To be purple with rage over workfare

[HoneyandHaycorns]

Sorry, I know there are loads of related threads on here, but I am getting really, really really upset and angry about the fucking workfare programme. It's an absolute outrage that my taxes are funding slave labour to line the pockets of huge tax-avoiding corporations, while the most vulnerable in our society are having their lifelines snatched away from them one by one.

I want to voice my protest, but apart from writing to my MP (which I have done) what is the best way of fighting this crap?

I simply can't believe that anyone in a civilised society could possibly think this was a good idea. Why on earth would a private company ever create any new jobs if they can have government-funded slave labour for free?

Will someone please come and tell me why the fuck anybody other than the boss of tescos would conceivably think this was a good idea?

And if you can't tell me why it is a good idea, please tell me the best way to protest.

Good to see this thread still going strong, have you seen Mumsnet's response to Custardo's thread about Workfare?

No, can you link please?

Honey it is in Politics

Called Occupy Mumsnet , it took a while for them to respond

"JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Thu 23-Feb-12 23:06:40
Evening all,

I do think this issue is actually a bit more complicated that meets the eye, as evidenced perhaps by the difference of opinion seen on this thread.

First, I don't agree that unpaid work experience is wrong per se. This is because it does seem to work. In fact I gather that it is pretty much the most effective scheme of many and various tried by the DWP to help young unemployed people into work. And given that it works, and that long term unemployment is so hugely debilitating for young people, it seems odd to be against it in principle.

That said, I do agree that were there evidence that a company was systematically abusing the scheme to avoid hiring people to permanent roles, and to merely to benefit from "slave" labour then we would most likely agree that they were right buggers and wouldn't want their presence on Mumsnet. I do think the new Tesco position, offering a paid four-week placement with a job if you complete it satisfactorily is an intrinsically better way of doing things because otherwise there will always be a suspicion/risk of abuse.

I also think that the compulsory element of this scheme (I think that if you drop out after the first week you lose a couple of weeks of benefits) does seem too Draconian - I think it's come about because of the idea that companies might devote resource into training etc so there has to be some incentive to stop people just being flaky - but it smacks a bit of it not being something that both parties voluntarily enter into for mutual benefit which is the only way it stacks up. That of course is for government to change, not individual businesses and we'll certainly see if anyone from government would like to come on to talk about that.

By the by we have just started an intern scheme here at MN. Interns are paid £1k per month and do a rotating 6 months around different bits of MNHQ and I really hope we end up hiring some of them permanently and that if not it helps them get jobs elsewhere."

Reading at again I could feel my blood pressure rising.

Look at this Forty years ago he was getting paid a WAGE FFS

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2106897/Sir-Stuart-Rose-tells-firms-defy-Right-To-Work-militants.html

This Sir Stuart Rose, formerly of M&S?
In 2011
"Sir Stuart, who stepped down in January, walked away with a total of £8.1m in cash and shares. He received £2.77m in salary and bonus, as well as £915,000 in a share bonus plan that was scheduled to pay out. Another £4.5m of long-term share awards that could have paid out in future years were accelerated."

TapselteerieO

Hi,
Unfortunately it doesn't work anyway. Workfare makes the fundamental mistake of assuming it will make a significant difference to unemployment by putting people to work who 'didn't want to work' or by giving people 'skills' they didn't have before so they can then work (which is presumably the result largely of a failed education system anyway).
It doesn't create jobs though... and that's why it can't work when there are less jobs than people to do them. We all know how governments love to play with figures (or lie about wars), and this topic has some absolute jems coming from Whitehall.

The two week sanction is the least... for the Mandatory Work Activity it is thirteen weeks first sanction, and up to six months sanction (I'd have to check the latter).
There are five schemes I believe ALL with mandatory aspects and sanctions and the Work Programme for example is six months unpaid work. The sanctions are enough to put people on the streets... you only have to look to see the extreme poverty in the richest country in the World the USA to see how it doesn't work.

Then there are the consequences... if you take someone's bread and butter away... how do they survive? Either they impose themselves on others, friends and family, or turn to crime, and if the latter then that's more money the government has to spend and less safety for everyone else.

