walked out of jobcentre work experience

andygb

missbiggles1 wrote: »

I don't really think that not being given a uniform or a locker adds up to "a horrible experience " though. If I were a volunteer (either voluntarily or under compulsion)

I don't think you (and many others) understand.
A "volunteer" does something "voluntarily"
Someone who is under "compulsion" to do something has been forced, threatened, blackmailed or coerced.
English is a very simple language;)

dktreesea

marleyboy wrote: »

No hopefully not. But I know many a steel worker who thought their jobs were for life. I dont know what your beef is about my qualifications, the point still stands. However BIGGER my Dad is than yours, no job is 100% safe, the very idea of Poundland telling me its ok, all Dads are equal here, isn't really going to fill me with temptation to work there for zilch now is it?

But the unemployed are all equal. Equally unemployed. Why shouldn't they all have to do something in return for their benefits? I just don't agree with that "something" being at a "for profit" enterprise.

dktreesea

andygb wrote: »

I don't think you (and many others) understand.
A "volunteer" does something "voluntarily"
Someone who is under "compulsion" to do something has been forced, threatened, blackmailed or coerced.
English is a very simple language;)

No one is being forced to do anything. There are plenty of unemployed people who don't bother claiming benefits, because they don't want to have to "perform" in return for them.


It may well be an unemployed person's misfortune to be unemployed, but why shouldn't they have to do something in return for receiving support from other taxpayers? Why should JSA be awarded indefinitely with no obligation to do anything other than look for a job by the recipient?

Flyonthewall

dktreesea wrote: »

No one is being forced to do anything. There are plenty of unemployed people who don't bother claiming benefits, because they don't want to have to "perform" in return for them.

To keep getting money they're being forced. They have the option of signing off but not everyone can afford to do that. Being forced to do that or have nothing is not a fair option.

It may well be an unemployed person's misfortune to be unemployed, but why shouldn't they have to do something in return for receiving support from other taxpayers? Why should JSA be awarded indefinitely with no obligation to do anything other than look for a job by the recipient?

They do have to do something, they job search. That's the whole point of JSA: Job seekers allowance. It's not called the work for free allowance. If they want it to be for something else/more they need to change what it is. It was their decision to have the benefit as it is, that's not the fault of the unemployed.

They can volunteer for non-profit organisations. The issue here is not with volunteering, it's with forced work for profit organisations. It breaches laws. That is the issue.

Plus if you want to volunteer (in the true sense, your decision 100%) somewhere for 30 hours they'd say no because you should be spending more time job searching, but when it's their decision it's suddenly fine.

dktreesea

bluelass wrote: »

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.

Isn't that fraud? Surely it is up to the government to monitor that and micro manage it if they want to crack down on that kind of abuse?

Flyonthewall

dktreesea wrote: »

Isn't that fraud? Surely it is up to the government to monitor that and micro manage it if they want to crack down on that kind of abuse?

Possibly. Depends on if they're declaring it with benefits. You can do so many hours and still be on benefits. Not sure about the legal side with sick pay, but you may be fit to do one job and not another so it's possible that for some it's all legal.

For others, yes, it would be fraud. The Government do certain checks, but they rely on people reporting those abusing the system.

missbiggles1

Flyonthewall wrote: »

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?

Perhaps a better question to ask (and I don't know the answer to this) would be how many people chose to come off benefits?

After all, many people seem to manage to find extra hours when WTC thresholds are raised.

missbiggles1

andygb wrote: »

I don't think you (and many others) understand.
A "volunteer" does something "voluntarily"
Someone who is under "compulsion" to do something has been forced, threatened, blackmailed or coerced.
English is a very simple language;)

Of course you're right. Unwaged would be a better way of putting it.

Flyonthewall

missbiggles1 wrote: »

Perhaps a better question to ask (and I don't know the answer to this) would be how many people chose to come off benefits?

After all, many people seem to manage to find extra hours when WTC thresholds are raised.

Perhaps. I think more statistics are needed and there are some important questions to be asked before we can see just how good an idea it is and even then we need to consider the effect of it over here as so many things are different here.

It's easier to get more hours when already working though. You're already employed so you just ask to do more hours. The extra hours aren't there for the unemployed, the employers/employees just make do with how things are.

Or it's a case of they're already working so more employable and so it's generally easier for them to get a second job over someone who's unemployed going for a job.

vegasvisitor

dktreesea wrote: »

But the unemployed are all equal. Equally unemployed. Why shouldn't they all have to do something in return for their benefits? I just don't agree with that "something" being at a "for profit" enterprise.

To be fair, someone who is new to JSA (and presumably serious about finding a job) needs to spend as much time as possible jobsearching, taking their time applying for jobs to the best of their ability, and keeping themselves available for interviews. I'd imagine it's even hard to commit to part time volunteering, despite it sounding like a good move, because you have to be readily available for interviews and appear as flexible as possible.

I think there does come a point though that work experience such as voluntary work becomes a helpful tool to get someone back into work, but only after their own jobseaching has been exhausted.

I totally agree that businesses should not be profiting from taxpayer's fund, although I would bet that the work coaches would argue that any experience whether profit making or charity is valid in helping someone get back into work and off of JSA.