walked out of jobcentre work experience

bluelass

This is not work experience it is workfare which is compulsory working for no wages. Yes the OP is receiving JSA but how many of you condemning her would like to be laid off after years of working then have to do this?. I certainly wouldn't and I don't see how this would teach skills. Those of you that say this is alright should try it for yourselves. This would surely breach the convention for human rights? the OP should look up a solicitor in that area and get advice quickly. Before I where I am now I was made redundant and was out of work for 9 weeks and I had concerns that something like this could happen. I decided to apply for a domestic post for 30 hours at a local university while I waited for a clerical position to become available. I was far happier buffing floors and cleaning toilets at least I got paid a fair wage for doing it and not feeling like scum every time I had to sign on and yes a lot of JC staff should remember it could be them sat on the other side of the screen one day.

dktreesea

fierystormcloud wrote: »

Yes of course any experience is better than none, and it will look good on your C.V. that you worked for 8 weeks doing voluntary work. But in POUNDLAND for goodness sake? How is that going to further anyone's career or life prospects? I would much rather work for an animal sanctuary or in a school or for a theatre or something. And as some people have said, it's disgusting that Poundland (and companies like them,) use people in this manner, with no intention whatsoever of offering them a job. Although I can't imagine anyone's life dream being to be the Manager of Poundland.

Also I have to add that I find it somewhere between hilarious and ludicrous that someone who has worked and 'paid into the system' for a mere 15 months, is taking the moral high ground on this thread; acting like they're superior to the OP because the OP doesn't want to take the unpaid placement at Poundland. Someone who has worked 10-15 years or more has a right to comment on people on benefits refusing to take unpaid work for 'experience;' someone who has worked for a mere 15 months, does NOT.

15 months?! I have had food in my freezer longer than that!

I don't think it is right Poundland should use free labour either. And it's hurting them. Their profits and share price have tumbled. I think businesses who get their labour for free, at the taxpayer's expense, are taking the p1sh.


Why are work placements even being offered at for-profit enterprises when there is so much that is needed doing in the community? Not just the usual retail work in a charity shop. There are heaps of places out there that could do with a bit of help. Soup kitchens, homeless shelters, anything for the council, e.g. helping out at the library, the coast guard, patient assistance at the hospitals, supporting prisoners both in and outside the jail, helping run Christmas fairs for various organisations. How about doing some work at a National Trust house for a few weeks?


Any one of those opportunities are likely to be heaps more meaningful than being a general dogsbody at a place like Poundland.

BigAunty

In the US state of Wisconsin (and often adopted by other states), unemployment benefit is time limited to 2 years across the entire life of the claimant.

Claimants are expected to undertake full time community placements or full time supervised job searches.

This is the kind of welfare model that the Tories admire.

missbiggles1

BigAunty wrote: »

In the US state of Wisconsin (and often adopted by other states), unemployment benefit is time limited to 2 years across the entire life of the claimant.

Claimants are expected to undertake full time community placements or full time supervised job searches.

This is the kind of welfare model that the Tories admire.

If it works, I don't care who admires it.:)

dktreesea

bluelass wrote: »

This is not work experience it is workfare which is compulsory working for no wages. Yes the OP is receiving JSA but how many of you condemning her would like to be laid off after years of working then have to do this?. I certainly wouldn't and I don't see how this would teach skills. Those of you that say this is alright should try it for yourselves. This would surely breach the convention for human rights? the OP should look up a solicitor in that area and get advice quickly. Before I where I am now I was made redundant and was out of work for 9 weeks and I had concerns that something like this could happen. I decided to apply for a domestic post for 30 hours at a local university while I waited for a clerical position to become available. I was far happier buffing floors and cleaning toilets at least I got paid a fair wage for doing it and not feeling like scum every time I had to sign on and yes a lot of JC staff should remember it could be them sat on the other side of the screen one day.

Compulsory working is all well and good, provided it is directly benefitting the community, since the tax payer is the one picking up the bill for the person while they do this compulsory work. Our benefits system is generous if you take into account the extras like housing benefit and council tax benefit.


What I mind is the work being undertaken in for profit companies.

dktreesea

BigAunty wrote: »

In the US state of Wisconsin (and often adopted by other states), unemployment benefit is time limited to 2 years across the entire life of the claimant.

Claimants are expected to undertake full time community placements or full time supervised job searches.

This is the kind of welfare model that the Tories admire.

They can admire it all they want. They are certainly in no hurry to implement it. I don't have a problem with full time community placements in return for welfare support, provided everyone is required to participate. It's unfair if some people have to do it but others get to coast along on JSA for years.

Flyonthewall

BigAunty wrote: »

In the US state of Wisconsin (and often adopted by other states), unemployment benefit is time limited to 2 years across the entire life of the claimant.

Claimants are expected to undertake full time community placements or full time supervised job searches.

This is the kind of welfare model that the Tories admire.

People not being able to take advantage and money being saved may sound good, but how well would that really work here?

For that matter, how well does that work there? How many are homeless because they can't claim and can't get a job, for example?

moneyistooshorttomention

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

OP


Walking out is not the answer.


If I were you I would have refused to leave my bag unattended and carried it around with me everywhere I went. What would/could they do to you?


You then should have told the jobcentre how they were treating you.

+ 1

...........................

No-one would have been able to get me to leave my bag anywhere unsafe and they would have been told THEY would be the ones who would lose out (suitably phrased) if anything had happened to the contents of my bag.

Having done that, however, I would have carried on "volunteering" at the "job".

bluelass

dktreesea wrote: »

They can admire it all they want. They are certainly in no hurry to implement it. I don't have a problem with full time community placements in return for welfare support, provided everyone is required to participate. It's unfair if some people have to do it but others get to coast along on JSA for years.

And what about those claiming they are too ill to work and get full benefits but do some work on the side for so called beer money? Now that needs sorting.

dktreesea

marleyboy wrote: »

Those on sanctions are likewise neither employed nor unemployed, those figures tend not to show up on the unemployment figures.

I'm a fully qualified Graphic Designer, I have been paying into this insurance system since 1986, am perfectly capable in cost effectiveness, stock control, graphic design, presentation, desk top publishing and computer aided design. What do you think Poundland could offer me to help further my career??? A sanction or a voluntary job?

Fair enough, but our benefits system addresses someone's situation at a point in time, not according to what they did in the past. We don't have that kind of unemployment insurance, i.e. based on past earnings.


So for contributions based JSA, how long do you think it should be paid out for before the unemployed person should be subject to the same obligations as someone on income based JSA?