After the Work Programme

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

Yes you do you will not let go of the fact that I praised ap007 on the fact she grasps the correct concept of actively seeking. why is that so important to you???

There are lots of people who disagree with me on here so whether they do or don't is not my issue.

Where I react badly would be when people like yourself tempt to take digs because you don't like the information you are given, so in turn start taking digs and getting personal because of the job I do.

Anyway as I said yesterday you're boring me now so it's best you reffrain from comments towards me as I'm really not interesting in pursuing this little tut for tat argument you wish to have.

like i said you cant assume they are doing everything right just because they fit in with your views and never disagree with you. some digs you recieve are deserved because of the shocking content of the particular post. some digs you get arent justified. either way i can understand why you react angrily to those digs. however i have seen you say bad things to people who have been perfectly polite to you but just happen to disagree with what you say.
i dont react badly due to not liking info. i disagree with things i believe are incorrect and i say why. if you look back when you mentioned the daily signing coming in april i am pretty sure i did not make any digs or say i dont believe you. however that would be classed as info i dont like. i believe signing daily is a waste of time and i believe you agree with this view point. so we at least agree sometimes.

donnajunkie

csmw wrote: »

Thats just a generalisation there are thousands of advisors across the country, most just try to do the best job they can given what we have to deal with on a daily basis.

i agree there are some good people in jobcentres.

donnajunkie

sensibleadvice wrote: »

Most likely because they don't want to accept AP is doing what is expected in return for their JSA. You'd think they'd want to follow a good example and learn from it rather than pick fault with it. TBH, it's pretty much the same when discussing anything related to the workplace, they either don't want to know as it's not relevant or don't want to hear productive advice on getting back into work. Pretty shocking really given their track record.

actually my judgement of them based on posts is some positive, some negative. i also have the sense to realise the reality of what they are like cant really be learnt here. there may well be many positives about them we dont know about and of course negative things as well. we just cant know for sure without knowing them in person. people coming out with comments like i would employ them, they are doing everything they should are silly.

csmw

:rotfl:

donnajunkie wrote: »

like i said you cant assume they are doing everything right just because they fit in with your views and never disagree with you. some digs you recieve are deserved because of the shocking content of the particular post. some digs you get arent justified. either way i can understand why you react angrily to those digs. however i have seen you say bad things to people who have been perfectly polite to you but just happen to disagree with what you say.
i dont react badly due to not liking info. i disagree with things i believe are incorrect and i say why. if you look back when you mentioned the daily signing coming in april i am pretty sure i did not make any digs or say i dont believe you. however that would be classed as info i dont like. i believe signing daily is a waste of time and i believe you agree with this view point. so we at least agree sometimes.

But as I said, why is it important to you if I praise another poster...???

sensibleadvice

donnajunkie wrote: »

actually my judgement of them based on posts is some positive, some negative. i also have the sense to realise the reality of what they are like cant really be learnt here. there may well be many positives about them we dont know about and of course negative things as well. we just cant know for sure without knowing them in person. people coming out with comments like i would employ them, they are doing everything they should are silly.

Fact is, people can and do make judgements and form opinions based on what is posted. I've noticed you've used the technically true 'we just don't know' line a few times now. It's also technically true we (the other posters) don't know donnajunkie and sensibleadvice aren't one and the same.

sensibleadvice

csmw wrote: »

:rotfl:

But as I said, why is it important to you if I praise another poster...???

It's rather like those paranoid thanks counters and spotters who get hung up on who's thanking who.

Chester666666

sensibleadvice wrote: »

It's rather like those paranoid thanks counters and spotters who get hung up on who's thanking who.

That can show their views though so it's not paranoia as much as observation
Like if a few constantly thank each other for comments that attack everyone who forums whilst being unemployed

mro

SJ32116 wrote: »

Very interesting. It's beyond all doubt now then that it's not legitimate. It certainly gives me some extra evidence to refuse to apply for their "jobs".

I'm just a bit concerned that I might find myself in a situation where it's give my details to these jokers or be sanctioned. I'll have to take it up with his manager if he pushes the issue of me applying for it I guess but then there's the risk of getting sanctioned in retaliation if he gets a warning off his boss.

Really is beyond ridiculous that they're basically forcing people to use Universal Jobmatch yet don't police the posting of jobs in any way.

They have 2185 spam jobs on UJM today, repeating same jobs all over the country.

Search Job Vacancies
https://jobsearch.direct.gov.uk/jobsearch/Browse.aspx?sc=em

https://jobsearch.direct.gov.uk/jobsearch/search.aspx?rad_units=miles&brd=6978%2c6985%2c6988&pp=25&vw=b&setype=1&seswitch=1&co=xw5634583wx

Morglin

All seem to be either care assistants, agency work or part time anyway.

Lin

red_devil

And canvassing for double glazing etc.