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.

I guess if they are doing this work in return for 3 months of JSA then £65/week is £845, which if they did 2 weeks of work at 30 hours a week works out at around £14 an hour. If it is only 1 week at 30 hours then that's £28 an hour.

200,000+ people are about to lose their jobs. The job market has slowed right down, while employers wait to see what happens.

I find this "just get a job you lazy bastards" stuff really crass TBH.

muminbeds you have misread it.

"nder the plan, claimants thought to need 'experience of the habits and routines of working life' could be put on the month long, 30-hour a week placements.

Anyone refusing to take part or failing to turn up on time to work could have their £65 Jobseekers' Allowance stopped for at least three months."

They do the work in return for their benefits. If they don't do it their benefits are stopped for 3 months. It's not that they get paid 3 months worth of benefits for the work.

This worries me a lot. As DP is the recipient of our JSA, it'd be him sent out to litterpick etc.
But if it was me, I'd be mortified. I'm not strong, or particularly good at anything manual - doing 9-5 manual labour for a month would quite likely do me some serious damage.
As I wouldn't be able to do these jobs normally, what use is this scheme to me? And what about parents? Do they get free childcare while they're on this?

I am deeply suspicious of this, as it smacks heavily of trying to keep a minority (i.e. those who swallow everything the Mail says about "feckless scroungers") happy, with no real goal in mind.

TBH, the only way to get people off the dole is to stop outsourcing stuff.

Skeleton - yes, if you read the information propery, it's aimed at exactly people like that. The reality is that some people ARE extremely picky about what they will do. Not all but some. They have an enormous sense of entitlement and think certain work is beneath them, and I don't have any problem with confronting this 'entitlement' culture which operates on the basis of INEQUALITY - ie - some people are too good for certain jobs.

Out of interest.

If someone won't do it, and they lose their benefits. Then what? Lose their home and starve?

Would our society really do this? If eg someone couldn't get childcare, or had psychological problems which weren't serious enough to warrant incapacity benefit, or was just plain arsey. Would we really say "right then you can starve"?

Be honest.

Someone already does these jobs- what will happen when these posts can be filled at no cost to employers

Or Are there really millions of low skill manual labour type jobs going infinite because no one can be arsed to do them

Really?

I don't think that all of these low skilled jobs which people are turning their noses up exist, TBH.

IME the people who don't work, and can't find work, have things in their lives which stop them doing it. Like mental health problems, or children with disabilities, or they can't read and write, that sort of thing.

I haven't seen anything to suggest that people will be expected to do this work if they have insurmountable childcare issues, or serious psychological problems which render them incapable of doing it. If they are just 'plain arsey' and don't want to... erm, why shouldn't they lose their benefits?

Is anyone SERIOUSLY suggesting that we put 'pain arsey' or 'can't be fucked' or 'I think I'm above that type of work' in the same box as people with genuine caring responsbilities or serious illness?

Because if people really think like that, then no wonder the welfare system has become a total bloody joke.

You have not answered the question.

If someone will not do it, for whatever reason, would you let them starve?

I am interested in the answer.

No I wouldn't, and I really don't think the Govt will!

But I would be entirely happy with someone being given food vouchers, for example, if they persistently refused to carry out the work because they are 'plain arsey'.

IMO being arsey, not being fucked, thinking you're too good for certain jobs are NOT the same as being ill, or having caring responsibilities.

Oh FFS, of course there is a small minority of lazy, entitled, selfish people on benefits. But that doesn't justify reintroducing slave labour in order to enrich all those private companies who deal with all the litter collection, unskilled carers and corporate cleaning at present by providing them with an army of serfs they don't have to pay proper wages to.

In principle I agree with it. I have claimed JSA and I don't consider litter picking beneath me. Once a person has been out of work for a while, it is possible to lose confidence and the routine of going out to work, which makes it harder to get back into it.

In practise, I think the NI experience should be examined carefully. The scheme should be put in place because it will deliver the intended outcomes, not because it plays to popular opinion.

What about their housing and other entitlements? Would you continue to pay that as well?

So under your plans people will be housed and fed but will have no access to cash. That may be a problem for things like school uniforms but I expect you will have some ideas for that sort of things as well.

BTW many people on JSA have caring responsibilities / mental health problems. I have no idea why you think otherwise.

the trouble is I don't think they have really thought this through.
it sounds like a good idea, but who would want to have someone volunteering at their school/nursing home,. who will pay for CRB checks, how much will running this scheme cost?

I am always suprised by the lack of help people on JSA get.
take ds 18 wants to work, applies for every job he see's with no luck.
he must be missing something, yet all he has had is one back to work "interview" that just told him how to look for a job.
surely there are jobs out there, so why aren't the job center making him go for interviews.

why whn he goes to sign on isn't he given some job details to apply for?
surely if they did this will all JSA and make them prove they went for the jobs.
it would help.
or is that just way to easy(using DS as an example)

I'm interested in hearing more about this voucher system. There are an awful lot of different things that people need. How would it all be managed? It could become a colossal administrative task.

so now you want then to work for pennies and have vouchers!!!
what next the workhouse

And the current welfare system ISN'T a colossal (and hopelessly ineffectual) administrative task.....?

Until recenlty I worked as a volunteer at a charity and we had quite a lot of unemployed people who came in as volunteers who were using it as a route back into work. They were all willing volunteers but there were four problems.

1. Not every volunteer had skills we could use;

1. We did not always have enough for them to do;

1. Me and another experenced volunteer were expected to supervise and train these new unemployed volunteers which took us away from the quite technical skilled work we were doing so sometimes it reduced our capacity to deliver the objectives of the charity; and

1. There was a very high churn rate among these unemployed volunteers as they were expected to take any job that came along. No sooner had we got them to a point where they could do something useful than they left to go into paid employment.

I agree people on benefits should do something for society in return for benefits but expecting the charity sector to be able to absorb millions of unemployed people withouot extra resources to do the necessary training is actually very naieve and quite lazy politics.

sounds fair enough to me.

The article states that it is aimed at people who are long term JSA claimants who have no intention of actually getting a job and are not actively job seeking in an effective way ("Reports suggest it will target people believed to be sabotaging efforts to get them back into work"); and not those who are using JSA as a stopgap whilst jobseeking. Or those who are working and claiming JSA.

It's not victimising genuine claimants, it's weeding out those taking the system (and everyone else - taxypayers and other benefit claimants alike) for a ride. Why shouldn't they be made to do something ?

inappropriate snurk @ taxypayer.

sorry.

Nowt wrong with picking up litter. In fact, that's exactly what my DF had to do when he was made redundant under Thatcher. Back then though, he got paid a wage to do it.

The idea is ill thought out and unworkable.

It will take real jobs away from those genuinely seeking work and there are plenty of them.

And are the Government really going to let children go hungry and on the streets because their parents refuse to participate?

SkeletonFlowers but you can't get carers allowance for looking after your own children (unless they have special needs). If you're employed you can (hopefully) afford to pay for childcare.