Work programme?

andygb

nannytone wrote: »

im glad he enjoys his job, but MOST people work because it gives them an income and not because it gives them any pleasure

I don't agree with that statement at all.
MOST people do a job which they enjoy - because if they don't enjoy it, they look for another one.
My first job lasted ten years, and although I found the work really boring, the people were fantastic, and it was an all round positive life experience.
I moved on because the pay was rubbish.
I know someone who has a degree in drama, but chose to become a personal trainer instead, because that is where his passion was.
I personally do not think that you can stay in a job for very long if you absolutely hate it.
I would also say the work programmes are disgusting, because they try to push people into positions where they will be exploited by greedy employers.

Tommo1980

Some may choose to do a job they do not particularly enjoy for a good wage so that they can enjoy their life as they see fit.

What of those who's only option is a low wage job that just allows them to exist. Should they be condemned to do a job they hate. I think there is enough variety of work out that the individual should have some say in what sector they are employed in.

Tom

Bogalot

Tommo1980 wrote: »

Some may choose to do a job they do not particularly enjoy for a good wage so that they can enjoy their life as they see fit.

What of those who's only option is a low wage job that just allows them to exist. Should they be condemned to do a job they hate. I think there is enough variety of work out that the individual should have some say in what sector they are employed in.

Tom

Everyone is free to look for a job they enjoy, but not whilst living off the state. If you cannot support yourself then you take whatever work you can, and then when you have an income look for something more suitable.

Benefits are for those who have no alternative, not those who want to picky/ precious.

Calz922

Bogalot wrote: »

Awaits the next thread, "Sanctioned for not applying for enough jobs".

That's not nice. I hope this doesn't happen as I have applied for lots of jobs in the sector that I am interested in, have experience in and enjoy.

tommix

FBaby wrote: »

What if nothing interest you because what you enjoy best is not working?

Then the government should support that person to prevent them becoming depressed about having to do something that they neither enjoy, or are the slightest bit interested in.:beer:

Gambler101

Only in the UK can you get people thinking like this.

It means benefits are becoming a lifestyle choice rather than a safety net. So sad and so unfair on those that go out and do jobs they may not like day in day out.

nannytone_2

Gambler101 wrote: »

Only in the UK can you get people thinking like this.

It means benefits are becoming a lifestyle choice rather than a safety net. So sad and so unfair on those that go out and do jobs they may not like day in day out.

and also unfair on those that have no option but to claim.

those that CHOOSE to live on benefits make life so much harder for those who HAVE to, because they then come under suspicion

Mersey_2

Bogalot wrote: »

Everyone is free to look for a job they enjoy, but not whilst living off the state.

Benefits are for those who have no alternative, not those who want to picky/ precious.

That's untrue, of course.


You may disagree with it morally, but it is a fact that JSA Claimants can restrict their job search to their previous occupation, experience and/or qualifications. It's called the 'permitted period' and lasts 13 weeks - but yes, the DWP do not advertise this fact.


Also remember that over 20% of claimants claim contribution-based JSA and so are receiving benefits due to that entitlement and not due to a financial means test.

Londonsu

Mersey wrote: »

That's untrue, of course.


You may disagree with it morally, but it is a fact that JSA Claimants can restrict their job search to their previous occupation, experience and/or qualifications. It's called the 'permitted period' and lasts 13 weeks - but yes, the DWP do not advertise this fact.


Also remember that over 20% of claimants claim contribution-based JSA and so are receiving benefits due to that entitlement and not due to a financial means test.

The work programme normally kicks in after 3 months so the OP will have done their 13 weeks or be at the end of them.

And contribution based JSA does not mean someone can pick and choose what jobs they do, it just means that they get it even if their partner works or have savings so whether its means tested is totally irrelevant to the requirement to find work

There is no actual entitlement to JSA in the long term there are however conditions and responsibilities the OP seems to have been 'told' by their work coach they can just apply for jobs they like, that may be true in the case of the OPs current work coach, but at the end of the day that work coach may change to someone who has different ideas.

Mersey_2

Bogalot (incorrectly) stated, "benefits are for those who have no alternative..."


I was merely pointing out that - by definition - those claimants in receipt of contributions-based JSA are in receipt of it by virtue of entitlement due to their previously having worked, hence it's name and not due to financial need.


You may not like the word, but they are 'entitled' to JSA by virtue of their NICs. Yes, they'll have to comply and attend fortnightly, but entitlement does not derive from that or need as with means-tested benefits.


Indeed anyone who appeals a sanction has it heard in the Social Security (&CS) Entitlement Chamber of the First Tier Tribunal.