After the Work Programme

donnajunkie

AP007 wrote: »

I wonder when we are going to fit in 30 hour job searching to this 'working' week and how this will benefit people in their search for a job.

i wonder what will happen for those who dont have the net at home and have been told to use either the library or the jobcentre computers everyday.

donnajunkie

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

He was saying that marriage was an important instituition for society as a whole or words along those lines.He said it should be encouraged etc.
Probably so they can encourage people to have kids so companies can have the next generation of cheap labour.

I dont know 1 marriage that has worked every single person I have known in a marriage is now divorced.

they support marriage but married couples get penalised if they become unemployed and get less than 2 single people. this policy is a blatant bribe to win votes as it comes into effect a month before the next election.

AP007

donnajunkie wrote: »

i believe the plan is community work. so basically the vilification of the unemployed because they will be doing what criminals have to do.

This is one of the reasons I will not vote Conservative at the next election and I have done so since 1988.

They have done nothing to help people into work and now this.

donnajunkie

Denning. wrote: »

A day working a week, other 4 job seeking. If you don't take it seriously you get sanctioned.

The council will be saving as 'cleaning' won't need to be done by council workers, so they either let them go or relocate them to another area within the council.

Why do you object to working at NMW for your benefit?

i cant see it only being 1 day a week. on your last point fine employ people and give them employment rights.

donnajunkie

Denning. wrote: »

It was restore a sense of fairness many people think is lacking.

these people wont have a proper wage or employment rights.

kizzie_nikita

Well, my housemate has finished the WP and he now has to do 35 hours a week work in a charity shop. He was told at the JC that everyone who finishes the WP will be placed in charity shops/other shops alike for 35 hours a week, until they find a job.

AP007

kizzie_nikita wrote: »

Well, my housemate has finished the WP and he now has to do 35 hours a week work in a charity shop. He was told at the JC that everyone who finishes the WP will be placed in charity shops/other shops alike for 35 hours a week, until they find a job.

We know this is not true though.

AP007

A good thread here http://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/2013/05/31/work-programme-leavers-face-more-misery-bullying-and-sanctions-new-government-press-release/#comments

Denning.

donnajunkie wrote: »

these people wont have a proper wage or employment rights.

Because it isn't a proper job, no one is calling it a proper job. It is community work as recompense for the money the community is giving to you in order to stop your from dying.

donnajunkie wrote: »

i cant see it only being 1 day a week. on your last point fine employ people and give them employment rights.

These jobs aren't jobs which we can justify paying someone full time to do. Yet we have many people doing nothing who can spare 8 hours a week. No increased labour costs.


It is people like you and AP007 that creates the animosity towards the unemployed. All you both ever do is complain and how XYZ is evil and unfair. Not once do you put your hat on a meaningful alternative policy.

Put up or shut up.

AP007

Denning. wrote: »

.


It is people like you and AP007 that creates the animosity towards the unemployed. All you both ever do is complain and how XYZ is evil and unfair. Not once do you put your hat on a meaningful alternative policy.

Put up or shut up.

I think they would have more animosity to the low life chavs in a track suit that are the stereotypical unemployed who have never worked, got fired or walked out of a job. Something I have never done,

Or the person at the JC telling the advisor he cant sign in the afternoons as he has things to do, or the woman sitting next to me telling me she was nearly sanctioned as she only applied for 5 jobs since APRIL (!!!!) , or the bloke arguing with the security guard swearing and telling the whole building the JC is !!!! and they have lost his paperwork.

Meaningful alternative policy?

Make it illegal to turn someone down for an interview on the basis they are unemployed

How about that for starters, or instead of throwing £millions at the WP why not give an employer an incentive to consider seriously someone who has lost a job and if they are in work with them for 2 years or more the Gov pay a % of the 1st years salary instead of giving the WP £££££ to spend on nothing at all.

Or maybe give the WP a kick up the backside to actually help people get interviews.......oh no ops sorry they can't do that, sorry.