Girl turns down 'mandatory' work placement

[Annoni_mouse 10]

The country is up the junction because we throw millions at fradulent schemes like this.

 

How many doctors and nurses training could we have funded out of the money that we thrown at the likes of A4e?

 

How many apprentices could properly have been trained out of the money thrown at A4e, plus all the other schemes like CTS (and the rest). If we had done that, we could have trained our own citizens, giving them the skills/trades needed to set up their own businesses and then setting on other people as their businesses grew.

 

We instead decided to throw money at schemes exactly like this throwing millions down the drain and making some people very rich

 

Meanwhile the list of 18-24 year olds without a job just keeps rising.

 

The point is that this individual doesn't believe that she should have to work in a job which she has no interest in, which of course she doesnt. She can simply say 'no thanks'.

 

However, when she is expecting handouts(in the form of JSA) from the taxes of people who will equally be doing jobs that they don't have any interest in, then that's where the problem lies.

 

It's not slave labour to expect people to work for their up keep, only in a society as perverse as this would it be seen as such. Everywhere else in the world, it would simply be called 'real life'.

 

It's often said that American society has a 'can do' attitude. If we as a nation had an attitude, it would be 'why should I?' and this girl is a prime example.

[NorthernStar 11]

If forcing law abiding people into working for free, surely the criminal justice system will have to change with regards to the unpaid community service as a punishment the courts often enforce on convicted criminals - unless of course it is a crime not to be able to find a decent job.

[Green Web 10]

Also whilst people are working for free in Poundland, presumably they're not on the unemployment statistics?

 

And how this will help them look for work and get employment whilst they're doing this unpaid job?

Edited January 19, 2012 by Green Web

[Cyclone 10]

They probably are since they are still receiving their JSA. And what difference would 2 weeks off the list make anyway, it's not published on a weekly basis!

[Cyclone 10]

That's like saying the NHS isn't owned by the government either but rather owned by no one since the government make partial sometimes full payment to pharmacists, doctors, hospitals on behalf of certain members of society while others pay the full amount for prescriptions and NI contributions. As I see it they are one in the same as both institutions are government financed and all decisions relating to either of them are made through the act of parliament.

Parliament has no power to make any decisions regarding universities.

They spend their income as they choose, they teach as they choose, they take what students they choose (barring discrimination laws).

There behaviour was limited by law, in much the same way everyones is, when that restriction was lifted some universities chose to raise their fee's, others did not. The government did not decide for them, it removed a restriction.

You might as well say that you are owned by the government because they pass laws about your behaviour.

 

 

 

That's right, but feeling resentful about finding yourself unemployed despite years of studying and spending thousands of pounds on obtaining the degree, then being threatened that your benefits (your only source of income) may be stopped should you refuse to agree to accept the opportunity when it arises to get you off benefit after completing a mandatory two week work trial where you're expected to accept any job offer no matter how menial the duties may seem, is a little hard to swallow don't you think?

Yes, feeling resentful in that situation is a little hard to swallow, I agree.

[CockneyMafia 10]

Regardless of the girl’s academic or intellectual credentials, why is a company owned by an American private equity firm being offered fully subsidised labour? Surely her time could be put to better use in the public sector. Perhaps working in the job centre?

 

This strikes me as a procedural rather than pragmatic move, as neither party stands to gain anything out of it in the long run.

[fake 10]

They probably are since they are still receiving their JSA. And what difference would 2 weeks off the list make anyway, it's not published on a weekly basis!

 

You normally have to have been out of work and claiming JSA for over a year to go on a New Deal or Back to Work type scheme. Those schemes normally lasted around 12 months and while on the scheme and AFAIK you are not part of the unemployment register. Possibly one of the reasons that the long term unemployed figures have recently fallen slightly. The new schemes that have just been introduced can now last up to 2 years or until you get a job.

 

 

I have disabilities and have been unemployed for a while and in July last completed a 1 year ND scheme. Very little support was given as its a case of "there is the computer, now do some job search." They did reformat my well written CV but that so the can get extra money for doing so. In all the 12 months I did not get any interviews despite applying for jobs neither did many of the others on the course. I was told about the MWA aspect and saw people being sent to Poundland as it was about the only place that would accept people on this scheme. BTW these provider get extra payment if people complete the MWA. I refused on the grounds that I would not be adequately insured and that as a "forced volunteer" would not be covered by employment laws, and I class that as discrimination. I was never asked to do the MWA after that. Don't forget also that these providers are meant to individually tailor the scheme to meed the unemployed needs.

 

Unless law are changed very few companies are prepared to take on people under the MWA. PLI and ELI does not automatically cover volunteers so it means that to comply with the law they will need to pay to get extra insurance cover to cover volunteers. I have a sneaky suspicion that Poundland are not covered for volunteers.

 

That is the basis on what any future cases should be fought on, unfortunately most of these schemes rely on people not knowing their rights.

 

Its only when you go on these schemes that you start to understand how they operate and how the "tailored to meet your needs" bit is bull. I kept a detailed diary of how I was treated and how these employment providers operate and so much was/is wrong I could write a book about it.

[Cyclone 10]

You normally have to have been out of work and claiming JSA for over a year to go on a New Deal or Back to Work type scheme. Those schemes normally lasted around 12 months and while on the scheme and AFAIK you are not part of the unemployment register.

You're talking about something entirely different than a 2 week work placement aren't you.

Possibly one of the reasons that the long term unemployed figures have recently fallen slightly. The new schemes that have just been introduced can now last up to 2 years or until you get a job.

