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 yes, let people just listen to the struggling readers for next to nothing - that'd be my job out of the window then. Great idea.

madlynormal

JSA is the minimum amount of money that the law says people need, in order to simply live. You are entitled to it, as long as you can show you are looking for work.

As the government is now saying, "actually, we're only going to give you your minimum living expenses if you work, and we will not reimburse you for the costs that you incur, because you are working" (such as childcare, travel expenses) then you're right. People aren't working for nothing.

They're paying to work!

ESA. Who is talking about people on ESA. That is a different benefit entirely. People won't be working for ESA. As somebody else pointed out ESA is not an unemployment benefit. Not posting on this thread any more. No point.

No-one's talking about ESA. I mentioned JSA- job-seeker's allowance, which is the benefit most/all of the workfare targets are on.

OP mentioned ESA on page 2 (I think) and that some people on that benefit will also be included in the scheme, even if they are too sick to work. VivienneMary suggested they get a sicknote.

If you have a minimum wage job you still have to pay your expenses.
I did say you should get topped up to minimum wage.
I do agree that help to keep a job should be given. Bus pass, free child care.
I have two members of my family who choose not to work as they are better off on benefit. That should not be.
They have all sorts of strategies to make sure they do not get jobs they are interviewed for.
Brothers who are fit and able with a good education.
They hate getting up and do not want to do something 40 hours a week when they could be enjoying themselves.
They are blatant about this.

Ah, now I understand. Sorry.

Sometimes these threads get confusing to me, especially after holier-than-thou posts about not "writing people off" by giving them their entitlement without demanding further hoop-jumping!

madly you (like my mother actually) seem to be in support of something which isn't actually what what work fare is at all!

You would agree with it IF you could do volunteer work while on the scheme.
You cant though.

You would agree with it IF the work were to be benefiting children or the wider community.
But it doesn't.

You would agree with it IF you were allowed time off for interviews.
But you're not.

You would agree with it IF you got the equivalent to MW while on it.
But you don't.

Be honest and say 'i don't agree with work fare'.

God, yes, people will be paying to work what with travel expenses etc

I don't see how people on workfare can legally receive JSA. To qualify you have to be actively seeking work and have to spend x hours doing so. How can that be done when working for Tesco thirty hours a week? The DWP will be breaking their own conditions for qualifying for this benefit.

What if you get an interview by some miracle? Sanctioned because you took time off from workfare? Sanctioned for taking time off to sign on?

But that's the thing, madlynormal. There is no top up!

Even a full-time minimum wage job works out to be a hell of a lot more for than £56.80- £71.70 a week!

Oh - and you would agree with it if help were being given to keep a job. But it isn't.

I think i agree with a scheme that did all the things that you propose, absolutely. But that isn't Work Fare as it stands right now. That's what we're all pissed off about.

I have to do workfare very soon, all i want is a damn job, i work damn hard and i learn fast, no one will give me a chance, and it took a year to get my first interview.

I need help practically, so employers will take notice of me.

Well fear not Ezio, very soon you could be spending 7 hours of your day in a stockroom sweeping the floors. Just think! What an amazing thing that will be for you to put on your CV.

Oh and also, for the duration of that time, you will be spared the worry of searching and applying for other jobs because you wont have the time or money left, from your travel, to go to any interviews.

Oh and don't worry - you wont have to keep the job in the stockroom - because it doesn't really exist. The company wont want to actually pay anyone to do it.

I wish you all the best for your job hunt.

I've skipped through the thread so apologies if I've misssed any salient points.

If there was a scheme to get long term unemployed people working on community / voluntary projects, them I might support it, if the scheme provided an additional resource that wouldn't otherwise be paid for, and was designed around increasing the individual's skills & employability, and allowed the necessary flexibility for job interviews, and took appropriate account of the specific needs of people with physical / mental health issues.

However, the idea that private businesses should get free labour, for roles that they would otherwise still require but would have to pay a salary for - that's not acceptable.

Big Jessie Upthread you said you had some ideas on how to reform the benefit system. What are they?

Workfare sounded like a good idea but the minute you sanction people it is not a good idea, it is state-enforced slavery.

Question for those on JSA and housing benefit - would giving you a job at NMW cover your housing costs etc too or is it better not to get paid and keep your housing benefit?

Oh and I think the only way to solve this is to increase NMW. It's a fucking joke, especially in comparison to rent costs.

KenAdams, people working full time can receive housing benefit. Many thousands do.

Housing prices are so out of control that even above-NMW jobs often do not cover basic accommodation.

Well I suppose it's Aston Martin's all round at Tesco HQ - workfce paid by the taxpayer must only help the bottom line. Feel sorry for their suppliers though, especially those who try to pay a living wage and treat their staff decently.

I don't see how people on workfare can legally receive JSA. To qualify you have to be actively seeking work and have to spend x hours doing so. How can that be done when working for Tesco thirty hours a week? The DWP will be breaking their own conditions for qualifying for this benefit.

I wonder about this anaishendricks.

Whenever these threads pop up, I've spelled out to fans of Workfare how it costs taxpayers money, jeopardises existing jobs, doesn't provide growth and gives participant members of the scheme an unfair business advantage over competitors who aren't in it.

They never come back to me.

Parsing I didn't realise that. Would people keep their housing benefit if they got these jobs at NMW then?

I think if they were asking people yo do a bit of community work it wouldn't be a problem. But to provide free labour to a multi million pound company is just disgusting.

KenAdams, approximately 80% of housing benefit is paid to those in work. There's a simple remedy to cutting the benefit bill. Force employers to pay a living wage. Apparently I'm a socialist for wanting that. No more socialist than the banks when it comes to bailing their useless arses out.

Yes yes, Ken, you'll be working with or talking to or walking past people today who have a full-time job but rely on housing benefit, either to pay their full rent or to top it up. Can't remember the figures, but IIRC the unemployed are actually a small minority of the people who receive HB.

And there have always been strict rules capping HB - only so many rooms for a family X size, rent only up to a set figure compared to median market rate, etc.

This government really is a shower of bastards, isn't it.

It is so jarring when people are so bogged down in poor bashing rhetoric that pointing out the already proven to be serious flaws in something like workfare is seen as 'lefty'.

I read lots of on-line newspapers including the traditionally 'right' and many people on all sides are not happy about workfare.

Workfare has been proven to fail

It failed in the US in exactly the way it is being predicted to fail in the UK.

Quote from article:

"The development (or deterioration) in the labour market structure is the real issue. It's worth noting that in that structure, paid employment doesn't necessarily reduce a worker's need for some state support either. David Ward, from the Direct Care Alliance in New York, told me that careworkers his organisation represents are often paid so poorly that they rely on food stamps and medicaid and other support to make ends meet. That's the experience of many low-paid workers across the US. Their problem isn't laziness, or scrounging. Their problem is that their wages are so low they can't feed their families on their earnings.

Workfare simply gives companies and organisations another pool of very cheap, and disposable, workers. Unions certainly saw that point in New York. Several years into the city's workfare programme, District Council 37, a union which represented municipal employees, took Guiliani to court, saying that his workfare programme “had illegally replaced nearly 2000 unionised clerical workers with unpaid welfare recipients in three agencies."