ATOS loses ESA & PIP Assessment Contract

Brassedoff

Wow, I've been rumbled!

Doctor does not believe that the overwhelming majority of disabled cannot do some sort of work!


Now, I suppose we will have a page or two of people ripping into his qualification to make this comment. If so, at what level does it take to be qualified to make the comment that?

schrodie

Oh look atos apologist cites daily mail as source of reference!!
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

if you listen carefully you can hear their credibility hitting the floor!

Brassedoff

schrodie wrote: »

Oh look atos apologist cites daily mail as source of reference!!
:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

if you listen carefully you can hear their credibility hitting the floor!

I was referring to the GP. At no point have I mentioned Arsetoss

gemmaking

so will there be a new company in the pipeline, to take over the job Atos did?

and will they be as efficient in dealing with peoples answers in their dla/pip/ ESA questionares ?

who will this company be?

abudabi

tokenfield wrote: »

Well I manage to work (restricted to 15 hours a week obviously) and I have been in the Support Group since Jan 2010 and receive HRM & HRC of DLA.

Do I imagine that I'm actually not working?

It would be much easier for me to not work, I wouldn't feel so tired and worn out every day. Also I only get £10 for that work as the other £80 gets knocked off my Pension Credit. But I just couldn't sit around all day doing nothing it would drive me round the bend. Yes I do push myself beyond what is good for me, but I always say that working has never killed anybody.

that working has never killed anybody. tell that to gulags or
Arbeit macht frei lol

schrodie

Brassedoff wrote: »

Yet again on here the rent a mob jump up and down when an opposite opinion is placed.

No it's because someone as ignorant on this matter as you claimed that 'Everyone CAN do some work.'

tokenfield

CTcelt1988 wrote: »

Even if 90% of disabled people can work, employers are still reluctant to take them on. It's up to employers to show that they are willing to employ disabled people. Sadly, some still see it as going to cost them financially in terms of adaptations, time off etc.

That was not the point or what was being discussed. It doesn't matter a hoot if they can never be employed - what was said that they are fit for work.

If there are no employers in this country then self employment is the obvious answer.

CTcelt1988

tokenfield wrote: »

That was not the point or what was being discussed. It doesn't matter a hoot if they can never be employed - what was said that they are fit for work.

If there are no employers in this country then self employment is the obvious answer.

Self employment requires funding from the start - not easy to get money to set it up if you haven't got any. You also need a good business plan otherwise it will fail.

tokenfield

CTcelt1988 wrote: »

Self employment requires funding from the start - not easy to get money to set it up if you haven't got any. You also need a good business plan otherwise it will fail.

Defeatist before you start.

The point was that 90% of those that were on long term IB have been found to have none or very little ill health problems that would stop them from working. Of course there will be those that had a miracle cure just before the ATOS assessment and closed there claim. If IB had been left untouched I doubt very many of that 90% would have volunteered to come off IB - they were pushed off, no matter what you say. A basket full of scroungers in my opinion.

Given my disabilities and ill health AND still being able to do some work, should be a shining light for others to follow.

Surely the question is this 90% have been taking the mickey out of the system for I don't know how long and have never admitted to having an improved health - Why??

The same goes for the vast majority of those that are in the Work Group - they should be actively looking for work, not trying to find ways out of doing so, plus , what was the figure, of those new claimants of ESA 60%??? were found to be trying it on as well. That gives a massive number of people that are too damn lazy to look for work or even do voluntary work on a full time basis until they do find work.

tokenfield

dori2o wrote: »

2. It doesn't make reference to the 40% of tribunal claims that are found in favour of the claimant.

If you are going to rant on and claim Government statistics say this that and the other, then at least have the nous to find those statistics to prove your claims, not quote spurious headlines from some rag.

But you conveniently forget that the 40% that win at a Tribunal are a very small number indeed - 40% of what? Every one that fails? Even if I accept that figure it actually means that it is 40% of 60% of the total which is 24% of the total of all claimants - approx. 1 in 4. What about those that fail at a Tribunal? Again using the same figures it is 60% of 60% which is 36% who failed twice - DW/ATOS & the Tribunal. Why were those 36% ever given a sick note I wonder - just trying their luck and didn't fancy working?