I haven't committed any crime like this woman has, so why do I have to do 120 hours of unpaid work?

[DeadWomanWalking]

Woman sentenced to 215 hours of unpaid work for committing benefit fraud. I'm currently having to do 120 hours of unpaid work (30 hours a week for 4 weeks) or I'll lose my benefits. So what's my crime? Being unemployed? Being poor? Completely baffled by this governments policies.

Maybe the scheme would.and shold only work in what are already voluntary place. Charity Shops, Care, etc.

Yes, Raspberry I completely agree that treating jobseekers as if they need to improve their moral fibre is condescending in the fucking extreme.

That's why I object to the narrative around workfare, which assumes precisely that.

And I agree about the value of genuine volunteering. Genuine voluntary activities have always been available. There are even coordinating organisations like CSV, and have been for years.

Nothing to do with workfare.

So we had a situation before workfare where the people who wanted to volunteer could already do so (unless some berk from the JobCentre stopped them). And those who didn't were much more likely to be the ones you didn't want in your house.

Good training in some valuable skill, expenses paid, even if it costs more than sending people to Tescos, sounds marvellous. Almost like the sort of thing people go to college for, no? (Although EMA's now been removed, of course.)

Again, been going on for decades, nothing whatever to do with workfare.

Workfare is simply not a part of these solutions.

Parsing - my 1st post was - I object to workfare !

It's a problem, isn't it, as soon as one utters a sentence like, "All jobseekers should volunteer"?

Because what is one going to do if they don't?

As you so rightly say, raspberry, removing the artificial barriers to voluntary work which the JobCentre creates would be hugely beneficial to both the unemployed and the community. The fact that the JobCentre does create these barriers is a red flag that the intent is punitive rather than constructive.

the cash people receive as jsa has already been earned by the claimant. if you have not worked and paid tax you do not get jsa. you may get some other benefit but not jsa. people therefore should not have to 'work/slave' again for the same money. is that clear?

Oh dear god.

Today's news: "Jobseekers made to carry out bogus psychometric tests"

"Jobseekers are being made to complete bogus psychometric tests by the Department for Work and Pensions ? and told that in some cases they risk losing their benefits if they do not complete the meaningless online questionnaire."

Plues more on the "test" here.

Raspberryroop - Umm...I'm not sure how to write this without it sounding like sarcasm...but I'm not sure what you're saying. Sorry. Autistic. Implied meaning. Ahh. But I also agree that the job centre systems are complex and the government are people whose experience is upper-class and wealthy. I wish too that unemployed people could be offered employment in projects such as Meals on Wheels. It could be offered as volunteer work too. That's great. It's when unemployed people are effectively fined for opting out, by benefits being stopped, that I find the snag.

In theory I agree that everyone contributes to the household or the community. The experience of people when is put into practice, though, is scary. I want communicate the horrible weird twilightly world where people with opinions above your rights make decisions about where you spend your day and your energy.

I mean to communicate that sometimes people problem-solve and that can depersonalise the experience of the people it effects. I chose your post as an example of replacing 'they' and 'I' etc because it was on a convenient page, but I could have chosen others.

We're all assuming that big companies use job seekers as cheaper labour and I'm sure there is some truth in that. But in reality many many people in this country go straight from school to claiming benefits so actually some work experience with some of the country's leading retailers is a good opportunity and can only help to improve employment prospects. I would expect from tescos point if view that training new recruits every 6 weeks ( or whatever) most of whom don't want to be there is a big of a pain so I'd like to think that these companies are actually trying to give something back.

The ops case is slightly different as she had obviously worked and contributed previously but there are an awful lot of people - my neighbour being one that have never worked, haven't got the first idea about working and who absolutely should learn that you get nothing for nothing.

WTF? Am astounded at the effrontery of the govt. threatening people into completing fake 'psychomentric' tests. Yet another downright lie about 'oh no, we don't threaten to withdraw benefits' I see - how long until there's a leaked email from a benefits advisor supervisor stating how many people the office has to chuck off benefits to meet their target?

The lack of respect this government has for anyone unfortunate enough to lose their job is disgusting. No human dignity, no awareness that these are people with the same rights as everyone else. And no understanding that not everyone has a computer + broadband at home - either that, or it's a deliberate ploy to attack the poorest and most vulnerable.

As for the idea that workfare might benefit young people who have never worked - if so, why is it being applied to everyone, not just those looking for their first job? And why workfare when the fact is anyone on workfare is LESS likely to get a job than someone not on workfare - the government's own statistics confirm this.

You mean like this one, edam: "Jobcentre was set targets for benefit sanctions"

[Walthamstow jobcentre adviser manager, Ruth] King says in her email: ... "Guys, we really need to up the game here. The 5% target is one thing ? the fact that we are seeing over 300 people a week and only submitting six of them for possible doubts is simply not quite credible."
...
She also discloses that the jobcentre customers manager is looking for about 25 referrals a week. "We made six last week and so far this week have made four. There is a shortfall here."

And more whistleblowing from JobCentre staff in response to the above article: "Jobcentre 'scorecard' shows how areas are performing on stopping benefits".

"[A JobCentre advisor in the north east said] All advisers at my place of work and most in the district have been given mid-year review statements (on which performance-related pay is based) which include a target to achieve 6% DMA referrals, although again this has been widely denied."

