Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Forced work experience breaching human rights ?

20 replies

Gigondas · 12/01/2012 10:19

Do work experience or lose jsa
Also one of people in this article on radio five now. I am not sure what to make of it apart from having a lot of sympathy for graduates looking for work. However I do wonder how realistic It is to get work as a curator in current environment and therefore there is some logic in trying to get some job.
Tricky one

OP posts:
Gigondas · 12/01/2012 10:23

Cait is not winning me over with her eloquence now

OP posts:
AMumInScotland · 12/01/2012 10:39

I doubt they will manage to get it classed as "forced or compulsory labour" - the people can choose not to do it. Obviously they'll lose their benefits, so it's not an easy choice, but it is still a choice (technically at least!).

It sounds like the scheme has been badly run though, if the people on it don't know what the rules are. That should have been made clear to them from the start, and to the companies where they were working too.

MillontheFloss · 12/01/2012 10:45

I think the problem with this scheme as it provides free labour for big companies like Tesco and Poundland. Why should big business benefit from the misfortune of others in this way?!

I think it's fair enough to do some work in return for your benefits but it needs to be structured and something you would want on your CV- why couldn't this young lady be offered unpaid work in a gallery/ museum?

Or even better use the people resources for social good. Helping the elderly or disabled. Maybe a little extra admin involved with CRBs etc but if you're going to enforce a programme like this then at least make it worthwhile to society and the individuals involved.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 12/01/2012 10:46

Its a stupid idea. Lots of big companies getting very cheap labour that is expected to work the same as a proper employee, but with no employment rights, and less than minimum wage. Instead of making a proper job available.

Gigondas · 12/01/2012 10:46

Agreed that it sounds badly explained and poorly organised . Also if have other experience in place not sure it's needed.
But legal action as you say on this ground seems Ott .

OP posts:
Gigondas · 12/01/2012 10:47

The volunteer Idea one is a good one mill.

OP posts:
foglike · 12/01/2012 10:49

This isn't really a new idea. In the 80's the govt ran schemes sending the unemployed to do community based tasks for £10 extra on top of their benefits.

EdithWeston · 12/01/2012 10:50

This scheme will introduce distortions into the labour market, as pointed out above, and I cannot see how that is a good thing.

But I do not think it is a breach of human rights.

MillontheFloss · 12/01/2012 10:54

What with DC banging on about the 'Big Society' last year you would think that he would have thought to utilise unemployed people for community development. Yet another soundbite idea with no strategic planning or underpinning.

WinterIsComing · 12/01/2012 12:18

If large companies have jobs available then people should be paid a fair wage and tax revenue accrued on it. Propping up big business this way as well as not paying a liveable NMW is ridiculous.

Dave Cameron is becoming more and more like a pantomime villain as the months go by...

Sevenfold · 12/01/2012 12:22

think the whole idea is flawed , but then is the oh do something to help the elderly or disabled.
please. I don't want untrained people working with my dd.
imo the whole thing is just a way of disguising high unemployment

MillontheFloss · 12/01/2012 14:22

Sevenfold Not all jobs working with the vulnerable are front line. It's a lack of imagination that has resulted in unemployed people shelf stacking for major corporations.

Besides, if it's to be a sustainable scheme then the gov would have to invest in training. Do you think TAs have much training? They work with children.

I did voluntary work when I was younger with disabled people working as a TA. I didn't need a lot of training. Often a pair of willing hands is all that's required. (obviously a CRB check too!)

kelly2000 · 16/01/2012 11:59

For most good graduate jobs, even entry level, you need relevant work experience. Working unpaid in a museum is much more likely to lead to a good graduate job in the relevant field, than stacking shelves in poundland. I also notice that if you look at the w4mp website it lists plenty of mps for all parties offering unpaid jobs, but demanding they have degrees and experience. Hypocritical or what?

Mill,
the girl was already doing unpaid work in a museum, the job centre was demanding she give this up to do unpaid work in poundland. i did hear about a man who was offered an interview that clashed with a training session, and was told he had to give up the interview to attend the training session or loose his jobseekers allowance.

