Tories to announce full workfare next week.

(111 Posts)
Darkesteyes Thu 26-Sep-13 23:03:36

According to the Mail This just popped up in my Twitter feed.

https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/383342225926524928/photo/1

angry

ttosca Fri 27-Sep-13 01:09:02

I can't wait until this asylum of psychopaths are kicked out of government, never to return again.

And they won't be. They haven't won a majority since 1992 and they wont win one ever again.

There are now too few rich, white, reactionary, male, heterosexual conservatives.

May they rot in hell.

ttosca Fri 27-Sep-13 01:12:20

That piece of crap Ian Duncan Smith should be put in jail:

Atos to lose monopoly after 'flawed and unacceptable' disability benefit assessments

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/atos-to-lose-monopoly-after-flawed-and-unacceptable-disability-benefit-assessments-8727115.html

territt Fri 27-Sep-13 09:31:37

whats wrong with making unemployed people work for hand-outs?

PedlarsSpanner Fri 27-Sep-13 09:35:30

Hahaha territt, that made me guffaw

territt Fri 27-Sep-13 10:15:15

Pedlar, you think people should get hand-outs without having to work for it?

KayHarker Fri 27-Sep-13 10:42:29

In a word, yes. Why should people work for less than minimum wage?

WoTmania Fri 27-Sep-13 10:43:03

territt - I think the point is that if there is that with workfare and 'working for benefits' it involves working for less than the minimum wage. Why not give them a properly paid job rather than expecting people to essentially work for free?

territt Fri 27-Sep-13 11:27:15

If people are long term unemployed then I really don't think its unfair to expect them to work for hangouts,

Have quoted this :
"It is expected that claimants who go through the Government’s main back-to-work scheme, the Work Programme, but fail to find a job, will be required to take part in unpaid community activities or work experience.

Those who refuse to do so face losing their welfare payments."

So they get help with the back to work scheme, but still don't get a job, they will be expected to take part in unpaid community activities or work experience. seems pretty fair to me, work experience will look good on a CV and help to find a job, and with if they cant get work experience then surely community activities are good, I mean why should the community continue to fund them if they don't want to put anything back into the community?

territt Fri 27-Sep-13 11:28:23

handouts not hangouts

niceguy2 Fri 27-Sep-13 11:45:23

The devil is in the detail.

I don't have a problem with the long term unemployed (say 1 year+) having to work experience if that's what stopping them getting a job.

What I don't want to see is newly unemployed ppl who are genuinely trying to be whipped off just meet government targets.

A friend of mine got stuck in a rut on JSA. He lost motivation and it was just easier for him to bimble along on benefits than get a job. It was only when the Job Centre forced him to come in literally every day and show his attempts at job hunting and being a general PITA that eventually he took a job. Until then there was always a reason why a job wasn't suitable.

In that context I give this a cautious welcome.

ParsingFancy Fri 27-Sep-13 11:49:34

Being forced to come in to the Job Centre and show evidence of job-hunting is an entirely different kettle of fish from profit-making companies getting a workforce paid for by the taxpayer.

SoonToBeSix Fri 27-Sep-13 11:53:52

Territt you are very naive

niceguy2 Fri 27-Sep-13 11:54:37

My point is that it was until the pressure was really piled on that he got up and found a job.

Until then he was happy just sofa surfing.

Therefore I can see that the prospect of workfare will encourage those who are just lacking motivation to REALLY find work. And it could actually help those who are lacking experience.

But I do accept that this could be used wrongly and not help in certain circumstances. It all depends on how the rules are applied. And here the government do have a chequered history.

ParsingFancy Fri 27-Sep-13 12:08:24

I'm not sure how you're making the leap from

some pressure would be a good thing

to

workfare is an appropriate form of pressure.

Particularly given JobCentres can and do apply pressure by simply stopping paying benefits (sanctioning).

ParsingFancy Fri 27-Sep-13 12:13:51

The point is, workfare is harmful to the economy as a whole.

Instead of businesses employing people and paying them, the taxpayer is now paying them.

(Disclaimer: there can be specific cases eg apprenticeships where it's overall positive for the country for the taxpayer to contribute to a business's labour costs, but permanent unskilled labour isn't one of them.)

niceguy2 Fri 27-Sep-13 12:47:04

I guess it's about having more than one tool to do the job.

In my friends case he was meeting the job searching requirements (somehow) so in that context the job centre couldn't sanction him. Actually they did once when he missed his appointment but that wasn't enough 'encouragement' to get him to find work.

But once they introduced something so regular that it was a big enough pain in the bum, it made him realise that he may as well have a job. And that's what i'm trying (possibly badly) to say here.

There are those who simply don't want a job. I'm sure we all know or have known someone like that. For those workfare could be enough of an incentive to get them to actually genuinely find work.

As for workfare being harmful to the economy. It doesn't have to be. Just takes some proper planning. If you plan it poorly and let employers use it as a slave labour then yes it's going to be bad. But it doesn't necessarily have to be the case.

ParsingFancy Fri 27-Sep-13 12:57:24

Can you describe a set-up where workfare isn't harmful to the economy? Because it's an age-old issue.

A friend in a local authority explained it to me when I was a teenager. Someone had suggested the council should be using the unemployed to pick rubbish from the streets. She asked the questioner what she should do with the existing council street cleaners - make them unemployed?

Any scheme where the fundamental idea is that the taxpayer pays below minimum wage for someone to do work has the same flaw. Obviously it's a vastly magnified flaw when the beneficiary of the work is a profit-making company, but the flaw's still there for non-profits.

NicholasTeakozy Fri 27-Sep-13 13:26:43

territt Fri 27-Sep-13 09:31:37

whats wrong with making unemployed people work for hand-outs?

They're not handouts. They've already been paid for via NI contributions. But the thieves behind these schemes don't tell you that.

NiceGuy, Workfare doesn't, erm, work. It just drives down wages and removes what little job security we have. What they're planning is permanent workfare. It's disgusting. I want to see capitalism for all, not just for the poor. What we have is not capitalism, it's financial terrorism. Our future is being stolen by these kleptocratic morons.

ttosca Fri 27-Sep-13 13:49:47

Do you make these little stories up as you go alone, niceguy?

ttosca Fri 27-Sep-13 13:52:53

Social security payments are not handouts. They are insurance payments paid through taxation.

If you don't agree with this principle, then you might as well forego the NHS and fire services. Everyone pays, and individuals withdrawal when they need to.

That's the way civilised societies work.

mirry2 Fri 27-Sep-13 14:03:56

Anyone who has ever claimed job seeking benefits but doesn't really want to work can tell you that the system can be manipulated very easily. The sort of work seeking evidence that is accepted includes, claims that they have looked at jobs vacant newspaper columns, registering with an employment agency, phoning some potential employees and writing letters of application (But no proof of postage)

I suspect that job seekers who are compelled to carry out unpaid work won't be dong it 40 hours a week and so in effect they will be receiving more than the minimum wage if it's averaged out over the week. I'm all for it.

territt Fri 27-Sep-13 15:07:36

NicholasTeakozy
They're not handouts. They've already been paid for via NI contributions. But the thieves behind these schemes don't tell you that.

Except for the fact that a lot of the people claiming haven't paid a day in their life's

ttosca Fri 27-Sep-13 15:19:49

> Except for the fact that a lot of the people claiming haven't paid a day in their life's

You know this how?

NicholasTeakozy Fri 27-Sep-13 15:21:47

Do you have a link to prove your statement territ? I'd be interested to see it.

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