Tory scum make lying, insulting and patronising response to workfare petition

[ttosca]

epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/29356

It's just unbelievable. Who do they think they're talking to?

I do love it when the tory party hq people are let out of their boxes to go on to the social media to try and defend the worst and most inefficient government nobody ever gave an outright mandate to.

"The economy stupid" does that ring a bel with any of those who think using unpaid labour to fill paid positions is a good thing. Osborne is a full 6 points of growth away from his target, guess that makes him some kind of fuckwit, more people under employed as only part time work available in many sectored directly because all these fantastic non paid work experience people are taking up the space and then not getting any of the bloody work.

End result people paying less tax either because they don't earn enough which then means they need subsidised by...yes the tax payers. Or as a result of the general economy falling off a cliff were paying much more in jsa in the first place, jeesus you people that want tyo pay less tax and not subsidise the feckless unemployed sure know how to fuck yourselves over. Oh well as comrade ttosca will agree with, come the revolution all your shiny things like cars and houses and fee paying schools wont help you, you will have no one to blame for fanning the fires of discontent but yourself.

On the other hand, if someone has been looking for work and getting nowhere for long enough to justify being stuck on one of these workfare programmes, the chances of them missing a golden job opportunity are pretty slim. If Johnny Pole can jump on a plane and travel halfway across Europe, find a job and thrive in some of the most economically blighted communities in our country I think it's only reasonable that a kick up the arse is offered to the indigenous workshy on behalf of the British taxpayer.

Of course, I appreciate that the vast majority of those out of work aren't workshy but there is, inevitably, a hard core that choose a life on benefits and I believe that this should be firmly discouraged by whatever means possible.

Go and boil your heir as we say round these parts MrJp. Whilst we wait for the water to boil though would you care to tell us how many are these "Hard Core" 50 thousand, a hundred thousand< a million, more than that? Whilst your looking for the answer to that see if you can find me the amount in unclaimed benefits. I hear tell that is dwarfes the amount of fraud by something a magnitude of 50 to 1. Tens of billions unclaimed, that will be the lazy hard core element not getting off their backsides to fill in the forms then...waters boiling!

I think Mr Judgey Pants is guilty of a bit of inverted racism there.

www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jul/18/food-banks-on-hand-outs?INTCMP=SRCH

From the linked article.

A large crowd in the Hope Centre are from Romania, and say they are waiting for food because collecting scrap metal and washing cars isn't enough to make ends meet. A bigger number is there because of benefit delays and cuts, or simply because they are no longer able to make their low wages stretch.

So you see Mr JudgeyPants. Life isnt a walk in the park for people who have come here from elsewhere.
I refuse to use the patronizing offensive derogatory term that you did!

In a time of mass unemployment can someone tell me why they think it's a good idea for anyone to do a paid job ( for nothing) for a company?

I don't think anyone is suggesting this is a good idea. But this valid point works on the assumption that without work programmes there would be a paid job, and that the people who have been unemployed for long enough to be sent on work programs would get those jobs.

I'm not entirely sure that significantly more jobs would be available without MWA. I can see that there may be a few, but in a time when companies are making so many redundancies because of the financial climate, it's reasonable to think that all that might happen is that more pressure would be put on existing employees to get the work done.

I can see that there may have been less temp work available in retail over Christmas than there has been in the past, but that isn't just because of MWA. It's because companies are going into liquidation, because the high street is massively losing trade to the Internet, because a large number of people are spending less on Christmas because times are tight. It is not just because of MWA.

I have to say, I'm surprised Darkesteyes that as someone who clearly has strong views on this subject and who seems to want to convince others of your view, that you didn't even attempt to engage in any of the questions I posed earlier on the thread. You may think those subjects are bollocks, but unless some of those questions (and others) are answered to people that don't see the massive problem that you are seeing, opinions that disagree with yours aren't going to change.

ttosca Please get a job, you are wasting your time ranting on here!

