Jobseekers made to carry out bogus psychometric tests. Unemployed people are told they risk losing benefits if they fail to carry out meaningless questionnaire

(70 Posts)
vivizone Tue 30-Apr-13 13:04:12

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/apr/30/jobseekers-bogus-psychometric-tests-unemployed

AIBU to think this is just not on?

From the article, I am surprised to find that a single mother is only entitled £71 PW. Where is the hundreds and hundreds of pounds per week we are told unemployed people get?

No matter what your stance is on benefits, do you ever worry that you/your family could one day face the benefit system? redundancy, illness, even death of a loved one can change your life in that one split moment. Why do people not want to protect the unemployed?! there are rogues in every part of society - why are the poor being regulated so much whilst others get away scot-free? big companies not paying tax, rich people hiding their assets. Why this heavy handed systematic attack on the poor?

What if your children couldn't get jobs - would you want them tarred with the same brush as benefit claimants - workshy/make them suffer attitude? It’s very easy to turn up your nose when you have things going well for you but you could lose all that you have tomorrow.

I work in quite a secure organisation but feel so desperately sad with is happening. Every single person I know who is on benefits are decent people. Being prosecuted by every angle of society. Makes me feel sick and ashamed.
And if the benefit system does need to be reviewed, it can be done without treating people on benefits like scum. It’s just not on.

Tortington Tue 30-Apr-13 13:06:35

by propagating the skiver myth the tory govt turn working people against poorer working/ unemployed people. an divert their thoughts from the true ruination and out and out theft from this country by rich people and business

Tortington Tue 30-Apr-13 13:07:27

and that labour is proposing a 'lite' version of the tory hardline against skiver spin

makes
me
want
to
sick
up
a
fucking
leg

vivizone Tue 30-Apr-13 13:18:16

But Custardo, are people really so stupid? with all the information that is available in today's digital world, WHY WOULD ANYONE RELY ON THE GOVERNMENT TO BE YOUR MOUTHPIECE FOR INFORMATION?

It seems like 8 people will buy what the Government is sprouting, and 2 people trying to scream 'don't believe everything they tell you!'

NC78 Tue 30-Apr-13 14:12:45

A single mother would be entitled to more than that with child tax credits, child benefit and housing benefit on top. The £71 is just the income support. The guardian puts a spin on stuff too. YANBU about the tests though.

Babyroobs Tue 30-Apr-13 14:18:53

Lone parents get a lot more than £71 per week , that is just income support . On top of this there is Child tax credits ( about £57 per week per child), housing benefit and child benefit.

siezethenight Tue 30-Apr-13 14:19:04

We have all seen the advert on Telly where the young girl is saying, 'I am a crisis and I do not care who you are...'
Those that bad mouth the unemployed, the benefit seeker must beware... A crisis is not picky and can strike you at any time.
That advert sends a shiver down my spine whenever it comes on as its true - a crisis can hit anybody, no matter how well equipped and able to cope you think you are. No matter how you think you are safeguarded against every eventuality. You are vulnerable, we all are vulnerable to a crisis.

Vivizone I stand with you and hang my head in shame at the way society has forgotten to be caring and decent and just bloody human to one another. Where is the compassion?
Most people are in the positions they are in today because of a crisis. There are those who are taking the piddle out of things, yes, but that person is not the norm, its the exception.
And as those who have had or are in a crisis are trying to get themselves and their lives back into some form of order, they get heckled and called nasty and often insulting names because they have to claim benefits.
Which, apparently, is perfectly acceptable today.

Babyroobs Tue 30-Apr-13 14:21:49

I agree op, I have a friend who has always worked but lost his job last year and is struggling. Each time I see him he looks more sad and downtrodden and it breaks my heart. No-one knows what is around the corner.

badbelinda Tue 30-Apr-13 14:28:33

Couldn't agree more OP. Because of the stigma now attached to being on benefits. Through work I have come across a lot of people, often elderly who refuse to claim what they need because they're "not that sort of person" often with great cost to their quality of life and that of their carers. Glad to see this thread and that not everyone buys into the spin.