If it is to become standard that everyone should "Work" for their JSA then NI should be abolished. Because to pay in AND then have to do workfare for the same money is theft.
If you had a prang in your car and the insurance company wouldnt pay out unless you did six weeks unpaid work for them im assuming that would be ok
After all its simply the same principle.

Yes, parsing, that's the one I was thinking of - the fake 'psychometric' tests seem to be another example where the govt. denies people are being threatened with loss of benefits, even though people ARE being threatened with loss of benefits...

And as for thinking that people on benefits get free water. Well bloody hell the stupidity and ignorance of that is astounding and its also worrying too.
Because these kinds of moronic statements are coming from people who are in responsible jobs and careers and i dont know about anyone else but i find that scary.

They get free air as well.

Fucking scroungers.

The main reason that so many of our beloved "hard working tax payers" are behind these totally immoral measure is precisely what MurkyMinataur is pointing out.
For a long time now "jobseekers" and "unemployed" has carried with it an image of some kind of Vicky Pollard character, e.g Not Us.
Loads of people of in favour of people "working for their benefits", and "staying part of society" but imagine that's YOU. Imagine you get laid off. And then your husband gets laid off. After 3 months you have spent all your savings paying the mortgage, you try and try, but you cant find a job,and you become a jobseeker.

The whole notion of unemployed people being"Jobseekers" and having to "prove" they are looking for work (with the implication that they didn't really want a job)treats you like a less than trustworthy person.
ou are not allowed to volunteer in any helpful areas (like meals on wheels, reading to the elderly etc) because you are not then available for work.
And yet, if some bod at your local jobcentre feels like fucking with you, they can send you off stacking shelves at Poundland, and pretend it is to help your work ethic. Yes, you who worked as a financial adviser for 15 years.
The whole thing is set up to make you feel shit, supposedly in the hope that if it's awful to sign on, then people won't do it for long.
It is all punative and none of it is helpful.

If they really wanted to get people into work they would be encouraging people to sort out their own volunteering, and posting volunteering opportunities at the job centre. They would be helping people with adult literacy, and numeracy, and interview skills-that is OFFERING these things, not saying "do it or else".
There is nothing more draining to the confidence and spirit that feeling like you have no control over your own life, and Workfare is the worst for this.
And yes, Tesco and the like do not need to be subsidised by our taxes.
I just don't get how anyone can not see that in six months time, that could be them in OP's position. It could be any of us.

Edam, as far as young people go, I did know a guy who benefitted greatly from the Future Job Fund (apprenticeship/training for young people) which ended in a real job.
The current government scrapped the scheme shortly afterwards.
So much for helping young people.
And, yes, darkesteyes, it is genuinely fucking terrifying the rubbish that seemingly normal people believe.

We're all assuming that big companies use job seekers as cheaper labour and I'm sure there is some truth in that. But in reality many many people in this country go straight from school to claiming benefits so actually some work experience with some of the country's leading retailers is a good opportunity

People used to be able to leave school and get a job or an apprenticeship they didn't need employer benefactors! If many many people are coming out of school and straight onto benefits then something is wrong with the labour market and the education system.

I have two compleatly none verbal learning disabled and physically disabled clients who have been sanctioned for none compliance, this pretty much means did not communicate during the meetings.

Another learning disabled client who took a Carer to a dwp referred course this person needs a Carer to function out and about and understand what it required of them,the Carer was not permitted to attend with them due to apparently fire regs the client was unable to understand what was required of them so sanctioned.

Another one placed as a emergency in the middle of the night in a refuge with her children miles away from home missed her sign on even tho she was taken by refuge staff to attend the nearest centre with evidence of DV low and behold sanctioned.

When you see things like this try and remember that a couple of weeks ago legal aid for benefit issues was removed.

Dwp staff no longer have assist people to claim the benefits they are entitled to as part of their job description. Its now find ways to prevent claims.

I think I should qualify what I put - I meant all people on JSA should be able to volunteer and it should be seen as the norm and well facilitated - ''not all people on the dole should be made to volunteer'' as that is clearly not practical or enforceable. But a culture change could make a big difference how unemployment is viewed.

Sock, punishing learning disabled people/families fleeing violence in that way is appalling. The government should be ashamed.

And yes, people on JSA should be able to volunteer -properly and voluntarily! They used to be penalised for volunteering as they were accused of not being avaiable for work - I don't know whether that has changed.

Edam well to be honest it started way before the sanction with them being found fit for work.

They should be ashamed they claim its a shocking error but it does not stop other org's reporting that it is still happening and having simerler examples.

Raspberry tightening the laws on the discriminatory and inflammatory articles that are written about disabled people and the unemployed and stopping the rhetoric coming from politicians would do a lot to change the culture.Why do you think Cameron has been so soft with the press? It is so they can collude in producing this rhetoric.

Im going to pretend its 1933 and rewrite your sentence just changing one word just to flip this.

This could so easily have been written back then

"Not all Jews /disabled (because Hitler came for the disabled first) should be made to volunteer as that is clearly not practical or enforceable.
But a culture change could make a big difference to how the Jews/disabled/unemployed are viewed."

If we came across a historical document from the 1930s which included this statement we would be quite rightly horrified.

Sock that is fucking appalling. Its sick. But unfortunately nothing these bastards do surprises me any more.