So one week you are on ESA and then because you are 'only in a wheelchair' (you can type and answer telephones presumably), and you do after all have at least six months to live with your terminal illness you go onto JSA, and then by the very nature of the system, a JSA advisor and not a doctor or specialist decides what you can and can't do, and decides to put you onto a workfare scheme or not... great! Good thinking batman! That's a quality system right there!

Have a good week, and I hope you are not affected by this building social welfare disaster.

I hate the idea in itself anyway, but sure even Tories can see that the government is paying wages for Tesco etc? How does that fit in your philosophy of a small state?

I don't mind so much the idea of doing community work - it's the corporations getting free labour and the claimants having to work alongside paid people that gets on my wick.

WordsAreNoUseAtAll

Yes the reasons people object as I listed hopefully quite comprehensively in my first post on this thread are many which is why so many people are against it.

However, the objections are working... the government can't control who shops where or who complains. So for example ASDA have yet to withdraw, while Tesco haven't withdrawn but will pay people, and Sainsbury won't have anything to do with it. Likewise Salvation Army are still involved, but Oxfam want nothing to do with any of it as it isn't voluntary. The once still involved will look increasingly bad as things develop, rather like the NHS changes... GPs now want to vote for strike action... things have to be very serious for them to want to do that.

Still, the government have restricted funding to universities and there is a massive youth unemployment, so their next little trick is to try and roll out... yup... 'Youth Contract' which is simply just another billion rolling out more of the Work Programme, Work Experience, and Apprenticeships... in effect just a desperate new PR spin on two of the workfare schemes aimed at the 1 in 5 unemployed and not in education youths who apparently all just sit on their butts all day according to Nick Clegg (nice one)... and all coming to a screen near you from this April!

So that's a lot of youngsters being treated like crap working alongside paid staff at for profit companies for nothing. Sweet... should be good for the share prices and the bosses. Just think, no proper employment contracts, no wages to pay, no sick pay, and a regular turnover of young and healthy (or perhaps not) forced labour... brilliant!

You couldn't make it up.

Have I got it wrong? I thought I read that older, experienced, sick, dying, disabled were prime targets! This isn't just about getting experience/training for the young, it's about bullying the weakest into something they often CANNOT do! As I said before, YOPS/YTS, for the youths, Community Enterprise programme, for older/experienced, Enterprise Allowance, for budding entrepreneurs, and Incapacity/Disability benefits for the sick/disabled, is what our system should be offering OUR NATION (not those who are benefit tourists!)! This is not what my contributions were supposed to support!

You haven't got it wrong Nannasylv, it just isn't being given any media attention.

Thanks TapselteeriO, I'm sick of everyone referring to the young, who need training/experience, as being the ones affected by this. Even the quotes of Cameron et al, avoid the fact that intelligent, experienced people (currently too sick to work), and seriously physically impaired , are being bullied into activities which exacerbate their health problems, and force them off the benefits they worked and paid for! Is their no legal redress for these people, the Human Rights Laws should protect us too!

Nannasylv.

See my first and second posts on this thread. The Guardian recently did an article about the disabled etc. and how the workfare programmes would affect the least well off in society of all ages. In fact that's what got me looking into it.

ESA claimants are being hit by this as they get put onto JSA and yes anyone on JSA of any age is affected potentially by one of the five schemes of which all have mandatory (i.e. in effect forced labour for less than minimum wage) aspects with various sanctions which all involve benefits withdrawal.

If you can do something work wise, and you have longer than six months to live, if you want to claim JSA, what is now happening and being rolled out more and more in the build up to Universal credit etc. will affect anyone on JSA.

People currently on Working Tax Credit will also likely need to be getting at least the equivalent of a full time minimum wage or be shifted onto JSA requirements also i.e. will simply be treated as jobseekers under government plans for 'Universal Credit'.

The legal changes the government have pushed through last year on JSA to try and avoid minimum wage laws etc. and the new various schemes and extension of previous ones introduced by Labour means this will affect all ages from school leaver up to retirement age, and people with many disabilities and illnesses even terminal illness.

Search Google with 'boycott workfare'... and you will be able to get the truth behind the lies.

"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors" Plato.

Am i a member of the SWP? No.
Am I a plant? No, been here years.

I also don't agree with the HQ line. There is a failure to mention terminally ill, those deemed unfit to work and carers having to do this scheme as well.