2old2beamum Tue 30-Apr-13 14:28:33

vivizone Babyroobs
Thank God for a few people with some humanity

badbelinda Tue 30-Apr-13 14:29:40

Apologies for the poor grammar

LaGuardia Tue 30-Apr-13 14:36:28

Unsure of what the problem is here. Unemployed people with poor IT skills will find it useful. The results are recorded. And it isn't like they have anything better to do now, is it?

erowid Tue 30-Apr-13 14:36:34

The government seem to be doing everything they can to bring down the number of unemployed in this country, only instead of actually helping them get jobs, they just want them off the benefits list. Leaving more neither employed nor 'officially' unemployed.

siezethenight Tue 30-Apr-13 14:36:59

Now, see, that irritates me - Housing benefit and Council tax benefit IS NOT available spending money. It is to keep the roof over a person's head unless we should send all unemployed people to the park to sleep on a bench? Its not cash to splash, its not spending money, its not a buffer, its not easy street.
And both those things have been hit by the Government in the form of bedroom tax - there are NO 1 bedroom houses in the entirety of Wales to move people to who wish to downsize and free up their home for a larger family so they are trapped into paying the bedroom tax or they can move to private rented which costs the Government more than the council house they were in before. And just to satisfy the people who think the unemployed have got it so very easy - we slap them with a partial council tax bill as well, well, they put their bins out on a Friday night the same as the rest of us, right? They should pay.
nc78 I am not attacking you at all - but the housing benefit is not the claimants to spend as they see fit - its not easy being on benefits, its made harder by misconceptions and idea somehow that, if you have your rent paid, you are living it up in life... Even with 71.00 Income Support/JSA
Child benefit payment.
54.00 Child Tax Credits - how do you pay your gas, electric, water rates. Food. Transport costs to job interviews? Schooling costs such as uniforms and bus fare if its needed? All other household bills considering how much everything costs today. How do you manage to pay all those and keep your head up, your self esteem up when all about you it is now acceptable to bash you verbally because you 'have such an easy life.'

siezethenight Tue 30-Apr-13 14:39:20

That questionnaire is very odd - by the way - sorry op to take things away from your original post.

ophelia275 Tue 30-Apr-13 14:41:48

But siezethenight, if you get housing benefit, then you get the benefit of what that money pays for, namely a roof over your head which you have to pay for from your taxed salary if you are in work.

I never understand why people say that housing benefit isn't money in the pocket of those on benefits. Maybe not but those in salaried jobs also do not get the money in their pocket, they have to pay rent from their salary which they have worked for whereas housing benefit does not depend on work.

ophelia, you're right in a way, in that housing benefit should be counted. But see, the vast majority of people in receipt of housing benefit are workers in low-paid jobs getting top-ups because barely anybody in Britain has a living wage.

So unless you're earning quite a bit (I can't remember the threshold off the top of my head) then at least a portion of your rent costs won't come out of your salary either. So housing benefit is, to an extent, reliant on how much work you have. It's a sliding scale. A lot of people who like to sneer about "scroungers" don't take that into account and just lump all benefits under the unemployment umbrella.

doubleshotespresso Tue 30-Apr-13 15:14:02

Housing benefit very rarely covers the rent owing though does it?
It is certainly not free cash to splash for many, it falls woefully short of their monthly commitments. Which means then that JSA / child tax benefit has to be dipped into and basic living costs are thus overlooked.....

The maths just does not work for so many, how anyone thinks otherwise clearly needs updating

NC78 Tue 30-Apr-13 15:55:56

Until recently, I was on benefits as a lone parent of two.

I got
Income support £71
Child tax credit 113.68
housing benefit £64
council tax benefit £14.17
Child benefit 33.70 per week

Not enough for foreign holidays, boob jobs, a mansion in chelsea and other such shite you read in certain papers, but more than what the Guardian is saying. £71 per week is what a single person would have after housing costs, not a lone parent.

