadvice wrote: »

Given their their high success rate on referrals for those not actively seeking employment it would appear they're very well suited to the post.

many people are clueless when it comes to appealing.
there is a time limit to appeal and they send the letter informing you at the last minute to give you as little chance as possible to respond in time.
they lose anything you send if you dont send via recorded delivery.
they have bias towards the jobcentre adviser.
its guilty until proven innocent. so unless you have printed documents that prove your innocent you are unlikely to win just by arguing your case convincingly.
of course some wont bother appealing simply because they think its hopeless.

donnajunkie

sensibleadvice wrote: »

The point is if a claimants JSA states every day then every means every day and an advisors hours are irrelevant to that point.

Presumably though, you'll be happier with the extra support that daily signing will bring.

you cant argue its ok to expect one person to work 7 days and not another.

donnajunkie

sensibleadvice wrote: »

Yet when advisors like csmw make it crystal clear and the claimant doesn't want to accept the facts they still complain it's unfair. You only have to look a few posts up to see the complaining about 'slave labour' when in fact it's crystal clear it's no such thing as it's free choice to sign on.

the choice is do it or suffer severely just like it is with any slave.

donnajunkie

sensibleadvice wrote: »

Shouldn't be this, shouldn't be that.... Fact is if they put 7 days, 7 days it is. Tantrums won't change that.

this shows where you stand. we established its wrong and yet your response isnt to sympathise its to make a tantrum remark.

donnajunkie

sensibleadvice wrote: »

Really?...

Refusing access to UJM, presenting insufficient or minimal evidence of job seeking over the last period, not applying for advertised jobs aren't rule breaks?

insufficient wasnt mentioned nor minimal either, the minimum was said. not applying for advertised jobs is only an offence if the agreement specifically states advertised jobs. allowing access to ujm isnt a requirement to qualify for benefit.

donnajunkie

sensibleadvice wrote: »

Changing the name to job seeking allowance makes it crystal clear what the allowance is for. After all, unemployment benefit would suggest a payment for doing nothing but being unemployed and that can't possibly be right.

it was always a benefit that meant people were protected from severe poverty. the change of name is saying severe poverty isnt something anyone cares about anymore.

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

Lol you really do like to make thiings up in your own little twisted mind dont you? I have never once said that.

did you not say you require people to show proof they applied for each job they list?

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

Gosh I see more and more why your unemployed, if someone is paid jsa for a 2 week period and only look for 3 days no they are not entitled to payment...is it really that hard to grasp

has a person who has applied for 100 jobs not done more that week than a person who only applied for 10 jobs?