Nightmare bullying from the jobcenter

duchy

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

He was single when he was on JSA and so had hardly any money. £50 something I think it was. (Plus rent paid).

.

So what did him claiming JSA have to do with this discussion ?
He only had to get himself to the JC
Apples and oranges

seven-day-weekend

duchy wrote: »

So what did him claiming JSA have to do with this discussion ?
He only had to get himself to the JC
Apples and oranges

Nothing at all. Someone asked me if I looked after his children when he was on JSA and I explained the situation.

It would be good if the Jobcentre had a small creche that clients could pay a small fee for. And it would provide jobs for people.

duchy

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Yes, I must admit I was. I do know some nowadays, however.

I don't know any who at the moment aren't doing some paid work or have gone back to education (or both) although not always full time apart from a few locals who haven't ever worked and aren't really employable (see above comment about wouldn't leave dog let alone sick child in their care)

It's a different world to "our day" (my son is 22)

duchy

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Yes, I must admit I was. I do know some SAHPs nowadays, however.

I accept that it is very difficult for single parents. However, I do think it is right to seek work once the child is of school age.

No-one is saying they shouldn't -what they are saying is it is reasonable to expect the JC to make it possible for them to jump through the designated hoops without making it impossible not to get sanctioned. A bit of compassion and commonsense and not assume that everyone on JSA is trying to shirk.

seven-day-weekend

duchy wrote: »

No-one is saying they shouldn't -what they are saying is it is reasonable to expect the JC to make it possible for them to jump through the designated hoops without making it impossible not to get sanctioned. A bit of compassion and commonsense and not assume that everyone on JSA is trying to shirk.

Well we don't disagree on that, there could be flexibility.

You do read on here though of people thinking it unreasonable that they should have to jump through ANY hoops. The JC staff must get this all the time.

It's a shame though if genuine Jobseekers lose out because of this attitude.

keyser666

Nightranger wrote: »

Erm! No offence intended but try reading the OP.

I did, you say they could of called the police, again for what?

Nightranger

keyser666 wrote: »

I did, you say they could of called the police, again for what?

I was repeating what was in the OP and explaining that had they done so the police would not have been impressed...I certainly was not defending the JC if that is what you thought.

john539

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I agree with the people who say treat the JC appointment as an interview, i.e turn up on time, be well-dressed and polite, answer all questions truthfully and above all don't take children or play Candy Crush Saga!

I do not believe that they sanction you unless you have given them a reason to do so.

That doesn't explain or justify the behaviour of JC staff in this case.

It's a pity you've gone off on a tangent/tangents.

You fail to understand what is going on & has happened to OP.

seven-day-weekend

john539 wrote: »

That doesn't explain or justify the behaviour of JC staff in this case.

It's a pity you've gone off on a tangent/tangents.

You fail to understand what is going on & has happened to OP.

What have I misunderstood?

john539

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

What have I misunderstood?

Read the OP's posts, that's what the thread is about.