The assumption that people on benefits are skivers and all the degrading gimmicks that this government keep dishing out to jobseekers (workfare etc) are, however, fucking awful.

doubleshotespresso Tue 30-Apr-13 16:19:37

A single person living in private rented accomodation yes would get £71 per week, but their housing benefit does not even cover half their rent payments.

ParsingFancy Tue 30-Apr-13 16:34:25

LaGuardia, the "test" is fake.

It gives the same "result" whether you answer all the questions with one extreme or another.

It was even giving out "results" when people just paged through without inputting anything (though that's been stopped since a blogger mentioned it two weeks ago).

Much more info on a link from that article: FAKE DWP ?TEST? REVEALS SINISTER GOVT ?PSY-WAR?

Plus THE FILE THE DWP DOESN?T WANT YOU TO SEE" another post from that blogger with links to DWP documents about behavioural control.

AThingInYourLife Tue 30-Apr-13 16:38:38

"a crisis can hit anybody, no matter how well equipped and able to cope you think you are. No matter how you think you are safeguarded against every eventuality. You are vulnerable, we all are vulnerable to a crisis. "

No, we are not.

Most of us are.

Hence social insurance.

But the very wealthy, which includes most of this government, and not vulnerable.

And most of them have never been vulnerable.

They are pulling apart a system that offers them nothing but a safety net they don't need.

And they seemingly despise anyone who does need it.

And needing it doesn't just fall under actually claiming benefits.

Knowing you will be looked after in a crisis is valuable, even if that crisis never comes.

It affects behaviour, society, families, mental health, weekbeing.

But they want to take that away from us.

PatPig Tue 30-Apr-13 16:40:12

"A single person living in private rented accomodation yes would get £71 per week, but their housing benefit does not even cover half their rent payments."

Why do you think that?

The current BRMA rates are here:

http://www.voa.gov.uk/corporate/RentOfficers/LHARates/lhaFeb2013.html

They are based on 30th percentile rates, for a broad area. In cheaper parts of the BRMA (which can vary a fair bit in price), you will find many properties below the BRMA allowance.

Unsure of what the problem is here. Unemployed people with poor IT skills will find it useful. The results are recorded. And it isn't like they have anything better to do now, is it?

Filling in a bogus questionnaire does not make someone computer literate.

As for having nothing to do, peoples lives involve more than work. They are looking for work. Looking after their kids or elderly parents. Doing all the other tasks that daily life requires.

Claiming JSA does not equal lazy. Nor does it equal sitting on your arse all day able to fill in ridiculous questionnaires so that some arsehole in Westminster gets paid £100,000 per year.

Its disgusting.

PatPig Tue 30-Apr-13 16:55:38

How is it disgusting that someone's been told to fill in a pointless questionnaire? They are part of most jobs these days IME.

It becomes increasingly difficult to take claims about the evils of the government seriously when faced with such hyperbole.

Its disgusting that DC has basically created some nonsense department, headed by someone being paid £100,000 per year to issue questionnaires that mean nothing.

Claimants of JSA are people not just beings that deserve to be demeaned and pushed into corners.

PatPig Tue 30-Apr-13 17:05:06

I fill in lots of meaningless questionnaires. I don't go raging to the Guardian though.

ParsingFancy Tue 30-Apr-13 17:16:33

From the article: The DWP letter said the test was "scientifically shown to find people's strengths" and instructed her that along with searching for work she must complete the online test within three days. "Failure to comply with this direction may result in loss of benefit," it added.

But when questioned, the DWP didn't deny the "test" was fake.

And we're paying for this shit?

IneedAsockamnesty Tue 30-Apr-13 17:20:20

These are personal apparently phycological based tests that's a bit different than something based on your actual work.

They serve no purpose at all not even a pretend one they create no info for anyone,no stats no evidence not one thing that could even loosely justify doing it.

Pat

If you were told your only source of income was dependent on meaningless questionnaires, I am sure you would feel differently.

PatPig Tue 30-Apr-13 17:44:58

Eh? If I refused to fill in a meaningless questionnaire at work, I would be sacked. No income then.

And that is acceptable to you?

