After the Work Programme

sensibleadvice

melysion wrote: »

You really do enjoy crapping on the long term unemployed from a great height don't you sensibleadvice?

How do you think your constant berating and patronisation of the long term unemployed on this forum is going to help them?

Do you aim to get them to see the ¨error of their ways¨ and magically find a job?

Or are you just enjoying making them feel like poo?

Check my posts. You'll see positive advice has been pood on by many who don't want to hear about having a plan to get back in work, keeping records, following up, considering what they can do to improve etc. Seriously, those that want to continue to be victims of the system, the govt etc make it so much easier for those who really want to find work.

melysion

You know, rather than just trying to make them feel bloody awful, how about giving them some decent advice, sensibleadvice? You seem to be full of it after all.

melysion

sensibleadvice wrote: »

Check my posts. You'll see positive advice has been pood on by many who don't want to hear about having a plan to get back in work, keeping records, following up, considering what they can do to improve etc. Seriously, those that want to continue to be victims of the system, the govt etc make it so much easier for those who really want to find work.

Although I understand some of what you are saying, by and large, I have read your posts and stand by my comments.

Have you not considered that its a bit of a cycle? Not having a job can destroy your self esteem, which then makes it so much more difficult to make good job applications.

How would you propose to improve a long term jobseekers sense of self esteem? The job advisers attitude towards jobseekers can be terrible and amount to bullying. And the general public just love demonising them.

So. Go on. How would YOU go about making them feel better about themselves so that they have a more positive attitude towards getting a job? If its all about a positive attitude? How do you stop them feeling like rubbish when others are always looking down and judging them?

How would you like to be described as ¨very poor value for the taxpayer¨? That was an absolutely appalling statement.

As I have already said - there are a number of reasons why some people are long term unemployed. And its NOT always, as I know you love to believe, because they don't try.

Age is a serious problem (on both ends of the scale). And then there's inexperience or overqualified. People can become long term unemployed not because they are lazy or not doing everything they can - but because its a employers market (yes, there really are too few jobs - look at the stats). Do you really think people enjoy living on £70 a week or whatever it is? Huh?

OleGunnar

sensibleadvice wrote: »

Many would of course prefer a 'good' advisor to tell them not to attend very often when they're doing very little to find work.

If an advisor thinks a claimant isn't actively seeking employment they may well ask for more attendance which may annoy the claimant. But the fact remains the reason for requests for more attendance isn't to annoy but to ensure work is sought more actively.

I'm sorry but you don't know what you're talking about. If they thought you weren't actively seeking employment they wouldn't have you in more often they'd just out right cancel the claim for JSA and impose a 4 week ban. If it wasn't the first time it'd be 13 weeks. Of course in reality both of those figures are inaccurate as they don't pay you for the first week of the claim, nor do they process the application immediately. 4 weeks would very, very easily be 6 weeks.


In regards to courses try this one I was sent on at a library:

It was sold as employability training but turned out to be 3 weeks of basic computer/ internet usage and how to use UJM. I was sent on this despite holding a level 4 qualification in Multimedia (so graphic design in digital applications, video editing, web site design on a course that's higher than A-Level and the equivalent of a HND/ first year at uni). Also bearing in mind my tailored CV is full of my knowledge of both Windows and OSX, Microsoft Office, a mention to my WPM.

You don't know me from Adam, however having stated that with the certificate to prove it, do you feel I need help on basic computer usage?

I was using UJM for 9 months prior to that course, which I signed up to of my own volition and a good few weeks prior to anybody at the Job Centre even mentioning it. I also have provided the Job Centre with cover letters that I've emailed along with my CV, they have my email so they know I have an UJM account and when I set it up. I also have print offs of applications from Reed, CV Library etc.

Again, you don't know me, but does it sound like I need help using UJM, signing up for jobsites or sending email?


