Workfare scheme for loan parents of children as young as 3, as of next month.

[WaterLoadaCack]

kept that quiet didnt they

Ruddy. The workfare claimant still gets 'paid' in benefits. Funded by the Taxpayer. The contractor that pays them gets paid a certain fee. Both from the Jobcentre. Both funded by the Taxpayer. I'm baffled as to how people think paying twice as much taxwise is a good thing . Simple solution don't pay the claimant any benefits. Don't pay the workfare contractor any fees per claimant. Give the woman some sense of purpose and off the dole queue with a paid proper sense of purpose and get money leaching companies to pay their own bloody wages to their workforce instead of it being funded by the taxpayer. .

When single parents don't have jobs, I always wonder how they came to be that way. Were they unemployed before having kids? If so, why? Or did they give us their job to have kids? I don't agree with that. I am a single parent by the way, not that that changes if I'm allowed an opinion or not.

Not all single parents started out as single parents. I could've easily given up my job to look after my dd as my dp earned enough to provide for us both on paper but was rubbish with his money.

Had I have done that I would now be relying entirely on benefits through no fault of my own because I would never have imagined he would have left us.

It is so very easy to become a single parent and I don't think enough people realise that it isn't a lifestyle choice for the majority.

And what happens if you do manage to get a job on a zero hours contract in Tesco following your forced workfare? What if they want you to work 6 till 10? I don't know of any childcare that provides those hours and if there is any I'd bet it costs more than NMW would pay anyway.

Here we go again the "Why should my Taxes go to pay for someone to sit on their rear ends watching JK their big screen TVs all day, whilst smoking and downing alcohol" Brigade are out in force.

Are your Taxes not going to line the pockets of the many companies that abuse Workfare? They get paid for every slave they take on, then let go at the end of the 6 months placements, to make more money on the next slave to be sent to them. It is extremely rare that permanent employment is given. They do not pay any wage at all, they also do not cut the prices of their products and services to pass on to the public.

Stop being so stereotypical, bigoted and plain damn rude.

IMHO young children need a parent at home to be on call 24/7, not shunted from pillar to post, but that is my opinion, I respect the opinion of those who do work and have made the choice to work and use childcare but do not agree with it.

Please provide evidence of children of working parents progressing more than those of SAHP.

Owl, I don't know where to start in response to your post, the level of ignorance should shock me but sadly it doesn't. I sincerely hope you are never in a less than ideal situation through no fault of your own. Even the most rich and successful amongst us are only ever 3 steps from the gutter.

What would it take for you - a sudden illness, unexpected redundancy, marriage breakdown. Maybe a combination of all three but don't ever be so completely sure it couldn't happen.

This particular thread is about parents who are healthy enough to work being paid to stay at home with their child. Therefore the above argument is completely irrelevant.

Illness, redundancy or divorce are not going to make me expect to stay at home with my own children at the expense of the state. I'm not saying I'm guaranteed to never be in a position to need JSA, or disability benefits, and both of those things are actually benefits that I think should be more generous.

But I can guarantee that I will never leave a job because I am pregnant, and that I will never conceive while both myself and my partner are out of work, and that I will never claim child tax credits or income support to enable me to stay at home just because I chose to have a child. There is a very tiny possibility that I might find myself needing to claim help with childcare, although it's highly unlikely, but that's really not the same thing.

I see no problem with expecting people to contribute to society while they are claiming benefits and are healthy enough to work. I don't think people should be made to leave worthwhile voluntary positions to do mandatory work experience, because those people are doing something to help their CV and gain experience and are contributing. But I think people are kidding themselves when they think they are contributing to society by sitting on benefits to look after their own children.

You are a fabulous human being Woo. I am very impressed.

IMO the minute you become a parent there is a chance you will become a lone parent- I'm not a lone parent purely down to luck.

I'm absolutely against workfare I have worked for companies that have used workfare and there is nothing more frustrating than having experienced staff bringing cvs but being unable to even give them an interview down to the company you work for wanting to save money so using workfare instead. Workfare really is stopping some employers creating new jobs.

I personally think it would save money in the long run to retrain/ educate people so they can earn higher wages and not need to be topped up by benefits.

I can't quite believe in this day and age all the onus seems to be on female lone parents and not the fathers that are failing to provide for their dc adequately- I really would like the system to be more like America for men that don't pay for their children.

I disagree with the way Workfare is being run.

