apparantely advisor does not have to prove it

red_devil

tomtontom wrote: »

One wonders why you have such problems with the JCP with such a delightful attitude!

I answered your question above. The JCP has to prove their case on the balance of probabilities. Whilst it would be helpful to their case to present a list of the vacancies they do not have to. If they do not have definitive evidence and nor do you, the judge will decide which version of events is more likely to be true.

There attitude towards jobseekers isntcexactly very nice you know, however that would be straying from the original question.

red_devil

melysion wrote: »

OK, fair enough. I was just thinking that 200 applications a fortnight would be rather shoddy in quality and would be rather counterproductive. Takes me a good day or so to write one - although admittedly I am a bit of a perfectionist.

The 200 jobs will not all be suitable either.

tomtontom

red_devil wrote: »

That wasnt aimed at you

I am aware of that. The comments about your poor attitude stand irrespective of who your comments were 'aimed' at.

red_devil wrote: »

It was just an example about saying something without proof. You cant go to court and say things without evidence why is it different for the jc staff.

Wrong. Many civil cases are decided on the basis of 'he said, she said'. You do understand the standard of proof differs between civil and criminal cases?

saintjammyswine

200 per fortnight.
100 per week.
20 per weekday.
So a 9-5 day means roughly 25 minutes per application.

Assuming your CV will not be changing much (tweaks for particular jobs, highlighting different skills etc.) not to much of a task.

martinthebandit

saintjammyswine wrote: »

200 per fortnight.
100 per week.
20 per weekday.
So a 9-5 day means roughly 25 minutes per application.

Assuming your CV will not be changing much (tweaks for particular jobs, highlighting different skills etc.) not to much of a task.

And to be honest if the OP had said something along the lines of,

'Yes I saw those and after looking at them all I applied for the 60 odd that I thought I was suitable for plus I sent out 3 or 4 speculative ones' would he/she be facing sanctions?

60 a fortnight, 30 a week, easily doable I would have thought.

red_devil

tomtontom wrote: »

I am aware of that. The comments about your poor attitude stand irrespective of who your comments were 'aimed' at.



Wrong. Many civil cases are decided on the basis of 'he said, she said'. You do understand the standard of proof differs between civil and criminal cases?

and my comment about sanctions, advisors and the jc in general still stand.

saintjammyswine

martinthebandit wrote: »

And to be honest if the OP had said something along the lines of,

'Yes I saw those and after looking at them all I applied for the 60 odd that I thought I was suitable for plus I sent out 3 or 4 speculative ones' would he/she be facing sanctions?

60 a fortnight, 30 a week, easily doable I would have thought.

Agree, it is easy to apply for 200 jobs in 2 weeks.

200 relevant, real jobs? Not so easy to find! Had OP evidenced that they had seen the 200 and provided reasons for not applying then I agree, unlikely to be sanctioned.

red_devil

I dont remember seeing 200 and i cant be told what they were how can i even see if they were suitable.

iammumtoone

OP I would be contacting your MP at this stage. I think it is disgraceful that you are not allowed to be presented with these 200 jobs so you can form a defense why you did not apply for them, providing evidence (for example if the buses do not run in time for a start time you could provide copies of the bus timetable etc) a third party could then decide if your reasons for not applying are valid or not.

I am not saying this is the case but has anyone thought the the advisor could be lying/wrong! I don't know the area you live but 200 suitable jobs seems excessive to me. It seems an advisor can say you missed any amount of jobs without having to prove what they say is a fact. If that is the case there is no hope for anyone to defend themselves, every single job seeker could sanctioned if they come across a less than honest advisor.

Prothet_of_Doom

melysion wrote: »

Just out of interest - are people really expected to apply for 200 jobs a week (or even a fortnight). Does seem a little excessive ...

As a tax payer, I'd be expecting someone serious about looking for work, and looking for my sympathy, to be applying for a minimum of 10 per day.

After 4 weeks I'd expect you to have applied for everything within travelling distance.

On the 3 occassions I've had to look for work, I've averaged 15 a day, although I appreciate that eventually you've applied for every job via 17 different agencies, and then you are forced to really focus on hunting out jobs that don't even exist.