I would be looking for a new job.

NC78 Tue 30-Apr-13 17:48:34

They are a waste of time and money.

They will not help anyone get a job.

They will probably be used as an excuse to sanction some vulnerable jobseeker with learning disabilities who struggles to read or use a computer.

This is wrong.

IneedAsockamnesty Tue 30-Apr-13 17:50:38

Pat I'm guessing your employer pays you either the NMW or more?

FasterStronger Tue 30-Apr-13 17:50:48

I fill out extremely dull questionnaires for an important supplier.

the test does help you find your strengths - just not how people are expecting it - its nudge theory.

ParsingFancy Tue 30-Apr-13 17:52:39

Actually, I want the job of the person who thought this one up. I can promise to do exactly as much job creation, for half their salary.

Mind you, not sure I'd fit in.

What sort of person would you have to be to say, "Hmm, a global financial crisis starting with US mortgages has caused a worldwide recession. UK private employers have been laying people off, and we're making idealogical cuts to public sector employment. So lots of people are unemployed.

"What shall we do about that?

"I know, let's fuck with unemployed people's heads. That'll cause economic growth."

doubleshotespresso Tue 30-Apr-13 21:22:07

Patpig the figures in your link prove my point. Where do you know of in Inner south east London that costs £86 per week to rent?

rainbowslollipops Wed 01-May-13 07:54:50

Not including child benefit and help with rent it is £71 a week for single parents on jsa. used to be £142 a fortnight.

cory Wed 01-May-13 08:43:01

If I were unemployed, I would no doubt jump through hoops to do whatever I was told. As a worker I sometimes fill in questionnaires that seem pretty meaningless to me.

But as a taxpayer, I am BLOODY OUTRAGED that the DWP are wasting my money on compiling bogus questionnaires when they could be doing something to genuinely help people looking for work.

If the present government has money to throw around, let them spend it on something sensible.

"I have not created a thing of beauty in the last year", indeed. Well, if you were David Cameron, you'd certainly have to tick the box that says "this is very much like me". angry

AudrinaAdare Wed 01-May-13 08:49:25

cory grin

I'd be afraid of being sanctioned if I admitted I went out of my way to visit museums on tax-payers time and wasn't filling in applications eighteen hours a day.

andubelievedthat Wed 01-May-13 09:26:05

my own brother has been diagnosed with several high end illnesses , so he is on whatever benefit it is for same but gets £71 p.w. and rent paid , he can allow himself £1 electricity use per day,no more .I do his clothes washing that's £1 per day ,yup, people on benefits live life high on the hog ! oh and having had a stroke and having osteo atheritis and pre cancerous blood cell situation,which is being medically monitored, means he is indeed FIT FOR WORK ,according to ATOS , so ,its JSA for him and I bet employers will be queing up to take him on ,but should he have another stroke and end up paralysed ,? I do wonder how much the country will have to pay out re his care then? you really could not make this up ! (sorry re crap spelling)

ParsingFancy Wed 01-May-13 09:43:05

Oh look, now the geniuses behind this are to be made profit-making.

You know, people are living high on the hog on the welfare state. Just not the recipients of benefits.

Emma "A4E" Harrison does quite nicely.

G4S too, apparently. Remember, the security company who failed to deliver for the Olympics. They're now in the Work Programme business - not to employ people in their security work, but to cream off govt money and then subcontract "getting them into work" to third parties.

LondonMan Wed 01-May-13 09:51:32

Where do you know of in Inner south east London that costs £86 per week to rent?

That is the rate for sharing. The rate in my area (inner East London) is slightly higher, £92. A flat like mine (three bedroom two bathrooms) is shared by four woman, but the rental value is about £450 a week, which would be £113 each. However this is a flat worth over 600K probably occupied by young professionals working in the City, I'd assume someone on benefits would be in cheaper properties with lower rents, so £92 seems plausible to me. I may be wrong though.

doubleshotespresso Wed 01-May-13 10:02:59

Londonman yes you are right. So if you, like my friend have been recently laid off, never having claimed JSA before, and sharing a 2 bed flat, then you are only entitled to £86 per week, when your rent is £625 a month, and you thus find yourself in s **t street within a month. He gets the princely sum of £9.18 a week council tax benefit, meaning he still has to pay £80 per month for his share. This all came to light when he broke down on me over coffee and told me he coildnt see a way out, vannot afford to ove and is getting deeper and deeper into trouble, whilst chasing work.