 

 

I have disabilities and have been unemployed for a while and in July last completed a 1 year ND scheme. Very little support was given as its a case of "there is the computer, now do some job search." They did reformat my well written CV but that so the can get extra money for doing so. In all the 12 months I did not get any interviews despite applying for jobs neither did many of the others on the course. I was told about the MWA aspect and saw people being sent to Poundland as it was about the only place that would accept people on this scheme. BTW these provider get extra payment if people complete the MWA. I refused on the grounds that I would not be adequately insured and that as a "forced volunteer" would not be covered by employment laws, and I class that as discrimination. I was never asked to do the MWA after that. Don't forget also that these providers are meant to individually tailor the scheme to meed the unemployed needs.

 

Unless law are changed very few companies are prepared to take on people under the MWA. PLI and ELI does not automatically cover volunteers so it means that to comply with the law they will need to pay to get extra insurance cover to cover volunteers. I have a sneaky suspicion that Poundland are not covered for volunteers.

Interesting... Do they actually count as volunteers though since they are given little choice it seems?

 

That is the basis on what any future cases should be fought on, unfortunately most of these schemes rely on people not knowing their rights.

 

Its only when you go on these schemes that you start to understand how they operate and how the "tailored to meet your needs" bit is bull. I kept a detailed diary of how I was treated and how these employment providers operate and so much was/is wrong I could write a book about it.

I'm not arguing that A4E are doing a good job, I've heard enough people telling stories about how poor they are. This is a government created scheme though, she should have gone and done the work if she wanted to keep being given money on a weekly basis whilst not working.

She should be adequately insured whilst there, but that's for the DWP to ensure since they are administering the scheme.

[chem1st 10]

The point is that this individual doesn't believe that she should have to work in a job which she has no interest in, which of course she doesnt. She can simply say 'no thanks'.

 

However, when she is expecting handouts(in the form of JSA) from the taxes of people who will equally be doing jobs that they don't have any interest in, then that's where the problem lies.

 

It's not slave labour to expect people to work for their up keep, only in a society as perverse as this would it be seen as such. Everywhere else in the world, it would simply be called 'real life'.

 

It's often said that American society has a 'can do' attitude. If we as a nation had an attitude, it would be 'why should I?' and this girl is a prime example.

 

Benefits have been around in the UK for nearly 1000 years, everytime land was stolen, particularly during enclosure & inclosure, they had to increase the number of payments.

 

Be it in the form of poor relief/JSA etc.

 

It was recognized that by stealing the common land, people were deprived of making a living off of their ancestral lands.

 

The way things are going in this country were going to have a full blown revolution on our hands as the youth rise up and seize land by force, like those whom stole it from them (the collective in the form of common land) in the first place.

 

You can't deny people a right to earn a living and force them to pay ever more to live, whilst paying others (landowners) greater amounts for doing nothing.

 

We need to look at the Prussian model, armies shall have to be recruited from landowning families.

 

Mayday and the Summer are going to be very interesting.

[fake 10]

You're talking about something entirely different than a 2 week work placement aren't you.

 

No. In order to do the 2 weeks work placement ie the Mandatory Work Related Activity you have to accepted on one of these schemes.

 

Interesting... Do they actually count as volunteers though since they are given little choice it seems?

 

Yes they still count as volunteers albeit forced and with conditions.

 

I'm not arguing that A4E are doing a good job, I've heard enough people telling stories about how poor they are. This is a government created scheme though, she should have gone and done the work if she wanted to keep being given money on a weekly basis whilst not working.

 

No necessarily, she should have checked on the relevant laws covering her working first. I cant see her wining any case on the basis of her claim as this cant be classed as a slave labour.

 

 

She should be adequately insured whilst there, but that's for the DWP to ensure since they are administering the scheme.

 

From the legal aspect look up what Public Liability and Employee Liability Insurance covers as extra cover is needs to be taken out to insure volunteers. AFAIK those on government schemes are not automatically covered or insured separately by the DWP.

 

http://www.unitetheunion.org/sectors/community_youth_workers/resources/best_practice_in_volunteering.aspx

 

To be hones I don't think the people who thought up these schemes have ever considered this aspect. They are just trying to copy the failed system in the USA where different laws apply.

 

Just to add, she also had the right to sort out her own MWA and should have done just that as MWA does not necessarily mean working at Poundland. She could have offered her services at a museum for instance or at a voluntary organisation for which she would have been covered.

[Cyclone 10]

Benefits have been around in the UK for nearly 1000 years, everytime land was stolen, particularly during enclosure & inclosure, they had to increase the number of payments.

 

Be it in the form of poor relief/JSA etc.

 

It was recognized that by stealing the common land, people were deprived of making a living off of their ancestral lands.

 

The way things are going in this country were going to have a full blown revolution on our hands as the youth rise up and seize land by force, like those whom stole it from them (the collective in the form of common land) in the first place.

So they're going to steal it from someone else...

 

You can't deny people a right to earn a living and force them to pay ever more to live, whilst paying others (landowners) greater amounts for doing nothing.

Nobody is denied the right to earn a living, indeed part of the problem are those who refuse to earn a living and expect to be kept instead.

Landowners might make a return on the value they have invested in that land, that's entirely proper.

 

We need to look at the Prussian model, armies shall have to be recruited from landowning families.

 

Mayday and the Summer are going to be very interesting.

I think you're gradually going off your rocker.

[Balpin 12]

Nobody is denied the right to earn a living, indeed part of the problem are those who refuse to earn a living and expect to be kept instead.

.

 

Above is a snippy.

 

A great deal of our problem is those that will not earn a living, and expect to be kept.

it starts with royal family and goes down through all the landowners etc.

 

They do nothing, and expect the rest of us to keep them.

 

I would include in this idle mass, all those who find time to post on here all day.

Why are you not working?