to wonder why the papers haven't got this on the front page?

[LittleHouseOnTheShelf]

www.thecanary.co/2016/04/29/cameron-rocked-by-major-defeat-just-days-before-election-time/

Workfare refers to all of the programmes which are mandatory, long term and paid less than minimum wage. The Government’s Work Experience Programme, Sector Based Work Academies, Community Action Programme, Mandatory Work Activity scheme and The Work Programme all fall into this category. Under these Workfare programmes, unemployed people have been forced in long term, full time work for no more than the benefits to which they are entitled as citizens.

Workfare was ruled illegal in 2013. But instead of complying with the orders of the court, the government has continued to appeal the decision – suffering defeat after defeat. And now, the highest court in the land has told Cameron’s government that its workfare schemes are illegal, and they must pay back benefit claimants who were forced into these unlawful programmes.

[limitedperiodonly]

If someone is really only receiving £70 from the state, and not sleeping outdoors, I can only assume they must be being subsidised by friends or family, perhaps by being given a free place to stay?

Why do you think that? Do you think that is a good idea?

[LilacSpunkMonkey]

The £70 a week is the JSA you get. Did I say anyone had to live on that? Nope.

Does £70 a week for five days at 9-5 equate to minimum wage? Nope.

But that's what they were pushing me to do. In my case it was a charity shop. A CHARITY wanted me to work full time hours for £70 a week. I was given no indication of how long this would go on for but I was told in no uncertain terms that I would be sanctioned if I turned the workfare down.

Please don't assume I don't know what I'm talking about Theoretician. I experienced it first hand.

[HelenaDove]

I believe you Lilac. The fact that charities are willing or were willing to participate in this really calls their ethics into question. Its possible homelessness charities could well have caused or reported someone for a sanction causing the very homelessness they are supposed to be against.

Im left wing through and through but i dont recall the left wing press kicking up a stink when ppl were on workfare under New Labours New Deal either.

[caroldecker]

Lilac What is so wrong with working for a charity? Why should you be able to choose to sit around and do nothing, when you are taking money from your working neighbours?

[Iliveinalighthousewiththeghost]

Carol. I assume Lilac has paid her taxes. So she is entitled to her money without having to jump through hoops and kiss arse for a fucking pittence.
Also how do you know her neighbours work.

[HelenaDove]

Because its wrong unethical and hypocritical for charities to be doing this. As i explained (quite clearly enough) in my above post.

[EveryoneElsie]

caroldecker
Why do you think we all pay taxes?
Why is it OK for companies to use cheap labour instead of having to offer real jobs?
It is absolutely normal for there to be some unemployment in a capitalist system. Full employment is an impossibility. Get over it.

[caroldecker]

I was talking about working for charities, not companies. They rely on volunteers and surely supporting someone to get back to work by giving them skills is part of many charities objectives.
It may not be her direct neighbours paying her the money, but many close by will be.
Ilive Why is she entitled to money? Ghandi, amongst others, rejected human rights and replaced them with duties here. Taxpayers are doing their duty by providing taxes for state assitance, the recipients should do their duty and work.

[HelenaDove]

carol are you rewriting the whole meaning of the word "volunteer" then.

[HelenaDove]

aaaaaaaaaaaand ...........................repeat


"The fact that charities are willing or were willing to participate in this really calls their ethics into question. Its possible homelessness charities could well have caused or reported someone for a sanction causing the very homelessness they are supposed to be against"

[Iliveinalighthousewiththeghost]

Carol, Please Google the meaning of the word volunteer.

[maddening]

Workfare would have been fine if claimants had had to work for the number of hours that meant that their benefits were equal to minimum wage and that these hours were funded by the companies that used them (apart from Charities which would be funded by he governments benefits scheme) - would have saved the government money, gotten the claimants work experience for a fair number of hours etc

[Iliveinalighthousewiththeghost]

Erm "she's" entitled to the money because. She's paid her taxes, and even if she hasn't. Welfare is there for the poor. If no one should claim dole, can you kindly tell me why the fuck. I'm paying my taxes!!!!!!. Shall we all just down tools.
Oh and btw, smugness is karma's worse enemy. She might visit you, when you least expect it in the form of unemployment.
Be nice to those while you're at the top, Carol, as. There's a very good chance you'll meet them on your way back down.

[caroldecker]

I used the word volunteer because charities do not have jobs to pay for, unlike companies but do have work that could be done.
I repeat the point about duties, not rights. We have a duty to pay taxes for the less well off (financially and physically) and they have a duty to aim to support themselves if able. Learning work related skills making yourself more employable would be a duty, sitting your arse, not so much.
Why do you think I am at the top? I happen to earn enough to pay taxes, have claimed benefits in the past, but never not worked.

[MattDillonsPants]

Ha! SO pleased to hear this!

[Iliveinalighthousewiththeghost]

I assumed you were at the top Carol by the way you what seems to me look down on claimants, and you can not abd have no right to validate my feelings. I've never not worked Carol, I don't see my self as better than those on Welfare. I see my self as very very fortunate.
And how is it voluntary work if claimants are forced to do it, or. They'll lose their benefits. You can't force some on to do "voluntary work, surely. Force abd voluntary. That's the biggest Oxymoron. Ive ever heard of.

[Valentine2]

Wow. Just wow.

[Gwenhwyfar]

"Learning work related skills making yourself more employable would be a duty, sitting your arse, not so much."

Most workfare jobs are those that are considered unskilled or very low skilled. Even if they weren't there's the basic principle that if you do a job, you get paid a wage. Getting your food paid for you (basically what JSA and HB is - it's never enough to pay all bills) is not the same as a wage.

[EmpressofBlandings]

Any workfare scheme should be for 2 weeks maximum. That's plenty of time for an employer to decide if they want to employ someone full-time. And if they do it more than, let's say, 3 times, they should have to pay full minimum wage and benefits.

[Gwenhwyfar]

"In my case it was a charity shop. A CHARITY wanted me to work full time hours for £70 a week."

Yes, a friend of mine had to do this. These charities should be named and shamed. Disgusting behaviour.

[HelenaDove]

Wonder how long it will be before the ppl who may be made redundant from BHS will have to do it...........you know,,,,,,,,,,,,,for the experience

[Iliveinalighthousewiththeghost]

Good Question, Helena

[Adarajames]

I read things like this with right wing I'm ok jack rantings such as those above by Carol, and I just think more and more seriously about giving up on this life, with it's pretty overwhelming lack of humanity these days. I'm disabled, I have every belief that at some point in the not too distant future, if we're stuck with this current government for much longer, I'll be living in a workhouse in all bit name. I was glad to see when tidying tonight, that I have enough medication stockpiled to end it all before it gets to that point

[Adarajames]

Although to Carol and this government, that'd probably be seen as one less drain on their tax payments!

[Potatoface2]

i would rather read about jude law than this.....and im sorry benefit claimants dont get 'paid'......you get 'paid' for working, (you collect your wages or salary)....benefit claimants collect their 'benefits'.!