How do you know she does not have a job Ironman. People can post and work it is not mutually exclusive or should we all including you get off our arses and get a job.

Looking for work is not a full time job.

I got made redundant at Xmas. So am currently out of work and applying for new jobs. I'd say there are probably two suitable jobs in my salary bracket, roughly around where I live, per week. There are maybe two more "off chance" jobs to apply for just in case. I have a few different base CVs, depending on the sector, which I then modify to fit the exact job spec, plus a few cover letters which again I can tailor exactly. That takes up to 1 hour (at a real stretch, and less time the more I do as I know my cv backwards so can dredge up relevant experience for pretty much anything quickly) each. Quick touch base with recruiters once a week, another 5 minutes per recruiter. Snoop round local companies and speculative cvs sent out...maybe a couple of hours a week.

That's about a days work, all in, at a push. I'm not claiming jsa as I have other income streams and have picked up a bit of freelancing on top of that. But I cannot see how I could stretch job hunting to cover 5 days. So far this morning, I've dropped DC at nursery, checked the job boards, sent some more info over to a recruiter, watched Wanted Down Under, had coffee and breakfast and arsed about on Mumsnet. My plans for the day include cleaning the bathroom and going to the supermarket. It's not a tough working regime here and I don't see how I could stretch it to cover 5 days.

Since your not on JSA Cly then you are not forced to fill in a job hunting diary which should show to the satisfaction of the job centre staff that you are indeed spending lots of time, several hours per day looking for work, attending interviews, filling out applications, using the internet, door knocking, handing out cv's randomly. Mostly at your own expense as it is very hard to get travel costs to interviews or to hand out cv's in other parts of the town or county in which you live.

Clytaemnestra imagine you are trying to do the same, except:

You don't have the internet at home so you must go to the library to use it (you cannot afford an internet cafe).

You are not terribly computer literate so you it's not an easy task for you (you also spend some time each week attending a computer skills course).

The kind of work you are applying for is low-skilled and often not advertised on the internet. It's often a case of printing out CVs (eating into your tiny food budget, incidentally) and talking them to employers. You are totally skint so you must do this on foot, rather than public transport or driving.

Your literacy levels aren't great - you have dyslexia which was not diagnosed at school (not uncommon for people in their 30s / 40s / 50s). You feel daunted by large application forms and know from experience that you don't do a good job of filling them out on your own, so you must seek help to fill them in. This takes time.

You also need to fit in other tasks such as food shopping. As you're on such a tight budget, this takes time as you need to shop around (e.g. local market, discount stickers in the supermarket) in order to be able to afford to eat properly. This takes time.

Now, how much time do you think you have for job applications? If you're working full time, how will you get on the internet, or get the help you need filling out forms?

do you tlhink would have done different ttosca?

i think they planned the same thing - i vaguely remember arguinng against it on here..

this blog seems to confirm

i know there was a news story too...just can't find in fog of google

i mean, do you think labour would have done different?

I suspect those who are screaming from the rooftops about how unfair it is to have to prove you are looking for work to claim JSA or do mandatory work activity are the same posters who think you should just get the benefit (which of course they will also feel is too low) without any conditions at all.

Just a self signed declaration that honest guv I'm looking for a job. Once upon a time that was the case but too many people took the piss. So over the last two decades the burden of proof has become higher & higher. It seems to me that this MWA has been brought in to try and tackle the huge numbers who simply do not have the discipline, skills or inclination to not only find a job but stick to it.

If you want someone to blame, blame the ones who are taking the mickey. Yes I agree they are in the small minority but they are adversely affecting the genuine claimants out there.

And it isn't mandatory unpaid work. People can refuse to do the work and lose their Job seekers allowance. People in work can't collect their salaries for doing nothing. And it does stop people doing cash in hand jobs whilst claiming JSA. I don't think there is anything wrong with it. But I'd rather not see private companies profiting from this. Community work or work for a charity or work for a non-profit organisation.