I don't think there's any such thing as a BBC bias on this one. As it is people with disabilities are finding it hard enough to highlight the cuts that this government are smashing down upon us - ie the cut to Universal Credit for disabled children amongst others - the abolition of the ILF, there's so much that there is a complete media blackout over.

TopDaddy, thanks for the info. I'm one of those on Incapacity Benefit, deemed unfit for work BUT also deemed able to be in the WRAG. I'm in constant pain, with a not-yet-diagnosed bowel problem, for which I can only use low-level pain-killing patches (with which I cannot drive). I am kept awake, by pain, and toilet needs (for which I have to use a private bathroom). I can barely sit/stand, a lot of the time, never mind walking (for which I usually need a walking stick). When healthy (even as a single parent, who could have just claimed Income support), I worked for 33 years, and paid into the system. I now have fear of bankruptcy added to the list. I am considering contacting a solicitor to handle my appeal, but it seems we have no rights any more, and I am afraid of the cost. I couldn't stack shelves etc. if I was facing a firing squad!

I sent this e-mail to [email protected], just in case any of you opposing the workfare scheme want to do so (I have posted this elsewhere on here, as part of my attempt to get as many people involved as I can)

Dear Mr Grayling

I am against the Government's Workfare Scheme I refer to all schemes that penalise people who withdraw from them resulting in the loss of their benefits including ;

The Work Experience programme

Community Activity Programme,

WRAG/ESA,

Mandatory Work Activity,

Sector-based work academies,

The Work Programme.

I do not in principle oppose the unemployed gaining good quality work experience, that does not involve a full working week and gives them time to pursue available jobs. The compulsory schemes offer companies a steady stream of free labour, just at a time when the emphasis should be on creating stable and lasting employment. If as the Government you would like us to believe that "we are all in this together" then companies making huge profits from the custom of ordinary people should do something to help people back into work without profiteering from free labour - taking precious over-time from part-time workers or reducing the number of jobs available to jobseekers.

I will continue to oppose this scheme and boycott every company that participates, until all organisations involved either remove themselves or amend their terms. All that is needed is a fair day's wage for a fair day's work, and not have people forced (or blackmailed by the state) into mandatory Work Experience Schemes which do not offer this basic right.

Whilst I am being slandered by you in the media, being called such astonishing names as left wing, militant and Socialist I would like to make it clear that none of these are correct, I have no political affiliations. I ask that you stop using such misinformed rhetoric. All who oppose back to work schemes that are mandatory and penalise benefit claimants are predominantly ordinary people, and it is offensive to be treated so contemptuously.

I look forward to your response. I think this is what unemployed people need to help them back to work.

1. All schemes should be voluntary

It's right to offer encouragement for jobless individuals to take up work placements, but the moment they are forced onto the scheme their ability to make the most of their experience diminishes.

1. They should take into account the individual's career hopes

Stacking shelves may be useful for someone looking for a career in the retail business, but not if he or she is a car mechanic. If their hopes are unrealistic, careers advice may be more helpful.

1. They should take experience and qualifications seriously

If the individual is significantly over- or under-qualified for the placement, or already has experience in that field, the benefits to them will be significantly reduced.

1. They should offer a learning experience

The placement should be structured so that, at the end, the job seeker should have a clear idea of how they have benefited. Ideally there should be some kind of project, the completion of which could be added to their CV.

1. There should be a time limit

The longer these schemes last, the more it can be claimed that they are replacing real jobs with free labour. They should run for a maximum of four weeks, or less if the learning element ends sooner than this. Companies participating must show that they are actively looking for new employees, and they have jobs available for the majority of those participating.

I look forward to hearing your response.

Kind regards,

(numbered points are Guardian reader's ideas).

TapelsteerieO - will do, and thanks for helping to show the way. If enough of us follow suit, maybe ??????????? someone in their ivory tower may take note!!!!!!!!!

There are some great posts on this thread, I liked your Plato quote Topdaddy.

Nannasylv I feel for you, I think the worst thing about these work for your welfare (Workfare) schemes is that it attacks the many for the crimes of the few (0.8 % of claims for out of work benefits are fraud, 1.8 are overpayment mistakes made by DWP and there is over a billion in under payments). You have worked all your life and when you are vulnerable and need support the government kicks you when you are down, the media focus on one very small section of the unemployed (young and longterm) in order to skew the argument. Ordinary people can see how this threatens jobs, the national minimum wage, tax and national insurance contributions BUT it is hardly ever mentioned in the news.