My friend has gone from earning a comfortable £45k to now borrowing from friends until he can get back into work. All because he and his flatmate share a kitchen and a bathroom.

He is walking everywhere, had had mobile cut off due to on payments and eats toast most days.... Oh and he also owes his flatmate for utilities since Christmas.

We are all in this together?

doubleshotespresso Wed 01-May-13 10:04:46

Apologies for the typos!
"Couldn't see a way out, cannot afford to move (where on that money anyway?)

doubleshotespresso Wed 01-May-13 10:06:26

And he is now expected to fill in a form detailing whether or not he has made something beautiful in the last year?

MeNeedShoes Wed 01-May-13 10:26:35

I shall contribute to this thread against my better judgement then hide it because I know the inevitable descent into madness that will surely follow.

The problem is not people on short term benefits e.g. working person made redundant. They are treated shoddily by the benefits system and get next to nothing. E.g. sister and husband both made unemployed, had young baby to look after and a mortgage. They received the princely sum of £120 a week and relied on family to keep them in the house until they were able to get new jobs.

The problem is the 'benefits as a lifestyle choice' brigade. Don't tell me they don't exist. They do. I used to work with some of them (they were service users) and they were better off than me and my working colleagues. They had better housing and a higher disposable income than the people working there to help them on minimum wage. That's just a fact. Funnily enough the less in need they were, the more entitled they felt. It rankled at the time as I was living back at home with my parents because I couldn't afford housing on my FT wage.

However someone will be along to tell me I'm a liar in a matter of moments because the truth (on both sides of this debate) seems to send MNers screaming mad. So I'll bow out gracefully and wish that just once there could be an actual discussion about the benefits system and what needs changed without hurting the people who need them the most.

Ofcourse the lifestyle choice brigade exists.

The issue is that they exist in such a small number that to change the system because of them is making life unbearable for the majority of claimants, who actually need the money to survive.

LessMissAbs Wed 01-May-13 10:39:17

*From the article: The DWP letter said the test was "scientifically shown to find people's strengths" and instructed her that along with searching for work she must complete the online test within three days. "Failure to comply with this direction may result in loss of benefit," it added.

But when questioned, the DWP didn't deny the "test" was fake*

Perhaps the "test" is whether the person fills in the questionnaire or not!

ParsingFancy Wed 01-May-13 10:46:02

What wannabedomesticgoddess said.

andubelievedthat Wed 01-May-13 10:46:31

Nice try MNS, thing is ,if homeless you do not get to refuse a property ,you take what is offered,once .and its hardly their fault you cannot get a job paying more than the minimum wage ,is it?i"m not telling you you are a liar ,you certainly sound ,from your post ,bitter .as for a "proper discussion" do tell ,how would that go? or do you feel that having taken a position re benefit claiments ,no one should have another opinion?oh, and where did you work exactly?ypu have not bowed out gracefully< you have bottled it.

doubleshotespresso Wed 01-May-13 12:22:27

Ok I will put my neck on the block here.

Meneedshoes , I think you may have had a valid point until you deemed the rest of us incapable of reasonable intelligent discussion and then went running, andubelievedthat called you correctly!

Yes the the system is very shoddy for those for whom it is intended.

The problem is now though that we now have at least two generations who have lived within this system, are often barely into adulthood themselves before they have children, ill educated, the children of these families have never witnessed a family member hold down a job. They are unemployable even for many NMW jobs and have been trapped in the mindset that they are financially better off to remain out of work because it would jeopardise their benefit entitlements.

What we should be doing instead of bashing these people is creating jobs via industry, production and service, all of which require inexpensive and not very intensive training,in short create opportunity for those who have for a very long time had none.

