To think being sanctioned for not applying for a job is not unfair ?

[Xmasfun]

People on JSA are now complaining they are being left with £40 to live in for one week for being sanctioned for not applying for the job they agreed to with their advisor. I'm no Scrooge but when hubby and I work (I'm currently on smp) 3 kids , we only had about that to live on last week after bills, Xmas gifts, etc . I mean they are being sanctioned cause they aren't doing as they agreed which was too apply for a job which is what JSA is isn't it? Your seeking for a job? It sounds harsh but to complain you will now be short because you've been sanctioned , well boo hoo it's no better on the other side either :(

Oh another thread bashing poor people!
What was their reason for not applying? that is kind of very critical to my response.

Think in principle I agree but lots of double/triple negatives make it hard to make my mind up

Which people would you be talking about OP? Ones you know?

I've been sanctioned for "not applying" for a job that I did apply for. Mistakes happen as well.

Also, some of the jobs you are made to apply for are knocking on doors selling stuff or call centres that class you as "self employed" commission only or under minimum wage. That really isn't helpful as you could end up with nothing at all, not enough hours for tax credits and kids to feed.

It depends if the job was one they were actually qualified to do.

I know a couple of people who are unemployed and they say they are pressured into applying for jobs they know damned well they aren't suitable for. so you may 'agree' but that's because the advisor is piling on the pressure and you say yes, you'll apply for that teaching job with your cse in RE and your certificate in origami.

What's the point of doing that? So you can be seen to be applying for 40 jobs a week? Even though 39 of them you don't have the skills, qualifications or experience for?

If, OTOH, these are jobs the people could realistically do - then they should apply for them, of course they should.

but call me cynical, I just bet it's the job centre making people apply for jobs they don't have a hope in hell of getting.

Could well be, not some one personal to me no , I've had to to selling stuff, and catalogue delivery in the past to try and get through , I just feel that they are complaining to be on £40 a week when many working ppl are left with that , and they have worked hard for it and don't get to see any of it either.

I agreed to apply for a job when I was in JSA a few years ago on the basis of a very brief job spec. Got home, looked up the spec on the company web site to see it was a highly technical electrical engineering role that had about 3 terms in common with my expertise (with different meanings). So no I didn't apply for that job!

I get confused when they talk about cutting JSA or "fining" people part of their benefits, it's made very clear that the amount they pay is the absolute minimum to survive on. The £40 a week that you have left AFTER bills, Xmas pressies etc is all they have to pay heating, lighting, food, water, loo roll, cleaning products etc.

Who are "people on JSA"? All people on JSA or people you specifically know. Starting a thread with what sounds like a DM headline is never a good idea.

Without knowing the details of individual cases you have no right to pass judgement.

And in your post you say that you only had £40 to live on after bills and Xmas presents. Some people only have that BEFORE bills and Xmas presents.

I understand its unfair to those who have been on JSA short-term and genuinely looking , but these ppl have been on And off JSA for years and years !

YABU
lots of people are sanctioned unfairly. It's a huge power to place in the hands of a decision maker: the power to take away someones entire income and it is often exercised in an arbitary fashion.
Having to account for your jobsearch in detail, in order to recieve the pittance that is JSA is humiliating anyway IMHO.
People on a low income often have every single penny planned out and accounted for. Disrupting that income for any reason is a nightmare. Disrupting it as a punishment is unforgivably cruel.

Good motivation tho to get work ......

it isn't about benefit bashing but basic honesty. Would you want to employ someone who didn't do what they claimed to be doing ?

Unless you have actually been on JSA and had to put up with the "advisor" then you really have no idea.

DP for the past 2 years since he lost his job has been going in every 2 weeks and not once have they printed or suggested any jobs for him to try. Instead they send him to a place that is meant to help him find work, he gets put on the PC for an hour to look on his own and can't even search for what he is qualified to do as the word "game" has been banned from searches!

He could and does do that at home, it's not helpful at all. Also, they sanction you if you go to a job interview when you are due to sign on. I caught swine flu the other year when it was rife and they actually cancelled my claim as I wasn't fit to work, even though I was only ill for just under 2 weeks.

Also, every so often they send a letter saying "how much the law says you need to live on" yet they take away all money if you make a mistake.

Some people are not thought as as human.

Good motivation tho to get work ......

Don't you think if it was that easy they would be in work in the first place!!!!

Yawn at another benefit bashing thread!!

"Good motivation tho to get work"

Easy for someone to say who already has a job and doesn't have a gap on their C.V.

Usual I know, you'd think the benefit bashing bastards would at least take a break for Xmas.

I'm also likely to be sanctioned if I don't accept workfare soon.

Problem is - even Atos have said I'm not fit for work, apparently I am fine for slave labour though.

I know someone who is a Quaker (therefore teetotal) with severe arthritis in their hips and knees who was penalised for refusing to apply for a job as a barmaid. Standing up all day serving people alcohol? What could suit her better?! Of course, she used to be considered disabled back in the day before anything less than being a head on a pillow with 3 days left to live was viewed as fully fit for work...

Disagree that it is humiliating to have to account for your job search. If you're wanting free money the government is entitled to ask what you are doing to change that situation.

Also don't see the harm from the applicant's perspective of being "required" to apply for jobs that you're not qualified for. Very annoying for the recruiter, yes, but no skin off your nose, is it?

You've missed the point spectacularly.

Their £40 has to pay for food, gas, electric, tv licence, water rates etc..etc..

You £40 is leftover after paying all that.

I agree in theory that unemployed should be encouraged to go for interviews.
However BIL is unemployed and in fact should be on disability but thats another story.
He is constantly being given interviews that require him to get a bus across the other side of town. His money is so tight that to do that one day means that he can't do it any other day of the week and getting out of the house is his life line. He has budgeted so that he can afford one day ticket a week and on that day he does his grocery shopping and spends a few hours in the library to access the internet.
If he has to go to an interview on more than one day a week which requires him to take a bus it means he has to go without in other ways.