I am still raging about it, I am glad it is hitting companies reputations, Tesco, Boots and Asda are three places I no longer shop, they are losing money - I hope it hurts them because the damage they are doing being involved with workfare is unforgivable. Wages for work - simple really!

RL beckons today.

Ooh ooh ooh! Have just put Grayling on live pause (C4 news, 19:20 ) talking about Work Experience and am going to transcribe:

"And the whole benefit of this, you know, employers don't want to take people who are forced labour. We couldn't refer people on a mandatory basis to big companies even if we wanted to, because why would a big company want to take someone who wasn't interested in working for them."

Hahaha! So that's Mandatory Work Activity completely sunk then!

SerialKipper,
I was delighted to see this too.

Not a leg to stand on generally, and (!) C4 says Grayling's press officer was sent a copy of the letter at 1.56 in the afternoon!

The scheme sanctions for failing to start or leaving after a one week cooling off period, however, the letter which can now be seen online clearly says it is totally mandatory.

It is also very clear that job centre staff are under extreme pressure to get people on these schemes, by the government and the private providers who are essentially in cahoots with each other. One is getting money for it to work, the other is spending money for it to work and is also trying not to lose face!

The wellbeing of the jobseeker's is therefore nowhere to be seen, as it is being squashed between the wellbeing of government egos and looking for rating and greed! However, backfiring badly... and own goals are being struck daily.

Welfare and greed do not mix at all well!

Oxfam pulled out as they were lied to and thought the placements were entirely voluntary.

I feel sorry for any poor ........ on JSA or ESA now... what a bloody mess... clearly not content with pulling the NHS apart.

The comment above about there being potentially more unemployed than jobs long term is a good one by the way. Society has gone from no jobs, to the fields, to the factories, to the offices... but after that there is potentially nowhere left to go with increasing use of mechanisation in factories and technology in general in offices etc.

Also interest on bank loans creates inflation and as a result the World economy must continually 'grow' to stay 'healthy'; if that growth falters, slows, or stops then the companies that survive often have to become much more efficient, and in doing so those jobs lost may never return.

So for example, expecting so many thousand redundant civil servants to not increase JSA by a roughly equivalent amount is asking rather a lot... whose to say those jobs have any private sector equivalents in anything less than a very substantially growing economy?

I can see why the government is clutching at straws... but pay peanuts and you get monkeys... this is no way to treat people who are already at their wits ends... whether it is a disillusioned youth who need honest helpful encouragement or an ageing population who need looking after.

Out of the cooking pan and into the fire... the government have caved to pressure on the work experience sanctions and are removing them..

However!!!

They are threatening that people who do not 'volunteer' for work experience will be 'considered' for Mandatory Work Activity.

So bottom line... people will be effectively forced to volunteer to avoid Mandatory Work Activity which is a punishment type scheme, and results in 13 weeks loss of benefits for non attendance and can affect even people with part time work.

What utter drivel they are coming up with to try and avoid the whole thing caving in... DWP have not responded to Channel 4 as to why online documents were changed to remove the bit about what job centre advisers had to say to avoid minimum wage laws, and the union that many jobcentre workers are in are now saying officially that their members want rid of workfare!

So with our GPs ready to lay down stethoscopes and strike over the NHS destruction, and our Job Centre staff not supporting what they are supposed to be implementing I'd say the coalition has got things very very wrong!

Do they really think that reassuring the businesses involved that one tiny aspect of the Work Experience placement being "voluntary" is enough?

I really feel that the debate has been completely marginalised and hope that people opposing this scheme will continue to see Workfare as unfair, and exploitation of all unemployed people, not just 18-24 year olds.

Boots have withdrawn from the Mandatory Work Experience Scheme!!!!

Lets all deny people the opportunity to get some work experience, especially the young.

Why would you do that Redbin?

Come in very late to this and have not read it all, so apologies

Why can't Tesco et al just create a few real jobs that pay real wages rather than using unpaid labour. - god knows they could do with more staff in some of these stores tor provide anthing near approaching decent customer service. ... and let the shareholders take a bit less of a dividend....