Alongside this affordable housing and education alongside it remains an urgent requirement.

We now have thousands of our population who are at breaking point with nowhere to go for help, no forms in the universe correct their situation, it simply adds to their desperation.

FasterStronger Wed 01-May-13 12:38:58

how do you 'create jobs' in sufficient numbers to make a difference?

doubleshotespresso Wed 01-May-13 13:08:24

Fasterstronger great question..... But surely worth exploring.

If companies, small businesses, freelancers etc were given better incentives to actually recruit staff rather than the whole process being so expensive that would be a start.

It would also greatly assist the creation of jobs if manufacturing in this country was further encouraged. It is presently a no brainer for a production firm to get their products made overseas, not always that far from the UK either.....

Surely it would better to explore a few options before we just shrug our shoulders and watch further decline?

issey6cats Wed 01-May-13 13:20:12

to clarify single peoples allowances, i work 12 hours a week take home pay £78 a week, allowance by housing benefits £71 a week plus £5 for working so i get £76 a week of my wages, my rent is £400 a month private rental housing benefit £330 a month and i have to find £5 a month council tax under the new rules so each month i have to find £75 a month just for rent and council tax. so this leaves me with £224 a month to pay gas, electric, tv license, water rates, food, clothes so believe me even working im not living the life of bloody riley more like robbing peter to pay paul each month

ParsingFancy Wed 01-May-13 13:29:31

"we now have at least two generations who have lived within this system"

This gets repeated a lot, but isn't very true.

The original claim was that there were families of three generations who had never worked. When researchers went looking, they couldn't find a single one.

So now the claim is about families where "two generations have never worked." According to govt statistics these do exist - but the people may in fact have worked! The statistics only count people with permanent positions: seasonal and temporary work is ignored.

What's more, in such "two generation workless" families, the younger generation tends to not long have turned 16. So although they have not yet found work, there's no reason to imagine they're going to go through their whole life without work.

So although the myth gets repeated, it doesn't tell us anything meaningful.

IneedAsockamnesty Wed 01-May-13 13:29:55

Well they can find enough placements for MWA positions that used to be jobs before the gov started paying places like tesco bonuses to not employ people.

cumfy Wed 01-May-13 13:35:50

What boils my piss is that 100s of people will have "jobs" hmm, administrating and "analysing" this cack.

yonithebrave Wed 01-May-13 13:45:41

Way back when I used to work in an FE college, I was sent (at the princely sum of £1700) on a course that would mean I could administrate, score and interpret psychometric tests.

This is not a psychometric test. It is the online equivalent of a Just Seventeen 'Does he fancy you?' questionnaire.

There are failsafe questions to see if you've answered truthfully, but that's about it.

doubleshotespresso Wed 01-May-13 13:47:20

What family successfully and independantly runs on seasonal and temporary work?

The younger generation? Well they turn 16, leave education possibly and before you know it enter their early twenties with zero work history. Wich then of course makes them less attractive to employers.....

Parsingfancy I differ with you, there absolutely are lots of families who have not known work for two or three generations innLondon and it is utterly depressing to witness daily.

Quodlibet Wed 01-May-13 13:51:23

It's not just about people in a crisis though. There are a great number of people in the UK who just arent going to be able to achieve a paid job.
There are more than 6m under-employed people in the UK
There are nearly 3m unemployed people.
There are currently under half a million vacancies.

This ghastly rhetoric of removing support from people because 'work has been made to pay' is not incentivising work if there is no work to be had. It is punishing the already hard-up for their situation.

The bare facts of the matter are that some people are not going to be able to earn a income in this economic climate. Getting them to fill out meaningless quizzes for the sake of a vague research aim is treating them like specimens rather than human beings.

As others have said we are witnessing a complete lack of empathy - or worse, a pathologisation of poverty - from the current government. Yes, the country is in a fairly dire economic situation - but does that mean it's fine to abandon our human decency, empathy and compassion to balance the books? There's all sorts wrong with the current system, but none of them are going to be fixed or improved by this top-down demonisation of people already teetering over the gutter.

