Workfare versus Work Experience

[rabbitstew]

How important is prior work experience, normally, to a job as a shelf stacker? I would have thought that anyone taking that on via Workfare who then failed to get or take the job at the end of it would be ringing the death knell to any future employment as they would be assumed to have been too slack to even get that sort of work when offered to them on a plate. And I know that unpaid work experience is more or less compulsory to anyone hoping to get into publishing, for example, but I'm sure that nobody would get to keep their benefits if they got themselves a bit of that sort of work experience.

So, basically, I'm a bit unclear as to whom Workfare is supposed to really benefit, apart from those people who wanted jobs in Tesco in the first place, but who now find they can't access them unless they are on a Workfare scheme?????

Sad to see we have dropped off of "discussions of the day" and we are not in "most active either.

I have left a message on McDonald's facebook page and next I am going to tweet, then write to my MP. Five days of protest against Workfare here.

Carer at least people are talking about it!

Oh yes Tapsel im pleased that they are. I caught the end of a conversation where a woman said she knew someone on Jobseekers who had been sent on a placement and had to pay for his own uniform.
thats all i heard as she walked past.
Ive just seen a clip on Twitter of Chris Grayling squirming as Cathy Newman interviewed him. She was damn good at it too producing a letter saying these schemes ARE mandatory yet he still kept lying through his teeth and saying its voluntary. Someone has already put it on youtube.

Seemingly his office had a copy of the letter hours before the interview. "I am looking you right in the eyes, I am not lying" Where is the large emoticon when you need it?

It was reallly REALLY hard not to throw up on my keyboard.
He was sweating though. You could tell.

Yes, he said "I am looking you right in the eye, I am not lying. Well I'm looking at the camera, but Im not lying."

Lol, I thought the tories destroyed satire but they are quite funny themselves.

Methinks the big man is too busy to read the standard letters his own department sends out. He's into standard denials in a big way, though.

He's looking more and more uncomfortable as the days go on.

Is he avoiding the question or is this "technicality" over the initial assessment allowing him to keep up the same denial. It seems that because young people are "invited" to take part he can say it's voluntary but Grayling knows that people are being verbally pressured and once they agree verbally, the letter is sent stating it's mandatory to attend.

I think you are right, rabbitstew.

But he should know what letters are being sent to people.

How he could be happy to on national tv and be shown to be a liar, time and time again, is beyond me.

I would really like to know exactly what it's like to be on one of the Workfare placements. How does it work? Do you go there at the appointed time and have some sort of induction? I suppose I would expect to learn about context of the business, different roles in the branch and at HQ that people carried out, plus basic Health and Safety appropriate to the organisation. Then I would expect to spend a day shadowing someone, to learn how they did their job. I would expect to have a debrief with the Manager at the end of the day, for at least 15 minutes. Then I'd expect to be given a chance to do a couple of front office and back office roles during the placement, with some sort of mentor keeping an eye on me and making themselves available for me to ask any questions. At the end I would expect to write a short report (half a side of A4) on how I think it went, and get this signed off by my manager at the placement, as well as the manager at the Job Centre or wherever. In return I would expect to turn up on time every day and not miss a day unless I had to go to A and E with something dire. I would also expect to show willing while I was there, and be polite and reasonable pleasant. I would expect the placement manager to write a report on my performance during the placement as well, and take an interest in me during my time there.

What I wouldn't expect is to shell out money for uniforms, be pointed in the direction of a pallet and told to get on with it, or sell sausage rolls all day for £70 a week, as frankly my time would probably be better spend volunteering in a more varied range of rolls tbh.

It would be good if someone posted on this thread who had actually done one of the placements.

roles

I was thinking of Greggs!!

I do agree. Sausage rolls are very limited in shape, size and variety. I would at least expect to have access to muffins.

Well, exactly!
A full selection of baked goods, definitely.

