UC Work Coach Being Unreasonable

Spoonie_Turtle

TheMsTeale said:

Spoonie_Turtle said:

TheMsTeale said:

NedS said:

TheMsTeale said:

spanishtiger said:

Chris_English said:

I feel very sorry for the work coach. The OP’s flinging put false accusations on here at people who are just trying to help; I can’t imagine being their coach is easy.

OP, why not just ask to change coach again if you are upset at yet another one actually doing their job properly?

Exactly my thoughts.

My point is, in my view they were not doing their job properly or at least were inconsistent. I am beginning to think that this forum is populated by ex work coaches, as you seem to assume that they are always in the right. 

There is no concept of right or wrong - a work coach has the discretion to book you in for an appointment every day if they consider it appropriate. There is nothing in legislation that dictates the frequency of appointments, only that they are at the discretion of the Secretary of State (or those acting on their behalf). Now that may appear to be inconsistent to you, but that's probably just because the law does not legislate for consistency.

Actually you are completely wrong - the government legislated for fortnightly signings which were changed to weekly in some instances - there has never been DAILY appointments - you are just making this up as you go along.

A source for that claim would be useful.

A source for the claim that the work coach "has the discretion to book you for an appointment every day" as stated by Chris would be equally useful - or is it only certain people you ask for proof?

You referred to legislation, which is much easier and quicker to prove than what is potentially internal policy

NedS

TheMsTeale said:

NedS said:

TheMsTeale said:

spanishtiger said:

Chris_English said:

I feel very sorry for the work coach. The OP’s flinging put false accusations on here at people who are just trying to help; I can’t imagine being their coach is easy.

OP, why not just ask to change coach again if you are upset at yet another one actually doing their job properly?

Exactly my thoughts.

My point is, in my view they were not doing their job properly or at least were inconsistent. I am beginning to think that this forum is populated by ex work coaches, as you seem to assume that they are always in the right. 

There is no concept of right or wrong - a work coach has the discretion to book you in for an appointment every day if they consider it appropriate. There is nothing in legislation that dictates the frequency of appointments, only that they are at the discretion of the Secretary of State (or those acting on their behalf). Now that may appear to be inconsistent to you, but that's probably just because the law does not legislate for consistency.

Actually you are completely wrong - the government legislated for fortnightly signings which were changed to weekly in some instances - there has never been DAILY appointments - you are just making this up as you go along.

Here are the Universal Credit Regulations, 2013, as they apply to a person claiming UC:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2013/9780111531938/contents

Please show me in that legislative instrument where it states appointments must be fortnightly (or weekly). Maybe you are confusing old legacy benefits which had fortnightly signing for the purposes of releasing payment. There is no concept of signing on UC, you are never asked to specifically sign anything in order to release your payment.

My point is that frequency of attendance is not defined in (UC) legislation. Because it is not defined in legislation, it is up to the SoS or people acting on their behalf (that would be the work coach) to require people attend appointments for the purpose of establishing they are meeting their commitments (e.g, taking all reasonable steps to find work, or more work). It would not be unreasonable for a work coach to require someone to attend more frequent appointments so they may receive the help and support they may need. Why would anyone not want extra support?

calcotti

NedS said:.. It would not be unreasonable for a work coach to require someone to attend more frequent appointments so they may receive the help and support they may need. Why would anyone not want extra support?

In this case OP says they have full time employment (albeit temporary) but is being asked to attend on a Saturday. That does seem unreasonable. However it has been explained to OP that it may be because they haven’t yet had any earnings (OP hasn’t confirmed whether that is the case or not).

OP has also been advised that Work Coaches have a great deal of discretion and this means that different work coaches will have differently approaches. 

Alice_Holt

Spoonie_Turtle said:

For what it's worth, I would be very annoyed if I were working full-time and still expected to attend appointments, especially on the weekends.  

     As would I.

    I would suggest that the OP attempts to work constructively with her work coach, to minimise the likelihood of future UC interventions.  The OP may wish to research 'the light touch regime', and whether her future monthly earnings would place her into this group.
To explore the possibility of future appointments by telephone. To explore what info she can put in her journal to reduce the necessity for future meetings. Etc,etc.

    Given that her work coach has discretion in these matters, then a cooperative approach (rather than a belligerent attitude) from the OP would likely benefit her. 

calcotti

Alice_Holt said:..

    I would suggest that the OP attempts to work constructively with her work coach, to minimise the likelihood of future UC interventions.  .. a cooperative approach (rather than a belligerent attitude) from the OP would benefit her. 

Exactly so. I can understand the frustration but the only way for this to progressed is by OP talking to UC.

Robbie64

The best advice I can give is to attend your first Saturday appointment, as annoying and as inconveniencing as that could be. If the job is to last more than a very short time then you could mention at the appointment that it is unreasonable for you to keep attending appointments while holding down a full time job.

The next step after that depends on the conversation you have with your Work Coach.

NedS

calcotti said:

NedS said:.. It would not be unreasonable for a work coach to require someone to attend more frequent appointments so they may receive the help and support they may need. Why would anyone not want extra support?

In this case OP says they have full time employment (albeit temporary) but is being asked to attend on a Saturday. That does seem unreasonable. However it has been explained to OP that it may be because they haven’t yet had any earnings (OP hasn’t confirmed whether that is the case or not).

OP has also been advised that Work Coaches have a great deal of discretion and this means that different work coaches will have differently approaches. 

Yes, agreed. I was responding to the OPs earlier assertion that the work coach was somehow wrong and the incorrect claim that the government had legislated for fortnightly appointments, which is simply not true. As you correctly state, appointments are at the discretion of the work coach and until the OP sits down with the work coach and discusses their circumstances, neither party are likely to have a very clear overview of the whole, yet clearly that doesn't prevent the work coach booking an appointment, nor does it prevent the OP thinking that the work coach is being unreasonable for doing so.
If you OP understood how the system works then they would understand why an appointment had been booked, as has been explained many times earlier in the thread.

calcotti

Indeed.   

Chris_English

calcotti said:

NedS said:.. It would not be unreasonable for a work coach to require someone to attend more frequent appointments so they may receive the help and support they may need. Why would anyone not want extra support?

In this case OP says they have full time employment (albeit temporary) but is being asked to attend on a Saturday. That does seem unreasonable.

I think that depends on how long their temporary contract is for.

If it’s two years I’d agree with you, but if it’s a couple of months then it makes sense for the appointments to continue.

calcotti

Chris_English said:

I think that depends on how long their temporary contract is for.

If it’s two years I’d agree with you, but if it’s a couple of months then it makes sense for the appointments to continue.

And there you have it, different people take different views. Different work coaches will take different views. To me it is clearly unreasonable for someone to have to have a JobCentre appointment at the weekend while working full time, even if only temporary. However, as discussed in the thread, there are reasons why this might happen.