to think that this is economically stupid. Tories to announce full and permanent WORKFARE.

[Darkesteyes]

next week according to the Mail.
So how is anybody going to afford to buy anything while working for benefits then.
Even less incentive for companies to take people in proper employment if the workfare workforce is going to increase.

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

Oh and who's going to pay for the welfare bill increases? If no-one has a wage, where's the NI contributions going to come from to pay for this?

The only ones left will be the high earners and millionaires, who won't want to pay for this.

unfortunately it generally ends up massively restricted by the claimant. Most, not all, but certainly the majority, have serious criminal records (often including restrictions on what they can do, where they can go, access to computers etc), issues with basic hygiene, no basic literacy / numeracy skills (let alone IT or customer service skills) and a complete lack of routine and structure to their lives (as I said previously, it's after a minimum of 3yrs unemployed before this would be considered - alot of these people have actually been unemployed and claiming JSA for much much longer

and...

As for these people working in schools that is ridiculous and dangerous,
as many of them will have many psychological problems

This is half the trouble, some people seem to have this idea about so called 'feckless' unemployed people.

There are some claimants that are like this, but it really isn't most of them.

The unemployed, even long term unemployed are just normal people, there are a few of us posting on this thread. do we fit that feckless category?

People seem to view JSA claimant as some sort of 'other' group, they are normal people, life can switch in an instant, unemployment can happen to anyone, you could have a good job then lose it via redundancy, suddenly you have no status and you're the wrong side of 40. Good luck if that happens to you at that age.

Agreed AmberLeaf, but this initiative isn't for people who have suddenly been made redundant - it's for the very long-term unemployed. I'm sorry but in this category it IS the majority. Tell me where you would start with a 37yr old who has been unemployed for 25yrs, limited literacy & numeracy skills (but does not want to address this), criminal record / unspent convictions, lives with parents (so no real housing costs to fuss about). The hurdle that is setting an alarm, getting up, looking presentable, getting somewhere on time etc is often huge for people with these circumstances. It's not as simple as "they shouldn't be working for nothing".

the people who will get caught up in this are the recently unemployed. if the jobcentre hasn't been able to make the 37 year old work until now, how will they suddenly make them get out of bed etc? these unemployed people will 'make their own arrangements' i.e. petty crime, getting money from family rather than work.

anyway, Tesco's et al do not want this 37 year old, they want to use the skilled, hard working people who have the habit of turning up for work and going the extra mile.

the employees of the jobcentre do not give a stuff as to who they force into 'jobs' or who they sanction. it will be as easy to sanction someone who has been unemployed for 6 months as 6 years. don't credit them with any care about the length of time someone has worked or contributed. they are not paid to consider trifles like that.

it is probably easier to sanction/hurt/intimidate someone who is used to working and obeying the rules rather than someone who has never made an effort to do anything as the newly unemployed will feel shame or fear at having no money to pay their bills

It isn't just for the very long term unemployed though.

Even on this thread someone reference her young daughter being placed on workfare.

You are wrong in your assumptions.

limited literacy & numeracy skills (but does not want to address this

Doesn't want to? or, doesn't know how to? or doesn't get any good support to do so?

I will bet my life that I know more people that fall into that category [long term unemployed] than you do and believe me, the norm is not what you describe. Nor is workfare what they 'need'

Ok, no recently unemployed people would be included in this proposed initiative as you would have to spend 104wks on Work Programme (which is preceded by between 39 & 52wks on JSA under the care of the Jobcentre). Tesco et al would not get a look in, it would be charity based work. This is the Pilot scheme >>> www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/welfare-to-work-services/provider-guidance/community-action-programme.shtml It was piloted 2yrs ago, in anticipation of claimants "returning" to the Jobcentre after 104wks on JSA. I see what you're all saying but by labelling everything "Work Fare" you're clouding the issue and making it about other initiatives. The lady upthread who said about her daughter, if it was Work Experience, it would have been entirely voluntary, no risk of sanction (unless dismissed for misconduct), travel expenses (& childcare, if applicable) would have been paid by the Jobcentre and she would have signed numerous forms explaining the voluntary aspect (as it's a "Get Britain Working" initiative) and giving consent.

Childcare if applicable paid for?

Even if it were true, where would the claiments find the money to pay for it on the first place? - it's paid for, no, it's reimbursed at best. Eventually.

It's not reimbursed, childcare is always paid directly to the childcare provider. The only stipulation is that the claimant must source it (Jobcentre can signpost to the Local Authority for registered childcare providers in the area, but that's it) and they must be Ofsted registered.

Find the link and then I'll believe you.

No manners or google. Hmmm...

Yes it is paid directly, but it is not paid in a timely fashion.

A friend had her work placement stopped because the job centre didnt pay the nursery fees for 7 weeks. They refused to have her child any longer for 'nothing'

I heard a very young man (who was evidently signing on for the first time) being snarled at for being unable to use the computer to job-seek, and being unable to go to an job-centre appointment in two days time, because he didn't have the money for a bus-fare in the first place.

He nearly got evicted by the watchful security guard, because he wasn't very good at handling the social interactions, and he got stroppy, in an obvious effort to hold back his tears, as he explained that he was dyslexic and couldn't read the screen*, and didn't have a car, and no, he couldn't get his parents to help him, because they were busy with his disabled little sister, etc.

The advisor did show some humanity and work out solutions that would work, but not before the boy nearly gave up on his claim then and there.

*Definitely not "mild" dyslexia from what I heard, and I don't know what will happen to him.

