Voluntary work or lose benefits

[Marjoriew]

Government intend to cut benefits of claimants on JSA who refuse to do voluntary work of 30 hours a week over a 4-week period.
Benefits could be stopped for up to 3 months if claimants refuse to comply.

it says people will be required to work 30 hours per week. they will loose benefit to the tune of three months worth if they dont go. this is forced labour isnt it? so what about the people who cannot organise themselves for many different reasons...benefit lost, housing costs cut by 10% etc etc. where will these people go? what will they do? how will they survive?

seems to me another way to bash the unemployed and less fortunate. it's almost like a workhouse idea but with people living out. looks like it's IDS turn this week to pander to the tory voters, what with bashing lone parents and their children all week aswell.

what makes this all worse is that we are paying his wages to come up with this rubbish.

But who are these people who cannot organise themselves? And why can't they?

Did you see that 1970s house programme with the elderly celebrities in which they acted out a research project done by a Harvard professor which showed that elderly people become progressively more incapable of helping themselves the more help they are given. Perhaps it is true of the wider population too.

I've argued against this many times before on MN ....

Its not voluntary is it. Voluntary implies an element of, um, choice.

What they mean is unpaid.

If people are turning up and working 9-5 then they are doing a job and should be paid for it. Properly paid, not forced to do it in order to recieve their measly £65 a week.

I'm sure my 57 year old neighbour who can't find a job will be thrilled to pick up litter wearing a hi viz 'unemployed' jacket

What is going to happen with childcare while people are doing this?

And if this is where the workforce for the "big society" is going to come from, I question how suitable/effective it will be.

Who says they will have to wear a high viz jacket with "unemployed" stamped on it?

There are people whose jobs it is to pick up litter. There are people whose jobs it is to wipe arses in nursing homes. People gut chickens and scrape the fat off the roofs of sewers. You get the idea.

People do all sorts of unpleasant things for money - is all work that doesn't involve exercising one's creativity and complete self fulfilment inherently demeaning then?

Just read it.

Didn't we do this in the 80s?

Also "Under the scheme, job advisers would be given powers to require tens of thousands of claimants to take part in community work for charities or local councils.".... So is this supposed to link into the "big society" or not? I think they are not being clear about the long term intentions of this.

A fair day's work for a fair day's pay.

Let's rid ourselves of our scrounging, tax avoiding, publicly funded monarchy and aristocracy then see what's left over to fund real jobs for the unemployed.

Presumably people in receipt of JSA are looking for work and will be faced with a childcare dilemma in any case if they find some.

What you are all saying actually is that there are people on JSA who can't or won't work and shouldn't be made to. Fine but they shouldn't be on JSA either.

Yes georgi and my question is, given that the govt intend to replace the 200,000 public sector jobs with voluntary people, and this is being described as "voluntary work", are the two linked?

Will unqualified people with no interest in what they are doing be sent to "wipe arses in nursing homes"?

can't do the math as it is too early and my pc calculator doesn't have a divide thing.
but so someone on £51 a week, would work 30 hours.......
so apart from how can they job hunt and be tied up for 30 hours, the "pay" is way below the minimum wage.

How much interest in wiping arses do you think the average care assistant really has? If you think everyone in work loves their job and is deeply fulfilled by it you are delusional.

Are the two linked - no idea, not being at the heart of policy making in the Coalition (not Conservative) government. I suggest you lobby St Nick Clegg about it, if the Tories are all so evil.

What they are suggesting does sound, though, a lot like the community service orders which are handed down through the criminal justice system. Are categories of long-term job-seekers to be indistinguishabe from them?

30 hours a week on the over 25 rate of JSA works out at £2.18 per hour. It's about £1.70 for under 25s.

Surely if they're working and part of the scheme is to show them that work pays then surely they should pay them at least minimum wage? Otherwise they may as well lump them in with offenders doing community service.

I agree that it's useful to get long-term claimants used to the routine of work but you've got to bloody pay them a working wage as well because, you know, they're WORKING.

georgi I am not actually saying that at all. I am asking how women with children will afford to do this, and wondering if childcare will be provided. You seriously expect people on JSA to pay for childcare while they do their voluntary work? That is just gobsmackingly, well, tory.

Perhaps they could all be required to wear special hats?

Dayglo toppers perhaps.

They could also be adorned with a helpful upper-case slogan; WORKSHY SCROUNGER perhaps??

Georgimama in that case the choice given should not be 'do this compulsory unpaid work or you will not get your £65 a week' but instead 'here is a job for which you will be paid a living wage - take it or you may lose your entitlement to benefits'

If people are doing this 'voluntary work' then they are working. Why is their labour less valuable than that of someone who has been fortunate enough to find a paid position doing the same work?

So how is one to afford childcare if they are on JSA?

Hmmm. It seems a good idea at first, but forcing people to do menial jobs, isn't that whAT they used to do to prisoners, but stopped as it was inhumane.

More seriously, I do wonder how the liberal democrat members of the government sleep at night.

The price of power? Whatever it takes it seems...

And a double at sending random people in to care for our vulnerable population.

There have already been threads on here saying that they wouldn't be very keen on genuine volunteers to do care work - for many reasons. Now it is advocated that people who are totally unqualified and have not even put themselves forward for this type of work be forced to do it? How can anyone think that is a good idea? It's just horrible actually.

Georgimama thats my point really, people get crap wages to do those jobs already ..can the unemployed come and do your job for free ?

are people whose jobs it is to pick up litter. There are people whose jobs it is to wipe arses in nursing homes. People gut chickens and scrape the fat off the roofs of sewers.

And they make more than £65 a week for the privilege

Will these same people find themselves doing their old jobs for benefit money once employers realise they can take on the unemployed to do the work at no cost to them?

And FWIW, 'wiping arses' for elderly or disabled people is a woefully undervalued area of work (as is childcare) which shouldn't be lumped in with other unskilled work like picking litter or cleaning up graffiti.