So, that course. 3 weeks, 2 hours a day. £37.50 in bus fare for 3 week tickets (which was reimbursed by the JC), several hundred paid to the company for the training. Is that ballpark £250 well spent? Are you happy with that as a taxpayer? Can you understand why I might class that training as pointless and futile for me? Heck I was even offered the chance to volunteer and help others administer the course given how well I'd helped the guy next to me.


I don't dispute the course is useful for some. I don't doubt that it covered essentials. However, everything with the Job Centre, Work Programme and these private providers only aim for the lowest common denominator. There is absolutely no tailoring for suitability, no chance to discuss why it's unsuitable for me. I tried to explain the situation and my JC advisor didn't want to know. He knows me, he has my CV, he sees the number of jobs I apply for yet still said I had to attend even when I expressed it's unsuitability.

I think the point is to do one of the following: catch you out if you're working and signing. To frustrate you so you sign off, or to miss an appointment so they can sanction. Where this fails, along with all their punitive measures, is I don't work on the sly and claim so I can't be caught out. I'm intelligent enough and in control of my emotions and behaviour to not react and lash out or miss a day. So the punitive measures they impose are futile as it won't work- I don't sign on through choice or enjoyment but necessity.

What you have to understand is they class anybody who claimed JSA but no longer does as off flow. Got a job, cool, off flow. Got sanctioned and kicked off? Not so cool, but off flow. Topped yourself at the sheer futility and despair or got banged up for fire bombing the Job Centre? Well you don't claim any more so you're off flow. They don't count how or why you came off JSA all they see is one less claiming and another tick in the off flow.

Is the advisor an idiot, a demon, or vindictive? No, he has orders from above in his manager that sets a quota for sign ups to these schemes, to hit certain goals for sanction levels, for the number of off flow If he doesn't play ball, despite seeing the sheer idiocy of some situations then the advisor gets the boot too. I read in this very thread the other day a JC advisor expressing dismay at daily signings as it's pointless; it's they the advisor and not IDS who'll have to face the wrath of any doleys for this punitive rubbish.The Job Centre manager has his targets and is answerable to others and on you go up to IDS and the Government. Whose sole interest is not to tackle the issue but demonise the poor and blame them for a recession that had absolutely nothing to do with the jobless.

So the Job Centre advisor act in their best interests and sanction/ refer to unsuitable schemes and all along the way the point is forgotten that the idea is to help you find sustained employment as everybody from all sides is busy playing the game.

Naturally and brilliantly of all they don't have the funding for the sort, level and skilled training I'd like. They'd rather spend it on a work programme that's worse than doing nothing and the sort of course I described.

AP007

OleGunnar wrote: »

I don't dispute the course is useful for some. I don't doubt that it covered essentials. However, everything with the Job Centre, Work Programme and these private providers only aim for the lowest common denominator.

That's why on the WP I was told 'we wont be able to help you' and 'why are you here'

The WP was meant as you are aware to be tailor made for each person which we know is total rubbish as the advisors knew nothing about people like me.

OleGunnar

Lith wrote: »

If any of you lot... really cant stand this..... why don't you just claim housing Benefit and NOT JSA? that way you avoid all the b0ll0cks of the WP


My brother will be doing this. no more BS WP/JSA he will get housing benefits for his new flat, and use the money for rent/bill - its tight... but better than being on the JSA.

Awesome! Some problems though.

What if, by no fault of your own as you don't really dictate what house you get when approaching the local housing authorities, you live in a 2 bedroom flat/ house and are single and thus have a spare room. Or you had a job, family, kids that are now grown up and you and the spouse live in a 3 bedroom. You are made redundant and are struggling to work with the fear being nobody wants you through age. Say you moved in to that property 2 years ago prior to the rules on housing benefit changing.

Housing benefit will no longer cover the full amount of rent as the bedroom tax will take a chunk. What then?

Council tax is also not covered in full by benefits, you have to make a contribution no matter the circumstance. What then?

This housing benefit is stretching real far, isn't it? I thought you had to declare the rent and provide evidence when applying so where is the excess even coming from anyway?

sensibleadvice

melysion wrote: »

You know, rather than just trying to make them feel bloody awful, how about giving them some decent advice, sensibleadvice? You seem to be full of it after all.