As I see it, and I admit I am by no means an expert in how one part of society affects another, the government need to think from the top down rather than from the bottom up.

Leaving aside disability and SN as a separate issue, people are on benefits due to the cost of housing, living and child care. If these were lower then households would need less income for a decent quality of life, which could result from one full time worker, or two part time workers per household.

So how to sort it?

Housing

• Restrict buy-to-let landlords to one property, allowing 5 years to sell off additional properties
• Sieze the thousands of empty/abandoned homes and regenerate communities by encouraging businesses to relocate there

Childcare

• In countries such as Poland, many businesses have an on-site highly subsidised crèche. Make it that businesses over a certain size have to provide this (either on site or in partnership with local facilities)
• if less income is needed for quality of life then more parents would choose to share childcare at home.
• Possibly (not fully thought this one through) allow early access to pensions for grandparents providing childcare

Jobs

• Start at the top down. How often do we hear that 'my husband works 80/100hr weeks? Working hours should be strictly enforced - no more than 50. Still too much work? Hire an additional person. With more movement into top positions, you free up the lower ones.
• restrict outsourcing some jobs, like call-centres, to other countries

More options and schemes for jobseekers that are relevant to them.

I'm sure there are pitfalls to these ideas that I've not thought of, but they appear as if they would work. Happy to be told otherwise as economics and politics are areas I'd like to learn more about.

"FanjoForTheMammariesTue 01-Apr-14 23:59:10

It is completely obviously a punitive measure."

It does certainly seem that way. I can't interpret it in anyoother way really

Seriously Owl? Seriously?

You honestly cannot conceive of a situation whereby you may end up reliant on benefits through no fault of your own?

You genuinely think every single parent did it through choice?
You think we all left our jobs because we were pregnant?

You say you would never conceive if you were both out of work. Fair enough. What if you were both made redundant soon after?

My XDH lost his well paid, professional job when I was pregnant. He hasn't earned more than minimum wage ever since. He also ended up having a near nervous breakdown and doing some pretty shitty things which destroyed our marriage.

I have a 2yo who cannot go to childcare but is not old enough to be diagnosed. That 'officially' makes me a perfectly healthy parent with a NT child.

I didn't give up my job when I was pregnant, I went back to it when my DS was 8mo. My flexible working request was declined. In order to keep working but ensure my DS's needs were met I had to agree to change to a temporary position. It was this or no job so I took it. My role will probably be axed within the next 6-12 months.

I would love to keep working and very much hope I will but I'm realistic enough to accept that finding another job with suitable hours is going to be very, very difficult.

Please tell me which part of that is my fault?
Which part could 'never happen to you'?

I really do think we have to get people out of the benefits trap...and it really is a trap.

It dehumanises people assuming they will live for years at the capricious whim of each successive governement. Helping people to be independent is the only humane thing to do!

And sometimes dependent people will have to be given a push because otherwise they'll be understandably scared (that's what happens when you've been sucked into reliance).

That said, this workfare scheme aint the way to do it!

More state support for big business in line with Tax Credits.

Great, I managed to lose two jobs whilst pregnant with my first child. I now work part-time in my child's school - workfare will cost me and others like me my job.

However the problem is not just workfare, its the "conditionality" that goes along with JSA. Miss an appointment at the job centre - sanctioned - at least one months payment and it doesnt matter that you notified them that you would be missing the appointment because you have a job interview. Child has D&V - can't attend placement - sanctioned, don't apply for a particular job because it involves evening shift work and you can't get there by public transport - sanctioned.

Also just a heads up - if any of you work part-time but earn less than the equivalent f/t minimum wage and are in receipt of tax credits you too will be subject to "conditionality" and be expected to increase your hours/look for another job if/when universal credit is rolled out.

oh and another thing. Take a look at the statistics for workfare programmes. They have a lower success rate for finding permament work than people just being left to find work on their own.

BTW Taxpayers are not paying JSA for people to sit at home doing nothing. You are paying because we have a captalist system which requires a flexible labour pool - meaning our system NEEDS unemployed people to work. You are paying for the system to work.

Unpaid workfare takes the bottom out of the system. Why would a company employ someone in an unskilled job when they can get someone for free (and in some cases even receive payment for it)

I have friends that work in retail, they have said that it was noticable that come xmas time there were less extra shifts available and there were fewer vacancies for few xmas posts than previously. These extra shifts were covered by people on workfare.