DS1 would probably volunteer to work in Greggs. He has recently come home extolling the virtues of their sausage rolls, and how suitable they are in terms of his overall eating budget when out. I practically needed smelling salts.

FactCheck update: DWP fail to explain disappearing ?workfare? document

We FactChecked several claims made by Chris Grayling over the controversial topic of ?workfare? last week.

Mr Grayling mounted a defence of the policy of mandating the unemployed to do short unpaid work placements ? forcing them to work for free on pain of losing their benefits.

The Employment Minister said the government?s Work Experience scheme, aimed at young people, was voluntary not mandatory.

Another scheme run by the government?s Jobcentre Plus network called Mandatory Work Activity was compulsory, as the name suggests, but no ?big company? would benefit from it by getting cheap labour, he insisted.

We found this response to a Freedom of Information request that strongly suggested he was wrong about that.

blogs.channel4.com/factcheck/factcheck-update-dwp-fail-to-explain-disappearing-workfare-document/9652

Looks like the Tory filth may finally be backing down from the slave labour programme...

The Guardian ticker headline reports DWP soon to announce removal of all threat of sanctions for the Workfare programme.

Caught up with last nights Newsnight. They interviewed a couple of young people working on placement at Greggs head office who both said they were happy on placement.
Maybe the responses would have been rather different if they had interviewed people on placement in one of their bakeries/shops who are sweating it out cooking sausage rolls etc for their Jobseekers Allowance. They must think the public are stupid.

ttosca , that fact check info is interesting. I've still got the original chapter 3 with the missing info. Couldn't save, so have printed, can scan it and email. If anyone needs a copy for any reason let me know.

I contacted Mr gleam, avanta put their name down without permission which seems to imply avanta are making claims to DWP about just what they can achieve. I can check out Holiday Inn, we have one here (I live in sussex) a friend was working there she would know.

So if stores are still in receipt of forced unpaid staff and that point 14 is now missing from the guidelines does this mean avanta et al are in breach of NMW. oohh! it's like pass the parcel or rather move the liability.

The news says that all sanctions have been removed for youngsters (16-24 year olds) on the govts. Work Experience Programme.

What's troubling me is, that there has been nothing mentioned about the Work Programme for anyone over 24 years old.

Am we to assume sanctions still apply to them ?

MrsDeeBee-

You raise some good points. It's not exactly clear what remaining programs will have sanctions and for whom. The govt. has repeatedly lied over this matter, so it may take some time for the facts to come to light.

It is interesting that, after repeatedly lying in the media that these Workfare programmes are 'entirely voluntary', they now declare that there will no longer be sanctions.

So... the scheme was entirely voluntary AND there was a threat of sanctions if you didn't accept a placement or accepted on and then withdrew? What sort of definition of 'voluntary' is that? Alternatively, were you just lying? If so, why don't you admit it now?

Sorry, just seen obvious mistake in previous post.

Are we to assume.....

I don't think we will ever get an admission of lying. It's like certain pieces of paperwork and certain paragraphs/bullet points being removed from the DWP website. "Oooh, they're gone, therefore, they never existed". Never mind that there must be some people who have original copies of paperwork etc.

I am still trying to understand why after denying last night on Channel 4 that sanctions existed, they are now removed ?

And still people are expected to work for 25-30 hours, for their benefits and yes, what about people on ESA and the welfare for work they have to do? What about older claimants, who have lots of experience? What about them all working for benefits whilst the private companies profit?

Still angry and still boycotting all companies involved in these free labour, Workfare, schemes, until they pay people for work.

I really feel so frustrated that the argument put forward is only about Work Experience for supposedly 18-24 year olds and that it seems to focus only on the issue of it not being voluntary, as if that is the only thing that makes it unfair.

Totally agree Tapsel. It stinks.

'Birmingham graduate forced to work for free at Poundland to challenge Government' > www.itv.com/news/central/2012-06-26/birmingham-graduate-forced-to-work-for-free-at-poundland-to-challenge-government/