You mean like this, for example? Or this? Or this?

Just stuff about sifting, interviews etc which I have experience in.

And some stuff about the name of an allowance which apparently I don't and in this case reference to direct.gov not good enough for some.

melysion

sensibleadvice wrote: »

You mean like this, for example? Or this? Or this?

Just stuff about sifting, interviews etc which I have experience in.

And some stuff about the name of an allowance which apparently I don't and in this case reference to direct.gov not good enough for some.

OK fine (although I am not convinced I like the tone of your first example). But then you undo all that good work by being so patronising and looking down on people elsewhere. Not really necessary is it? To tell people that they aren't good value to the tax payer (just to give your most recent insult). How does that achieve anything other than bad feeling?

sensibleadvice

melysion wrote: »

Although I understand some of what you are saying, by and large, I have read your posts and stand by my comments.

Have you not considered that its a bit of a cycle? Not having a job can destroy your self esteem, which then makes it so much more difficult to make good job applications.

How would you propose to improve a long term jobseekers sense of self esteem? The job advisers attitude towards jobseekers can be terrible and amount to bullying. And the general public just love demonising them.

So. Go on. How would YOU go about making them feel better about themselves so that they have a more positive attitude towards getting a job? If its all about a positive attitude? How do you stop them feeling like rubbish when others are always looking down and judging them?

How would you like to be described as ¨very poor value for the taxpayer¨? That was an absolutely appalling statement.

As I have already said - there are a number of reasons why some people are long term unemployed. And its NOT always, as I know you love to believe, because they don't try.

Age is a serious problem (on both ends of the scale). And then there's inexperience or overqualified. People can become long term unemployed not because they are lazy or not doing everything they can - but because its a employers market (yes, there really are too few jobs - look at the stats). Do you really think people enjoy living on £70 a week or whatever it is? Huh?

Of course I've considered it's a cycle. But those who choose to blame everything and everyone and refuse to even acknowledge there may be a problem with them, their applications, CV, attitude etc will carry on doing the same and remain in the same loop. As I've said before the control is seeing others with a different approach succeeding in finding work - the types who take a critical look at themselves from the employers POV.

If people perpetually blame the system and processes, it's inevitable they'll have no self esteem. People look down on others who have a bad attitude towards work and the system the supports them whilst looking for work. That's not the same as demonising for being out of work by any means.

Very poor value for the taxpayer...how about someone who, for example has been unemployed for years, does the very minimum to keep JSA, just ticking the right boxes when pressed, likely doing even less when not, constantly looking to blame the process and system - how do you feel about funding such apathy?

Sure some will find it more difficult than others but it's not impossible to find work and posters fitting that demographic would surely be better placed job seeking than moaning on a forum?

melysion

People look down on others because they are on benefits. Its that simple.They don't really need any other excuse, unfortunately. Its why I will never claim them, no matter how desperate I am. I am sure that you are aware that most people on JSA are pretty much tarred with the same brush - very unfairly so.

Sure - there will be people who are too lazy to get another job. But so what? They are the ones hurting themselves - its no skin off my nose of they are only doing the bare minimum. Seeing as JSA accounts for just 2% of the benefits bill, I am not going to sweat it. And I would prefer them to have a little money so that they can eat than be on the streets committing crime.

And such people are - to be fair - a rarity. Honestly. Most people really want to work. But being out of work is just bone crushing. A lack of self esteem isn't just due to wanting to blame the system. And to be honest I don't really think that is what it stems from for the most part.

It can be very much due to them considering themselves worthless, not part of society and a burden. A attitude that isn't helped by the media constantly telling them that. And it can be difficult shifting your attitude to a more positive one when you are constantly bombarded with this negative viewpoint that everyone is chucking at you.

Anyway. I think some of your posts are useful, in retrospect. But they can also be really judgmental. I am pretty sure me saying so wont make any difference to you - and that's fine. Why should it? But I am hoping that it may have made you think, just a tiny bit