Exactly susyot

"but what can we DO?"

Not vote for those Tory motherfuckers ever again. Bunch of fucking rich wankers who have no fucking idea what its like to have nowt. David Cameron can go to hell. The whole Tory party can go to hell. This country is going to pot and only the rich will benefit.

Why don't they just put all us lone parents into slums and workhouses and have done with it, its not like we've ever paid fucking taxes is it? God fucking help those who look down on single parents on benefits and hope they never wind up having to depend on the government to help them.

Lots of broadsheet newspapers ran several articles about the arts graduate who had been forced to carry out unpaid work cleaning shelves instead of continuing with her relevant volunteer work at a museum. The articles led to several large companies pulling out of similar unpaid work placement schemes.

I hope the media and businesses will respond similarly to workfare and not take a different view simply because it targets lone parents rather than a shiny graduate.

Some snippets from the link at the bottom (using my phone so cant make a clicky link):

"According to the National Audit Office, The UK taxpayer spent£850bnbailing out the Banks in 2008. This isalmosttwice the nation’s total annual budget. For this amount, the UK could have funded the entire NHS(£106.7bn a year) for, our whole education system for(£42bn a year) or providedof Job Seekers Allowance(£4.9bn a year)."

"According to the government’s own figures, overpayment of benefits due to fraud is just0.7%, or a cost of £1.1bn a year.To put this in perspective, overpayment of benefits due to error is almost double this, at1.3% or £2.1bn. Yet, we are not launching a war on mistakes within the DWP.

of people claiming benefits are being attacked, for the actions of just 0.7%.

These figures alone suggest the government is deliberately framing the debate in a way which distorts the issues at hand and creates rather than reflects a perception of a ‘broken benefits system’."

www.scriptonitedaily.com/2013/04/08/scroungers-how-much-does-the-corporate-welfare-state-cost-the-tax-payer/

The SAHMs of the UK constitute a huge body of experienced and talented human beings with great skills and potential.

The idea that the best way to realise all that potential is to coral them en masse into floor sweeping and shelf tidying to the economic benefit of multinational corporations, is literally obscene.

The fact that women on a predominantly female site are cheerleading the policy is even worse.

Some of what I am reading makes me want to weep.

Woo you can't guarantee that you'll never conceive if you're out of work...what will you do? Abstain from sex?? Unless you did that, contraception is not a guarantee that you won't conceive.

The case with the graduate really struck home with me. 15 years ago after I was made redundant I started to volunteer with a local charity while doing temp work and claiming JSA inbetween.

It was a "high" level volunteer role in that I was writing funding application grants, planning fundraising campaigns and so on. The charity would not have paid someone in that post as the salary would not have met the criteria for self-funding plus x but I was happy to do it as I was considering a move into that sector and it was valuable experience.

Eventually I decided to look for p/t work so I could continue the volunteering (I was unsuccessful as at all the job interviews it was brought up that they thought I would be bored in the job and it was "below" the level I had previously worked at.)

In the end, the charity offered me a part-time receptionist post when the receptionist left. From that I identified a fund-raising opportunity which then the charity then employed me as a project worker to set up. It was so successful that the charity had to set up a special type of company to funnel the profits back to the charity. It ended up employing a workforce of 20 people and generated thousands of pounds for the charity.

Today I could be pulled out of the volunteer placement to do an unskilled role - I've done plently of those in the past I dont need unpaid work experience. I would probably also be sanctioned for starting to look for p/t work whereas at the time the job centre were happy for me to do so as long as I still looked for f/t jobs.

I took a 5 year career break.

When the youngest got his nursery place, I immediately oragnised a volunteer role for myself in my previous career area. The job was very menial, but it was an excellent taster for life as a working parent. The 'new' stuff was organising work, pick-ups, forcing Dh to do his share etc - I didn't need a challenging job at that stage, although my volunteer role evolved gradually into someothing more challenging.

I guess you don't have to do the organised workfare, if you can organise something yourself?

Highlander you guess wrong.

Stuff you have organised yourself does not count, you will be made to quit it to do workfare.

Highlander If are claiming JSA then, no, organising your own work placement does not count.

Also you can only do so many hours a week as a volunteer - so that you still have to time to jobsearch, which I think is fair enough.

Its odd that the government work placements are f/t and no longer have to have a training element or the possibilty of a paid job at the end.