Government consultation on Work Capability Assessment LCW/LCWRA

HillStreetBlues

Comment on the proposal from the Resolution Foundation
https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications/reassessing-the-work-capability-assessment/

HillStreetBlues

Clearly this has nothing to to with helping people and everything to do with reducing payments.
Talking about working from home is just a smoke screen as the changes that are proposed will do nothing to advance that.
For example if you remove the Mobilising activity entirely, then there will be no record of a person being unable to mobilise. So how can a person avoid
 getting sanctioned for refusing a job they can't to, if on the DWP records  that person  can do it.

Albermarle

arnoldy said:

With 5 million (soon to be 7 million on disability benefits at current trajectory) we do need a national debate about the whole area. If 1 in 7 of working age are disabled, and there are 1 pensioner to every 2.5 working age its pretty tough on the working population. Time for a rational, data driven, unemotional and kind debate about the whole thing. 

Yes away from the personal stories/anxieties/worries understandably expressed by other posters, there is a serious economic problem here.
There are more and more people not available for employment, whilst job vacancies remain at a record high.
Poor productivity and economic performance means in the end higher taxes for working people, and a creaking underfunded welfare/health system.
Of course you can blame this or that, and of course there will be difficult personal situations, but the hard economic outlook for an underperforming economy and  a growing number of long term sick and older people, is not good for anybody.

Muttleythefrog

Albermarle said:

arnoldy said:

With 5 million (soon to be 7 million on disability benefits at current trajectory) we do need a national debate about the whole area. If 1 in 7 of working age are disabled, and there are 1 pensioner to every 2.5 working age its pretty tough on the working population. Time for a rational, data driven, unemotional and kind debate about the whole thing. 

Yes away from the personal stories/anxieties/worries understandably expressed by other posters, there is a serious economic problem here.
There are more and more people not available for employment, whilst job vacancies remain at a record high.
Poor productivity and economic performance means in the end higher taxes for working people, and a creaking underfunded welfare/health system.
Of course you can blame this or that, and of course there will be difficult personal situations, but the hard economic outlook for an underperforming economy and  a growing number of long term sick and older people, is not good for anybody.

To clarify again regarding the quoted post. The proposed changes relate to the Work Capability Assessment which is something around 2.85 million are subject to. A subsection of those could/would be affected. Disability benefit figures therefore could be misleading as many disabled work and there is unlikely to be any work related requirements attached directly to disability benefits (PIP/DLA). Worth also saying that the longer term goal (beyond those in the consultation) of government to use a singular assessment for PIP and remove the WCA and use the PIP assessment to determine capacity to work may be encouraging more to apply for and get PIP. 

My own personal point might be to say it probably is quite easy in trying to get people back into work to 'throw good money after bad' (e.g. one of the proposed changes would mean people at substantial risk of harm to themselves and/or others if found capable of work related activity would need to have their risk managed if expected to engage activities or work and the consultation asks how that could be achieved). And one should never underestimate the potential disablement and other negative impacts of benefit changes on claimants. I do wonder how many disabled and sick people are locked into cycles of trying to maintain benefits rather than improve their circumstances through work and 'medical' treatment. Even attempts to make working a small amount without it affecting benefits seems by many to be treated with great suspicion that it will be used against them. And so I would say this... that enabling more sick and disabled people to work requires an understanding of how those sick and disabled people think in their day to day lives particularly around benefits processes  - fortunately we have a government that has asked disabled people precisely for this information, unfortunately they refuse to publish the responses despite informing participants they would.

Ultimately the way we live and economic model we have alongside the population dynamics that trend are entirely unsustainable but I would argue large numbers of job vacancies are a political choice... a choice essentially made by millions of tax payers as attracting labour to the UK has never been difficult... we are just choosing to reject much of it. A lot of the work available in sectors like care, hospitality, agri, factory (inc food processing) strike me as precisely the sorts of jobs that would not be suitable to disabled people of the difficulties in question and would not be relevant to changed working practices such as increased ability to work from home.

arnoldy

Reading this thread again I think if ever there was a case for simplification this is it. That would be a good thing for those who want to know what they can claim, and taxpayers who can understand what they are paying for. Regardless of if you think spending more or less on benefits is good or not.

DLA PIP WCA DWP ESA LCWRA LCW UC

And that's just a fragment of the system we are discussing. Byzantine.

Muttleythefrog

arnoldy said:

Reading this thread again I think if ever there was a case for simplification this is it. That would be a good thing for those who want to know what they can claim, and taxpayers who can understand what they are paying for. Regardless of if you think spending more or less on benefits is good or not.

DLA PIP WCA DWP ESA LCWRA LCW UC

And that's just a fragment of the system we are discussing. Byzantine.

lol... this is the simplified system we were promised with Universal credit (which 'brought several working age benefits into one')... yes still very complicated and as you point to even just in relation to sick and disabled people. Hopefully though those responding to the consultation will either have a good grasp of what is on the table or find its earlier sections explanative sufficient to understand what they may be providing a response to.

Also worth saying that if people do think the system is complicated then the subsection of people under the microscope in these proposed changes are essentially by definition of enhanced incapability to deal with the complexity or any changes due to a whole myriad of considerations and in particular health/disability related. The consultation and proposed changes are significantly provoked (and this is made clear in the consultation) by the very high proportion of those classified with LCWRA compared to LCW which over time has increased - either that means this subsection of society are getting more severely disabled or they're getting better (possibly with 3rd party help or increased amounts of evidence within the system!) at arguing their case for more severe disability. Perhaps even the removal of extra money for LCW has deterred claimants and prospective relevant claimants alike for settling for this outcome. And there is a trend of making it harder to qualify over time as people get better at qualifying. PIP essentially replaced DLA also to achieve a reduced disability bill. Some might argue that changing the criteria of the WCA when the plan is to scrap the WCA entirely (deck chairs on Titanic and all!) seems a waste of resources including parliamentary time (perhaps an issue of elevated relevance given such required is liable to continue into a new government come 2025 who may have a very different approach).

HillStreetBlues

The trouble is how the system is set up doesn't work (no pun intended).
A person might have a life long disability and meets the criteria for LCW  but doesn't for LCWRA. So that person is suppose to engage in  work preparation for work that they will never do.
What these changes would mean is more people would fall into the above situation but the money would be less.
So  this has very little to do with getting more people into work, just paying disabled people less money.

Don't forget that they have stopping extra payments for being in LCW  so disabled people have already been punished.

HillStreetBlues

Worst Case WCA 
Warning:  Please do not take the test if you think you would find the results distressing
https://benefitsandwork.co.uk/worst-case-wca-test-form

Spoonie_Turtle

HillStreetBlues said:

Worst Case WCA 
Warning:  Please do not take the test if you think you would find the results distressing
https://benefitsandwork.co.uk/worst-case-wca-test-form

Thank you for the emphasised warning, very much appreciated.

HillStreetBlues

I decided to do the test, The results were clearly I'm not fit for work (lifelong conditions), well over the 15 points  but would now only be in the LCW group.
I would have less money and would have to prepare for work,
So they would have taken money from me and used it  to "train" me in work that I will never do.