We just don't know any details so to base it on previous schemes may not be fair

Brett i was on workfare a couple of times. I was told each time "dont worry we have ironed out the teething problems and its better this time."
Total bollocks.
In fact i wrote something on the thread in the comments section of a paper a few years back If i can find it i will c and p it here.

8day week i will try to explain this as simply as i can because i obviously need to.

There will be more long term unemployed because they are unable to get jobs due to companies getting workfarers for free.
And then those long term unemployed will end up on workfare Then more will be made redundant because of companies being able to get free workers. be unable to find work because of companies being able to get free workers and then they become long term unemployed and become subjected to this.

Found it.
My last experience of this.

Carers and New Deal
I am a carer for my husband who has heart disease and arthritis and have always been ineligible for Carers Allowance. Because of this I was having to claim Jobseekers Allowance three years ago. I had no choice but to do this if I wanted any money at all.During this time I was placed on New Deal with no thought for my caring responsibilities.I tried to explain the situation several times at fortnightly interviews but it always fell on deaf ears.In fact I distinctly remember the New Deal Advisor greeting me with the phrase “Got a job yet “ on a couple of occasions which is nothing but insulting to a full time carer.
The same advisor told me my training could not be done in my home town of Braintree and would have to be done at Seetec in Chelmsford They were the providers of the New Deal programme.He then proceeded to tell me that my travel expenses would be paid back at the end of every day.He was lying. They paid back travel expenses every Friday.So I hoped and prayed that my husband didn’t get admitted to hospital yet again during this time as we simply couldn’t afford it!
So I began the course with much trepidation. I was right to be worried. Occasionally I had to sort out my husbands prescriptions which meant taking them to the doctors and picking them up but when going to Chelmsford it wasn’t possible. I could only go by public transport as I don’t drive. The surgery didn’t open until 8.30 am They wanted me in Chelmsford by 9.30 at the latest. I had to be there all day till 4.30pm so I also had trouble getting back to pick it up before the surgery closed. I tried explaining the situation to them.I also tried doing the prescriptions anyway and just going in late. Their answer to both scenarios was to get there on time or be sanctioned and kicked off the course and lose your benefits.
This isn’t the worst thing that happened while I was there. My husbands heart attack left him with memory loss. One day he had to phone Seetec in Chelmsford where I was because he had taken an accidental overdose.They were fine about letting me go straight home From leaving the Seetec building in Chelmsford to entering my flat in Braintree took two hours. I had to get the bus as travel expenses wernt paid back till Friday This was a Tuesday.No way could I afford a taxi.At home my husband couldn’t move. He was nauseous and sick and in pain. The following day I went into Seetec (didn’t want to risk losing benefits) to find they had already put me down as late. They had obviously assumed I was coming in despite what happened the day before.They knew I had no choice.I had constant IBS attacks while I was at Seetec and a particularly nasty bout of impetigo.I couldn’t take it any more It was making me ill. The GP agreed and signed me off.
Thankyou very much for showing your support for carers unlike other media who only seem to be interested in benefit bashing.

Jobcentre are typically rubbish at reimbursing expenses.

I tried to claim interview expenses and was told I had to go in to collect them. It cost me £5.50 in bus fare to get to the Jobcentre, they reimbursed me for £4 "because the computer says this is what it costs for bus fare to your interview". It actually cost me £9.50 to get to the interview as it was two buses across two different bus districts so each bus needed its own return ticket, plus the £5.50 to get to the Jobcentre. Claiming my expenses actually left me £11 out of pocket

Then there was my dad, wrong side of 50, looking for work and applying for everything in his field of qualification. He began looking further afield thinking they could move to where the jobs are (something the Tories keep spouting on about). The Jobcentre refused to pay travelling expenses for an interview some 200 miles away because, in their own words, "you're going to too many interviews"!!!!

Some people end up stuck between a rock and a hard place because certain aspects of the job market are shit and the very department that's supposed to help them get back to work is shit.

Bearfrills that is disgusting treatment Fucking appalling.

Just wanted to make it clear that my long post is copied and pasted from elsewhere.
The incidents described happened in 2007.

They reimburse you for interview expenses?

This is me my whole life- I've almost always underclaimed...

All of my examples were 2012, very much in the current administration.

They made my sister work at a drop in centre cafe for drug addicts. My sister is quiet vulnerable and this wasn't the place for her. She didn't feel safe but the job centre didn't care.

Then they stuck her in a chicken factory. She's bloody veggie!

Workfare has been around since before then. YTS in the early 80s Training For Work in the 90s. (very much under the Tories) but i hate both them and Labour for this.

It is all relevant because with every "change" implemented it just metamorphosizes into an even bigger monster.

It is ALL the same thing just under different names Several young people died while doing YTS in the early 80s Should we say its no longer relevant then just because it happened over 30 years ago? And with Grayling wanting to relax H and S laws we could be staring the same thing in the face again.
So you see the past is very relevant to the future.
Its where the phrase "a warning from history" comes from So that we learn from the past so as not to make the same mistakes in the future.

Coo they tried to stick me in a soup factory in early 2001 after i had already done workfare in a charity shop (where i was refused gloves even though i clearly remember having to deal with soiled bedding that someone had sent in) and the council.
That lasted for 3 months.
Then they wanted me to do ANOTHER 3 months in a soup factory for JSA
Luckily i was offred a job in a sex chatline office so i took it.

Hearing all these stories has increased my anxiety, i just know im gonna have a IBS attack.