ParsingFancy Wed 01-May-13 13:55:58

Of course seasonal and temporary work will find it hard need topping up, doubleshot.

But you claimed: "the children of these families have never witnessed a family member hold down a job" and "have been trapped in the mindset that they are financially better off to remain out of work because it would jeopardise their benefit entitlements."

Which is rather different.

Oh, and if you'd like to pop the addresses of those families you know where three generations have never worked to the Jospeh Rowntree Foundation, I'm sure they'd be very glad of your expert advice.

But I think it's more likely you can point at families where at least one member in each of three generations is currently unemployed, rather than a family in which no member in three generations has ever worked. Not quite the same thing.

ParsingFancy Wed 01-May-13 14:11:54

temporary work will find it hard

doubleshotespresso Wed 01-May-13 14:33:19

Parsingfancy , sorry was not aware I had claimed to be an expert. I merely stated the facts as I find them everyday. I thought we were all in this for lively discussion, not cheapshots!?!

And yes your link throws up some interesting facts, particuarly the other problems brought on by worklessness. What they do not do, is disprove the fact that the families I refer to have no parents with a work history, and the grandparents (if around sadly) have not either. But some of these grandparents are in their 30s/40s. I did not state about a third generation, as I have not seen this firsthand.

Another fact you may like to ponder is that 30% of the adults/carers/parents etc are unable to read.

So I will stick with my previous statement (assuming of course that is fine with you?) that many families who have existed for years, making the lifestyle choice of benefits are reluctant to take temporary, part time or full time work as they know that once they leave the system, it is far harder for them to get back in. They fear their payments will be in jeopardy if they enter work or the work does not continue.

Very much as I stated before as opposed to your judged rather different.

ParsingFancy Wed 01-May-13 14:43:38

No, I'm not here for the fun of a lively discussion.

In this instance, I'm trying to stop people perpetrating falsehoods which then get picked up and tossed around like facts, on which policy is then made.

But as you've now recused from your claim that "there absolutely are lots of families who have not known work for two or three generations innLondon and it is utterly depressing to witness daily", that's cool.

ParsingFancy Wed 01-May-13 14:46:09

And I quite agree about the insecurity if people leave the system, and then need it again. Zero hours contracts being the worst of the worst.

cumfy Wed 01-May-13 14:52:50

Apparently the 48 questions are supposed to reveal strength of following traits.hmmhmm

Signature strengths

Strength 1. Curiosity
Strength 2. Bravery
Strength 3. Love of learning
Strength 4. Self Control
Strength 5. Teamwork

I believe however that it is far more likely that many of the questions are intended to document mental health "indicators", so that in the future should JSA applicants apply for ESA/DLA on MH grounds, DWP can dispute applications on the grounds that questionnaire answers contradict the claim.

Many of the questions relate to underlying indicators of depression, social anxiety, social functioning.

The problem is that people with genuine MH problems will feel embarrassed to reveal their psychological vulnerabilities in such a test, and will give conformal responses.

doubleshotespresso Wed 01-May-13 15:02:47

Oh wow- it's the falsehood police! And then you quite agree!

Priceless.

Two or three generations Parsingfancy. It is the truth. I see it daily. Deal with it.

But I am sure all Mners are grateful to you just in case they cannot absorb and analyse their own information or form opinions of their own.

Thank goodness you are here to show them all how a discussion works. This is a forum- did you get that memo?

You know nothing about me but presume to know everything. Then you "quite agree"- this really is painfully tedious now. Finally, I take great issue at your inference I am lying, we are here for debate not personal attacks. I fail to see what you feel you are bringing to this thread, but it comes across as deeply unpleasant, supercillious and inaccurate. Regurgitating the findings of a single website when faced with bare facts has made you look beyond ridiculous and the fact that you then act like you are doing us all a favour is insulting.

ParsingFancy Wed 01-May-13 15:24:29

WTF?

Oh, never mind.

doubleshotespresso Wed 01-May-13 15:36:16

I do mind.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now