apparantely advisor does not have to prove it

sensibleadvice

AP007 wrote: »

I think you are assuming people only use and have been told to only use the UJM site

You do not need to record any job at all that you have not applied to.

If you think you have to we would all be recording 1000's of jobs each week surely.

No, I'm saying they haven't actively sought work to a reasonable level, hence sanction.

They could have presented evidence of what they had done. They did not. Ergo sanction.

OleGunnar

sensibleadvice wrote: »

I understand the notion of filters but thanks for the missive. The advisor likely matched against the claimants criteria which would include range, jobs added in last 14 days and probably several types of basic jobs, like cleaner, warehouse, retail, care etc or whatever matched their criteria.

Anyway it's irrelevant as the OP couldn't evidence they had actively sought work to a reasonable level and the UJM was indicative of what may be available had they looked.

You can be as glib as you like but the fact is you didn't use said filters, did you? How many of the 749 are counted if you limit to say a week and 10 miles? About a tenth is my guess.

I explained because competent sites such as Reed don't have you set reasonable parameters like "within the week" or "within 15 miles", it does it automatically. Why doesn't UJM? I think it's partly they where sold a lemon, partly because they like to pretend there are X jobs to maintain the ideology.

I'll tell you this- as a user of UJM daily, who has never been sanctioned, who far exceeds his claimant commitment there is no way on earth 200 unique, new, suitable jobs are listed in a fortnight. Especially not at Christmas.

Like I said in the first post of mine if the OP can't provide evidence of using Reed, papers, company sites etc then they'll be bang to rights and rightly so. But to suggest there are 200 suitable jobs on UJM in a fortnight is rubbish.

Anyway, night. Did you know where Tarporley was BTW?

AP007

sensibleadvice wrote: »

No, I'm saying they haven't actively sought work to a reasonable level, hence sanction.

They could have presented evidence of what they had done. They did not. Ergo sanction.

I am sure the OP has shown the JC the jobs they applied for. The Op hasnt said they didnt do this?

AP007

OleGunnar wrote: »

I explained because competent sites such as Reed don't have you set reasonable parameters like "within the week" or "within 15 miles", it does it automatically. Why doesn't UJM? I think it's partly they where sold a lemon, partly because they like to pretend there are X jobs to maintain the ideology.

Not totally true

You can type ADMIN London and you get anything listed in London

OR ADMIN SE1 within 2 miles or 5 miles say

You have to set this to be more acurate.

The UJM allows all adverts to be posted to SW1A 1AA you know!
Thats the postcode for Buckingham Palace!!

UJM say they are working on it as you need a postcode to post and advert.

ADZUNA are good at posting London adverts where the job is in say Leeds!!

saintjammyswine

OleGunnar wrote: »

These 749 warehouse jobs. I live within distance of Trafford Park for it to appear (legitimately) on UJM which according to Wikipedia is the largest industrial estate in Europe. UJM finds 147 jobs with warehouse in the title within 10 miles of my postcode (so within Trafford Park and beyond) posted at any time. Just what did you search to get 749?

My listings:
-Overwhelmingly apprentice jobs
-Many requiring FLT licence, 7.5t licence etc, none of which I hold or will be able to get paid to train on by the Job Centre
- Many requiring night shifts that I literally couldn't get to or home from due to bus limitations
- A fair few that are Sunday only
- Jobs in Bolton- this isn't 10 miles from me but nearly 20
- Other unsuitable vacancies such as manager jobs that I am not qualified for


I don't dispute there are jobs I can (and have applied for), but you presumably said warehouse as it's low skilled and provides many results, yet the most cursory of glances reveals over 75% of jobs in my listings are unsuitable for me.

Sorry to jump in but FLT is fundable through the Skills Funding Agency (usually via FE Colleges) for people on JSA (means you get it for free). So whilst JCP will not pay (as they used to) through discretionary fund you may be able to get it locally, removing one of the barriers.

OleGunnar

saintjammyswine wrote: »

Sorry to jump in but FLT is fundable through the Skills Funding Agency (usually via FE Colleges) for people on JSA (means you get it for free). So whilst JCP will not pay (as they used to) through discretionary fund you may be able to get it locally, removing one of the barriers.

Really? Awesome, thanks.

When I asked I was told they'd pay for a refresher course if the licence had lapsed by about 6 months but they wouldn't start a new beginner on it. In retrospect I asked last summer, so broadly 6-9 months ago, it may have changed. Then again it was a Work Programme person and not the JC who informed me so maybe the person I heard off was plain wrong!

I'm mainly aiming at office/admin/data entry (whilst applying for retail, warehouse etc) so that licence could open up some storeman jobs I've seen and been capable of, licence aside. Will ask again about it.

csmw

How come everyone is assuming the advisors was referring to universal jobmatch when saying there were 200 jobs available it could have been any website or a few different ones combined.

csmw

OleGunnar wrote: »

Really? Awesome, thanks.

When I asked I was told they'd pay for a refresher course if the licence had lapsed by about 6 months but they wouldn't start a new beginner on it. In retrospect I asked last summer, so broadly 6-9 months ago, it may have changed. Then again it was a Work Programme person and not the JC who informed me so maybe the person I heard off was plain wrong!

I'm mainly aiming at office/admin/data entry (whilst applying for retail, warehouse etc) so that licence could open up some storeman jobs I've seen and been capable of, licence aside. Will ask again about it.

The jobcentre does fund for flt licenses but your on the work programme so any funding for courses serf would need to come from them.

sensibleadvice

AP007 wrote: »

I am sure the OP has shown the JC the jobs they applied for. The Op hasnt said they didnt do this?

Sorry, I must have missed where OP said they'd shown jobs they'd applied for to their advisor, perhaps you could highlight where that is?

But in any case it's a moot point because whatever they may have shown wasn't sufficient as OP stated advisor said they had not applied for enough jobs.

OleGunnar

csmw wrote: »

How come everyone is assuming the advisors was referring to universal jobmatch when saying there were 200 jobs available it could have been any website or a few different ones combined.

Opening post, second paragraph:

My advisor said i didnt apply for enough jobs and i had a sanction in december even though it wasnt clear how many i should be applying for. He stated there were 200 jobs on UJ i could have gone for.

Also I'm done with Work Programme and on PWPS- your post has made me realise of course I was fobbed off over the FLT thing by the WP Provider as they don't want to pay for somebody who was 3/4 done with them at the time.