Crazy JSA Sanction

essor

Lol, it's beyond a joke.

xylophone

.it's a no brainer, (if you don't you get sanctioned.), that's all I'm asked to do,

You are seriously looking for work?

essor

xylophone wrote: »

You are seriously looking for work?

In case you missed it, the point of this thread was to expose the draconian methods of the jc "dictators" to impose sanctions for the slightest reason.
Your obviously unaware that it doesn't matter if you are "seriously" looking for work or not, you are treated the same by the robots at the JC.
It doesn't matter what walk of life you are from, it doesn't matter what situation you are in, whatever you do you are treated as though you are doing nothing.
It is a fixed procedure that is applied to the letter of the IDS law, you have no say, you have no voice, you have no opinion.

What part of that don't you get ?

nannytone_2

im not going to name the specific job centre ....
my daughter has recentlyreturned to work after maternity leave.

and for the for5st time ever. she has be4en given danctioning targets.
the y have to put customers on pips * personal improvement plans) and if they dont meet the targets, then their jobs are at risk!
the issue has been referred to the unions as the JC staff are as unhappy wih the enforced sanction rate as the claimants are!

xylophone

What part of that don't you get ?

This seems a very aggressive reply! Or are you particularly sensitive about my question?

And why do you describe the employees at the job centre as "robots" - a very sweeping generalisation? (And no, I don't work for, or have any connection with, the operation of job centres.)

xylophone

And the answer to my question

And why do you describe the employees at the job centre as "robots" - a very sweeping generalisation?

is......?

essor

xylophone wrote: »

And the answer to my question is......?

Sorry your right, yes that was uncalled for and a total generalisation ..I meant "Sheep".

nannytone_2

dont under estimaye the JC staff.
they hate the arget driven system as much as the jobseekers do!
but they have families to feed and bills to pay as well!
they dont have any power in making decisions, they just have to enforce them

csmw

essor wrote: »

I'll try to keep this brief...as I'm not allowed to post links here to images of the issue.

I've just been informed that I'm being referred for a sanction by my "advisor". for not making enough effort to find work.
I apply for 15 - 20 jobs a week and always take in my job search record..it's a no brainer, (if you don't you get sanctioned.), that's all I'm asked to do, this isn't the issue though.

On the Directgov website there are two areas you can click when your advisor saves a job that she says is mandatory you apply for.

In the "Activity History" area in the left hand column (it clearly states "Saved Job".
It is also saved in the "Jobs saved by your advisor" area in the right hand column.

On the 9th my "advisor" saved two jobs for me and told me I must apply for these jobs, fine not a problem.

When I accessed the Directgov site at home I clicked the links in the "Activity History" area and it took me to a page that stated:

This job has been removed from the site and is no longer available for viewing.

I didn't think anything more of it, the job had expired, no biggie, I'd been on the PC for a few hours jobsearching my eyes were tired and I was sick of the sight of jobsites.

The next day I had an appointment with my "advisor", I told here the jobs had expired, she clicked the links in the "Jobs saved by your advisor" area and the jobs were still listed.

I explained to her that I had used the "Activity History" area and that they had expired, she clicked the same links and was taken to the :

This job has been removed from the site and is no longer available for viewing.

She asked me why I hadn't clicked the link in the "Jobs saved by your advisor"area, I explained I rarely use it and assumed the links would take me to the same "job has been removed" message.

She adopted the usual pose of assuming I was trying to pull the wool over her eyes and was giving me suspicious looks. I said it's not a problem I can apply for them when I get home, she kept on labouring the issue and I kept giving her the same answer.
When I got home both links had expired.

She is now using that as a reason to recommend me for a sanction, it seems a little harsh, when there is clearly a problem with the website functions.

Surely I have a valid argument, this will be my second sanction, so I'm facing 13 weeks if unsuccessful in my appeal.
I know they are sanctioning for the slightest reason these days, but this takes it to another level.

Sorry for going on.

If this is your 2nd sacntion for the same thing, sorry to be the bearer of bad news but it will be 26 weeks not 13.

As for the website functionality whether the jobs are expired or not an advisor will still be able to see them and if they have been applied for.

They have taken the correct action, you were matched to 2 vacancies you did not apply for, they have to reffer it to a DM its not up to the advisor to determine whether your reasons were good enough that's the DM's role.

On the note of un-ticking the boxes on ujm, it is irrelevant as you still be matched to vacancies on there you will just have to provide your proof of application in a different manner.

essor

csmw wrote: »

If this is your 2nd sacntion for the same thing, sorry to be the bearer of bad news but it will be 26 weeks not 13.

As for the website functionality whether the jobs are expired or not an advisor will still be able to see them and if they have been applied for.

On the note of un-ticking the boxes on ujm, it is irrelevant as you still be matched to vacancies on there you will just have to provide your proof of application in a different manner.

Don't worry about the news, I can find work in 13 or 26 weeks and it will be work I want to do , not what I've been forced to do.
I'll continue to sign on my signing day and attend no other appointments, they can sanction away to their hearts content.

They have taken the correct action, you were matched to 2 vacancies you did not apply for, they have to reffer it to a DM its not up to the advisor to determine whether your reasons were good enough that's the DM's role.

Oh dear, do everything by the book do you? If the sanction process wasn't so impregnable and you had an opportunity to explain and provide evidence "before" they imposed a sanction on people, it wouldn't be so bad. They don't, they sanction you and you have to appeal, which takes months, basically your guilty and sentenced until you can prove you are innocent, what a great system.
Don't try and justify the way these people work to me, like I said robots and sheep, puppets of the state.
Ironic that now the last place to look for help when finding a job is the Job Centre.

It's a relief to be out of it.

.