Giving people a choice between starving or doing a work placement is not a true choice.

niceguy2 whereon earth do you get that from? Workfare is a badly thought out program, which isn't going to help people get jobs - in fact it may well harm the economy.

What job do you do? Let's say you're a computer programmer. You get made redundant. How on earth will shaking shelves at Tesco at night for 4 weeks help you at all?! All it does it take that job from someone who actually would get paid for it. It doesn't help your job prospects at all. It does however help Tesco!

"If you want someone to blame, blame the ones who are taking the mickey. Yes I agree they are in the small minority but they are adversely affecting the genuine claimants out there"

Oh we agree then? Because the way I see it, the ones taking the mickey are this government and yes, I do blame them.

Just because it bears repeating...

It is not just JSA claimants, it's ESA claimants too. ESA is for people who are ill or disabled.

aufaniae I disagree. I think that in certain situations that Workfare can be very helpful. I don't think it's the magic solution nor do I think it's suitable for all.

So from what I read there are examples where I think the decision makers made a decision I personally would not have made. The example which sticks in my mind is the lady who was volunteering elsewhere but made to stack shelves in poundland. But that said we haven't got all the facts.

I do not agree that just because you have someone on workfare that it takes away the job from someone else. Using that logic we should have any trainees/apprentices or even bother with work experience.

And with regards to your computer programmer analogy, that is an extreme example which I suspect is hypothetical. The reality is that nowadays if you cannot get a new job as a computer programmer then you need to consider another profession. Gone are the days where the state would just give you money and leave you alone in the vain hope you will be employed at some point as a computer programmer again.

So if I was a computer programmer and I couldn't find a job doing anything else. Then after say a year (for example) then I should consider something else....anything else. And if stacking shelves for Tesco means I stand a better chance at getting a job at Tesco then bring it on.

niceguy2 you obviously have no real experience of the job centre! The computer programmer example is far from extreme.

In RL, a friend of mine, a qualified teacher with two post-grad qualifications was advised to go on a literacy course by the job centre. She's qualified to teach a literacy course!

She really wanted to suggest that the Job Centre employee might like to go on a literacy course themselves as they were obviously having trouble reading her CV!

Luckily it was only a suggestion, but now idiots such as that one will be able to force her to stack shelves or starve. That's not going to help one bit.

OK....so let me ask this. If your teacher friend cannot find another job as a teacher or a related field.

How long do you feel the state should continue paying jobseekers for before expecting her to look at other unrelated jobs?

And just because she is a qualified teacher, does this mean now that she is too good to stack shelves and should never have to consider such a menial position?

"I do not agree that just because you have someone on workfare that it takes away the job from someone else. "

Of course it does. There was plenty of evidence this Christmas that stores that usually took on temps were using Work Fare instead.

" Using that logic we should have any trainees/apprentices or even bother with work experience."

Training schemes, apprentices and work experience are all designed to support people into getting work. (The word "training" might be a clue!)

Work Fare AFAIK is simply a number of weeks doing an unskilled job. It doesn't have to have any component which is designed to give the participants new skills or lead to permanent employment. It's simply forced labour.

niceguy2 my teacher friend is a good and dedicated teacher. Yes she is considering alternatives, of course, but it would be a great shame if the profession loses people like her.

No, she's not "too good" to stack shelves, but it isn't a job appropriate to her skills. If I were Tesco I wouldn't want to employ her to stack shelves as I know she'll be off at the first opportunity of a job which uses her skills appropriately. She's massively overqualified.

There are 100s of applicants going for every job, even stacking shelves. It makes more sense for everyone if the person stacking shelves wants to be there and intends to stick at the job!

Do you really want teachers stacking shelves? What a waste of talent!

I'd rather a qualified teacher was stacking shelves than unemployed. That to me would be an even bigger waste of talents.