April JSA changes

busy_mom_2

tomterm8 wrote: »

Honestly, I think advisors time would be better off spent helping people who want to get work than trying to force people who don't want work to get it.

This was the old method and to most extent the problem with the WP. These customers get ignored and they get more and more comfortable on benefit, they them start to see themselves as not wanting or needing work and i don't see this as right, why should people recieve an allowance for being available and actively seeking work when actually they are not?

I have known one customer who was 8 years unemployed, no real reason why and after lots of arguing and resentment was referred to MWA, he completed it and actually came back a changed man. he found the work rewarding and enjoyable and has carried on volunteering with the charity. Has now took on a warehouse job and was actaully glad he was forced to do something to make him realise what he was becoming.
Many wont agree with this and are against what they feel is slave labour but I firmly believe why should someone get long term JSA HB CT and CTC add on top free school meals free dentsit and free prescriptions and not give something back to the community?

(i'd best duck now ready for the onslaught and backlash)

tomterm8

You might be right, busy mom in that one case.

How many people have you sent on MWP? How many of them actually got a job as a result?

It's cost benefit to me. You can spend the money doing schemes to force people into work, or helping people who want to work into jobs.

sensibleadvice

busy_mom wrote: »

This is true but then its not up to the adviser, you have to prove that a jobseeker has or hasn't done certain things in order to recieve or not recieve benefit. One persons perspective is always different.

It starts the debate that should JSA be paid after a certain lenght of time? Everyone has their own idea as to what is and isn't appropriate and who should and shouldnt be entitled to JSA benefit.

Of course not. If the advisor thinks insufficient job seeking has taken place they refer to DM with reasons why. The types that only have single figure actions each fortnight or always present the minimum are a good starting point for further scrutiny as it's likely they're not doing all they can to find work.

Restricting JSA after a period of time would help focus those who currently sit back and do the minimum.

sensibleadvice

tomterm8 wrote: »

Honestly, I think advisors time would be better off spent helping people who want to get work than trying to force people who don't want work to get it.

Those who don't want work should be sanctioned. Ultimately, those that do will find it themselves rather than expect others to do it for them.

tomterm8

sensibleadvice wrote: »

Those who don't want work should be sanctioned. Ultimately, those that do will find it themselves rather than expect others to do it for them.

Most people who don't want a job will learn pretty quickly how to fulfill the JSA to the letter and will never be sanctioned. Hard cases like the one busy mom mentioned know precisely how to keep within the rules.

As a rule sanctions happen to the easy targets, not the hard cases.

melysion

I read all this feeling really sad. People who are out of work aren't criminals - even those few that are bone idle and cant be bothered to get work. But the current regime is all about punishment for being unemployed and from day one it seems. The so-called "job advisors" main role appears to be to sanction as many people as possible. And perfect strangers seem to think it's appropriate to question job seekers about their job seeking activity and give them unasked for advice on the assumption "they know better" because they are employed. Quite frankly its none of their business - the unemployed don't need to justify their actions to everyone with a job and are quite capable of asking for advice if they need it. Most people who are unemployed can both read and write you know. Your brain doesn't suddenly fall out of your skull the moment you walk into a job centre. So depressing. I'm pretty sure being unemployed isn't the walk in the park some people think it is. There's a reason why many more unemployed commit suicide than those with a job.

Sigh

mro

patman99 wrote: »

'Daily search review' - So, are the JC going to pay people's travel expenses then?. Or are they planning to dish-out free bus passes to the unemployed.

A sure way to disillusion and demoralise JC staff & Jobseekers and destroy morale.

DWP & Jobcentres never learn.

OleGunnar

busy_mom wrote: »

I have known one customer who was 8 years unemployed, no real reason why and after lots of arguing and resentment was referred to MWA, he completed it and actually came back a changed man. he found the work rewarding and enjoyable and has carried on volunteering with the charity. Has now took on a warehouse job and was actaully glad he was forced to do something to make him realise what he was becoming.
Many wont agree with this and are against what they feel is slave labour but I firmly believe why should someone get long term JSA HB CT and CTC add on top free school meals free dentsit and free prescriptions and not give something back to the community?

(i'd best duck now ready for the onslaught and backlash)

So an admission that the Community Work Placements aren't about enhancing a claimants employability and prospects of finding work but are an idealogical attack. A punitive way of making people pay for the crime of being unemployed. An idea you shouldn't get something for nothing.
Sounding an awful lot like the Government there, I thought Civil Servants are supposed to be politically impartial?

Which I extrapolate to a hope they'll either get so annoyed they sign off, or fail to attend and get kicked off. If they're dodgy and working on the sly they'll be unable to continue both.


I mean we all already know that the Job Centre aren't there to help people find work but enforce rules. As enforcers I don't doubt they have helped some. However the resources are limited and everything is aimed at the lowest common denominator. There is no personalisation or attempt to offer any form of specialisation.

I don't claim any of the benefits you named bar 70 odd a week JSA. I haven't been to the doctors for getting on for nearly a quarter of a decade, similar with the dentist. I don't have any children. Does this mean I should do approx 11 hours community work as recompense at NMW? Fine. I mean I already do do voluntary but if you want a formal 11 hours cool. What argument have you got for me doing the other 19 hours for 6 months?

Your story is totally anecdotal about the guy on MWA, as is my situation. That's the thing though isn't it- NOTHING is personalised, nothing is tailored. It's all one size fits. Dude is unemployed for X amount of time, it must be down to a reluctance to work. So lets make things uncomfortable.

Just like the work programme, that didn't help the vast majority, I don't see how forcing people to work UNPAID, full time for 6 months will achieve anything beneficial. It's all a punitive attempt to get you off signing on. Unless you want shocking customer service in a charity shop or people spitting in the food they prepare for old people and think that is beneficial? Voluntary work only works when it's voluntary. Especially when compelled to do it for 6 months, which is twice what the courts can impose.

I think Labours idea of a 6 month paid job at NMW is a much better idea than giving more money to the likes of Serco, A4E and every other useless provider who will source the community work. Funny thing is if people mess about or don't participate in that Labour scheme those are the EXACT people the Job Centre should be targeting and sanctioning. I mean what reason can a job seeker have for not working at NMW? It's so simple and obvious that it should be done, yet instead giving money to select private firms is what the Government favours. Wonder why?

KevInChester

AP007 wrote: »

Erm no I think you will find I really live in Essex.

I have found lots of vountary work to apply for and have done for a few roles and even met with one charity.

If you aren't hearing back from charities then you are doing something fundamentally wrong. Some won't reply, but to only have had one meeting with your skillset sounds bizarre.

AP007

KevInChester wrote: »

If you aren't hearing back from charities then you are doing something fundamentally wrong. Some won't reply, but to only have had one meeting with your skillset sounds bizarre.

Wrong as in hit the button on the http://www.do-it.org.uk/ site that says 'I'd like to know more before applying for this role' as the descriptins are very brief.

I have only heard back from 2 on that site and one was ChairtyJobs (this morning) and have to fill in a form but it doesn't ask for employment history which is very odd I think).