apparantely advisor does not have to prove it

iammumtoone

csmw wrote: »

At the point of reconsideration the DM would write to the advisor, asking for further info or clarication on any points raised. They can asked for details of jobs and an advisor would have to send evidence of available vacancies.

So why is the claimant not allowed to see the 'evidence'

I does appear that the OP was given the correct information as you state that the DM can request the evidence but the manager is disputing this.

red_devil wrote: »

I asked him to prove it and he ignored me so i went and had a managers meeting yesterday to report advisor for not answering and he said the advisor does not have to provide proof?:eek:

I had been told by the decision makers he does have to evidence it but manager says no.

I am not implying that the manager is being obstructive perhaps they need more training to be aware of the rules. BUT where does this leave the poor claimant if the manager is not aware of this fact, what chance do claiments have?

Are the guidelines regarding sanctions published anywhere on the web? so at least a claimant can check that they are being followed.

iammumtoone

csmw wrote: »

But as I keep saying that will never be the whole reason as to why the OP was sanctioned, I just think they are being very vague with the truth.

But you are comparing this situation with your workplace which sounds as it is very well run, your claimants are lucky I don't think all JCs are run that well, as I said above this is not necessary the advisors fault they might not have been given the correct training but every claimant should have the right if they are to be sanction for it at least to be done correctly and within the guidelines.

csmw

iammumtoone wrote: »

So why is the claimant not allowed to see the 'evidence'

I does appear that the OP was given the correct information as you state that the DM can request the evidence but the manager is disputing this.



I am not implying that the manager is being obstructive perhaps they need more training to be aware of the rules. BUT where does this leave the poor claimant if the manager is not aware of this fact, what chance do claiments have?

Are the guidelines regarding sanctions published anywhere on the web? so at least a claimant can check that they are being followed.

Claimaints can be provided with evidence if requested under disclosure of information.

I'm sorry but I just don't believe that the op is being truthful, I personally believe they are just looking for a way to have a correctly applied sanction overturned.

All information relation to procedures and guidelines can be found on https://www.gov.uk or can be found quite easily by doing a quick Google search.

BillJones

mattcanary wrote: »

And where do you find 200 jobs a week from???!!!!

The OP has not said that he was asked to apply for 200 jobs in a week. He says that he was sanctioned for not applying for enough jobs and, apprently in response to him suggesting that there weren't many available, his advisor pointed out that a quick search revealed over 200.

I don't believe that his advisor ever told him that he needed to apply for 200 jobs.

BillJones

makeyourdaddyproud wrote: »

My advice to the OP would to keep on complaining, if it's one thing which UK PLC hates about its citizens is having to spend time handling them in the face of oppressive labour costs and welfare claimant indifference.

And lets hope if he does so, then that as a response to spending time on this rather than looking for work that he is sanctioned again and again until the lesson sinks in.

If some posters on here put as much effort into becoming employable as they do into complaining then they'd never spend a week out of work again.

whodathunkit

saintjammyswine wrote: »

Because they do. A minimum of Level 2 Literacy & Numeracy equivalent is a mandatory requirement of working in the majority of FE establishments. Teaching a vocational subject such as brickwork is no longer a standalone qualification. It is part of what is called a Study Programme which is about preparing the person for employment. This not only includes developing practical skills for the particular job but now also Maths & English depending on previous qualifications (GCSE results normally) and employability preparation such as work experience or a part time job. This has come about because employers are saying young people may leave college with the practical skills and qualifications but are still not ready for work or do not have the required Literary or Numeric ability to be an effective employee.

I was actually posting in your support because of a grammatical error in your post!

If you think a level 2 in literacy represents any guarantee of writing good English, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken.

saintjammyswine

whodathunkit wrote: »

I was actually posting in your support because of a grammatical error in your post!

If you think a level 2 in literacy represents any guarantee of writing good English, I'm afraid you're sadly mistaken.

Thanks, I think.

I spotted the spelling error (to not too) but not the grammatical. Couldn't be bothered to change it though.

Very aware of the limitation of L2 Literacy too (see what I did there?).

red_devil

csmw wrote: »

Claimaints can be provided with evidence if requested under disclosure of information.

I'm sorry but I just don't believe that the op is being truthful, I personally believe they are just looking for a way to have a correctly applied sanction overturned.

All information relation to procedures and guidelines can be found on https://www.gov.uk or can be found quite easily by doing a quick Google search.

Of course im being truthful. What would be the point in posting this.

red_devil

BillJones wrote: »

And lets hope if he does so, then that as a response to spending time on this rather than looking for work that he is sanctioned again and again until the lesson sinks in.

If some posters on here put as much effort into becoming employable as they do into complaining then they'd never spend a week out of work again.

Im a a she you berk, just shows you no nothing about me.

unless you can advise properly jog on. As said ive appealed. The problem in general with jobcentres is their incompetence.

The left hand often dosent know what the right hand is doing. I was on the post support work programme with a hit squad advisor thats probably why i was sanctioned.

red_devil

csmw wrote: »

Claimaints can be provided with evidence if requested under disclosure of information.

I'm sorry but I just don't believe that the op is being truthful, I opersonally believe they are just looking for a way to have a correctly applied sanction overturned.

All information relation to procedures and guidelines can be found on https://www.gov.uk or can be found quite easily by doing a quick Google search.

No wonder im confused. I can request the info, then i cant, then i can, if this is evidence in a court of law it would be thrown out.