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.

1 year apparently, custy.

Also, please remember that these people have not done anything wrong, they are just jobhunting. Perhaps the government has taken away their job.

I got my first "job" 14 years ago working for a charity under the Community Employment Scheme in Ireland - at the time, you worked for 20 hours a week and received slightly more than you'd get in benefits. It was fantastic - I loved what I did, and it gave me a start in the sector where I wanted to work, and I've been more or less in the same sector ever since.

That said, I wasn't obliged to do it and had to go through a competitive interview process to get the chance.

I'm not totally against this scheme, but it depends how it's implemented, and whether it's about really helping people or punishing them for being "workshy".

i dont think a months worth of volunteering is too sinister if you have been unemployed for a year

it would be nice if this was coupled with helping people look for for work

OOH heres something contraversial... job centres are shit, they don't help

so are connections - and you dont need both.

close down the job centres and open a one stop shop where people help you fill in an application form, the information is up to date and volunteering opportunities are known about. where training is available.

Oh dear...now its the Jobcentre's fault there's no work..and people don't get jobs..

Obviously where you live the Jobcentres are crap..we would quite happily help with application forms (i have done in the past) butthe nature of our job is very time bound so we usually refer a client to a local provider who helps them with forms,C.Vs,interview technique etc..

no no no mumcentre plus - BUT it is a factor. i have listed many factors

i also believe that the long term unemployed should do voluntary work

but it isn't a person in a vaccum making a decision to just not work

there are many supporting factors.

I think voluntary work is fine in the correct context and with decent employers and decent actual jobs ...but not for more hours than we pay them for in a week..

I quite liked the Future Jobs Fund Scheme which was aimed at young people aged 18-24 they were offered various jobs for 6 mths at minimum wage or more 20hrs per week to gain experience and footing in the labour market...i think something like this on a smaller scale could perhaps be extended to older clients...but this has been scrapped

I think its exploitative and wrongto expect a person deemed long-term unemployed should be forced to pick up rubbish etc...that is not improving their situation.. actually it's very degrading.

cedarcottage ...I already work ,so no need for me to do voluntary work

mumcentre - surely having to rely on others to provide your income is degrading in itself - ie being on the dole. this is a way of helping people get some of the discipline necessary for work so they can move towards getting a proper job

I don't think that is the case...how is someone picking up litter helping them back to work??..they may have to wake up early..ok thats about it..

it's not challenging..

its not increasing their knowledge,

it's not actually helping them into work or giving them real experience.

it's not increasing their confidence so what the fuck is it doing apart from making politcians look good/like they are doing something about these evil job-less ones?..

I agree being on benefits can be degrading in itself but being forced into voluntary work that provides no actual hope or real benefit is wrong...

In response to lifeinlimbo's last post.

Why would they have no money for food or bills and end up with £0 if they turn up and do the work that's being asked of them?

They have a clear cut choice. They turn up, do 30 hours work for a month, they still get their money!

They decide not to bother to turn up and do the work,then yes, they lose their money, because that is what they chose to do.

Really, how is it degrading to do a job that you are capable of in return for your means to live. Surely to any person with an ounce of pride it's more degrading to recieve money for doing next to nothing?

Mumcentreplus, it's making them do something in return for their money.

Why should they only do it if it will benefit them personally? Why can't they do it just to help society in the same way that society is helping them by paying for them to live?

So something is enough?...not actually helping them but just lip-service?..how does that actually benefit society in the long run? ..they are part of society not less than..

Hey curlymama, even prisoners get minimum wage. Being treated worse than a criminal is degrading.

Many unemployed people had good jobs, they are not lazy idiots. They have trained, gained useful skills, contributed to society and now are trying hard to get a job because JSA is no picnic.

Here are the statistics for you, from the October 2010 report:

No of people on JSA: 1 470 000
No of unemployed people: 2 450 000
Economically inactive people: 9 280 000
No of vacancies: 459 000

Yes, something is enough. Otherwise they are just getting handouts for free. Why should people who are capable of working get money for doing nothing, when there is work they could do that would benefit society?

It benefits society because there are things that need doing to clean up areas or assist charities or help individual people, that the taxpayer simply can't afford to pay for. So as the taxpayer is already having to pay someone who is out of work to enable them to live, why not get them to do something in return?

I genuinely fail to see the problem.

We are talking about 30 hours a week for a month, in return for at least a years worth of benefits.

once people have been on the dole for a long time i understand that they lack basic working skills such as getting up in the morning and being at a certain place by a specified time. surely this teaches them that and therefore improves their changes of getting a job. maybe its not ideal but then their situation hasn't been - either from their pespective or the taxpayer who's been funding their lifestyle

They are not being treated worse than criminals, criminals have no freedom, and very little choice of what to spend their money on.

People on JSA can also recieve FSM, HB, free prescriptions, and I'm sure there's more.

When you add it all up, they will be getting more than minimum wage. And when they don't even have to do it until they have been on JSA for a whole year, they will have recieved alot more than the equivalent to minimum wage for 120 hours.

I know there are genuine people that have, through no fault of their own, lost their highly skilled jobs. They may be trying very hard to get another job, and not in the least bit workshy.

But that doesn't entitle them to something for nothing. They are capable of working, so what's the harm/

using litter picking as an example,i doubt anyone will learn much from this,as mumcentrplus said!

plus,wouldnt it actually encourage more people to chuck litter.....cos the attitude would be, the 'feckless' unemployed can pick it up,'i pay tax so they can do something to earn it'

i know a few off here would think that way...

You are missing my point curly its a waste of money ...your money..my money..so they work for 4 weeks 30hrs a week and get no benefit and some company gets paid..this type of scheme is never done for nothing the people losing out are the jobseekers & tax payers..if it actually helped people at least it would be worth it!

'criminals have no freedom, and very little choice of what to spend their money on '

Nor do people on benefit tbh...should I say very little freedom ,they can walk around freely..but of course they must bear in mind we are all paying paying for them..

what's fsm? because the others on the list prisoners get also..

the article said they woulkd get payment on top of the jsa for doing it....£1 per hour

so it wil benefit the jsa claimant....but will costs loads to administer

what about insurance?
what about training of any equipment to be used?

it cant be a case of turn up and get on with it

and the article is saying 'menial' work for the 'feckless'.....so clearly the intention is not to prepare them for working,but to punish

who must walk around bearing in mind who are paying for them??