Triggles · 17/01/2012 15:06

I thought the purpose of the Job Centre was to assist people in getting jobs... not hiring them out as free labour. Hmm

HerRoyalNotness · 17/01/2012 15:13

When I left school and landed my first job it was a govt scheme where the company would hire me and pay part of my wages and the govt the other part. I think it was for initially 12mths. It gave me a) work and a working wage and b) experience, the company also had an incentive to hire me. At the end of the 12mths they kept me on. I was working as an accounts clerk.

This kind of scheme would work much better. What incentive is there for the companies to hire people? The work is obviously there if they are taking on free labour.

limitedperiodonly · 17/01/2012 16:41

It's outrageous. The DWP is using taxpayers' money to subsidise businesses that want free labour. They're the only ones being helped here.

Neither do I that you should work in return for your benefits. Your JSA agreement is that you will be available for work and you will provide proof of your efforts to find it.

People are also encouraged to consider voluntary work because that can be a way into a real job. Although they can do only a limited number of voluntary hours as that would interfere with their jobseeking.

This girl appears to be doing all that. If she wasn't, the DWP could and would stop her benefits. The scheme is interfering with her efforts to get a job apparently without offering her the chance of permanent, properly-paid employment.

Furthermore, she's volunteering at what I take to a local authority-run museum so she's saving council taxpayers' money.

I hope she takes them to court and wins.

Gigondas · 17/01/2012 16:51

Limited and Kelly make some good points about focussed experience . This is off point but I do wonder where cold reality (shortage of grad jobs esp in arts/public sectors ) needs to be balanced against making do with some kind of experience (preferably paid) while you wait for something better. I don't know what the right answer is but I suppose it goes to
Old issue of do you just take any job? Not that work here was paid work.

OP posts:
limitedperiodonly · 17/01/2012 17:07

gigondas there is a shortage of jobs full stop.

But if one exists then people should be paid an appropriate wage for it.

Poundland and the rest of the chisellers signed up to this scheme aren't providing real jobs, they want free labour and when the scheme ends the so-called jobs will end too.

The DWP is colluding with them to distort wages and the labour market and get people off the unemployment register either temporarily or permanently.

What happened to kelly's friend isn't unusual.

What stuns me is that lots of people prefer to put the boot into people like him and Cait and don't call the Govt on their despicable treatment of benefit claimants and lack of any idea of how to create real jobs by stimulating growth.

carernotasaint · 17/01/2012 22:34

A lot of these stores like tesco and their ilk use claimants for unpaid work and then ....... HAVE THE BAREFACED HYPOCRITICAL CHEEK TO SELL FAIR TRADE GOODS. the hypocrisy beggars belief.

niceguy2 · 18/01/2012 08:20

It's a double edged sword isn't it?

On the one hand unemployed people often lack the skills and experience to get a job. In which case I can see how a scheme like this can help.

On the other hand, right now it's being viewed as a source of cheap labour for the likes of Tesco's rather than a genuine scheme designed to help.

The notion that somehow it's slave labour or that people aren't getting paid for it is simply wrong. You can choose not to do it (and lose your benefits). So it's not slave labour. Also don't forget that most of the time you don't just get JSA alone. There's a whole host of other benefits which most unemployed would be claiming for like Council Tax benefit, child tax credits, housing benefit etc.

The problem I think is with the implementation, not the principle. There's little point in putting people through a week of stacking shelves at Tesco's if they're a graduate who's already got a volunteer position with a view to gaining experience that way. The adviser's need to be given the latitude to make common sense decisions. Or if they have the latitude, to use their discretion.

However, if someone is long term unemployed and are not being realistic in their job search then yes I think this sort of scheme can be helpful. But I personally feel the 'training' should be much longer. Say 6 months and with a much larger focus on education rather than stacking shelves. So customer service training for example. Or for another employer perhaps business administration training.

That way employers have to show more commitment to the training and it's not simply cheap labour and good PR. The employees can prove their worth to the employer over a longer period and have a nicer looking CV.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page