This one is for anyone out there who thinks that people who sign on have it easy. They don’t.
Have posted the recording below to demonstrate again the (often costly) obstacles that are planted in the way of people who look for low-paid work while signing on.
Some of the treatment by employers experienced by the woman in the recording is downright discriminatory and probably illegal. Certainly should be illegal.
I leafleted outside Stockport jobcentre this Wednesday with Stockport United Against Austerity.
I spoke at length with J, a woman I’ve spoken with before.
The recording below is from that interview. J has a son with autism (he’s in his early 20s) and a ten-year-old daughter. Her son’s PIP was stopped recently. J lost her carer’s allowance. She signs on for JSA and is looking for work.
J has been to six job interviews in the last few months.
Only one organisation ever bothered to get back to her about the job she was interviewed for. That was a nursery job.
Here’s the audio – J describing the experience (there’s a transcript at the end of this post):
The woman who called J about the nursery job told her three things:
- J didn’t get the job
- J didn’t get the job because she was too old
- If J had been given the job, the company would have deducted £200 from her (minimum) wage over several months to pay back apprenticeship costs, because the job was an apprenticeship. I thought that any apprenticeship cost or levy was supposed to be paid by employers. I’ll be doing more work on this, but feel free to comment if this is an area you’re familiar with.
J was also told that she would have to pay for a DBS check. Last time I posted about this, people tweeted to say that employers should pay for such checks. I find mixed advice on that one.
The point is that I keep meeting people at jobcentres who can’t get their employer or their jobcentre or pay for DBS checks. The cost – between about £50 and £70 – lands on the newly-employed person. That is no joke for someone who only gets £70 or so a week in JSA or Universal Credit. The jobcentre says No and the employer says No and the person concerned begins to worry that they’ll never be able to start work, because nobody will help pay for the DBS check that the person can’t afford.
You’ll see what I am getting at when you listen to the recording and/or read the transcript.
People such as J have no money. They sign on for unemployment benefits. They attend jobs fairs. They get a few job interviews – or, at least, they’re invited to attend a company for some sort of canvassing session. I’m not sure that these sessions are actual job interviews. People almost never hear anything further. If they do get close to a job, they’re told that they must pay for checks, or apprenticeships, or badges to get started.
I can tell you this much. This end of the labour market is feral. It’s harsh. It leaves low-income people out of pocket. Employers say and do whatever they like to people who they interview for jobs. There’s nobody around to make sure that people get a fair deal, or even a legal deal. There are all sorts of companies lining up to suck money and personal information (I’ll get to that in the next post) out of people who apply for the lowest-paid work.
People report the sort of story that J has described here ALL THE TIME. Something has to be done about this crap.
Audio transcript:
J: I’ve had probably about six job interviews over past two or three months and I’ve not heard back from… oh, one I heard back from saying I was too old. Nursery nurse work… in the interview, because I’m a mum of two, she said they need somebody with experience… Okay, I haven’t got childcare experience, but I’ve got kids and [son’s name removed] with all his learning problems and health problems, so I have got experience.
I’ve had two children and so she said in the interview, “we need somebody with experience,” and she phoned me – “no, you haven’t got the job, because we’ve taken somebody… you’re too old. We need somebody younger,” basically what that was, because it was an apprenticeship, I had to pay £200 for… it’s cause they don’t get the funding, so I would have had to pay £200 for it and that was the end of that basically.”
Me: So you have to pay £200 for…
J: The apprenticeship, to train how to become a nursery nurse. They told me it would come out of my wages…
Me: So they would deduct that out of your wages:
J:…and the job…they [jobcentre] won’t even help with the CRB, not CRB, DBS check. They won’t even help you with that now.
Me: That’s really interesting, because I’ve talked with a number of people here [at Stockport jobcentre] who have said that, someone who had just got a care job and she was literally ping-ponging backwards and forwards between here [the jobcentre] and the employer [to try and get help paying for the DBS check]. I put that on my blog and people said the employer should pay, but it sounds like a lot of employers are not paying, or not telling people that it’s their obligation…
J: So. it would probably have cost me about £260 for that job. Plus, it was two buses away, so then the bus fare as well… fair enough if I did get the job, because that was the kind of work I was looking for at the time, fair enough, but it is a lot of money £200 to come out of your wages when you’re on the minimum wage as well, just the minimum wage.”
It’s an entirely hopeless situation and I’ll be glad when I can Retire.
When I finished school and got work in 2003, both of my employers did the criminal records check themselves. I never read or heard anything about the jobseeker being asked to pay.
However, I know that self-employed people like taxi-drivers have to pay for a criminal records check and arrange it themselves. Perhaps some jobs like care jobs are treating the worker as self-employed?
There is a lot of malpractice and discrimination happening in workplaces all the time. The problem is that nobody enforces employment law except the worker/jobseeker, who has to embark on a formal appeal at the same time as working or looking for work.
I have long felt that government should proactively inspect workplaces to check they are hiring and firing in line with the procedures set out in law. However, it’s obvious that government views employment law as bad and deregulation as good. There has been a lot of rhetoric from government about the “burden” of the Employment Tribunal and the poor dear employers stung by all these nasty workers winning payouts. (Never mind the poor workers who get fired without good cause and are now skint.)
“There is a lot of malpractice and discrimination happening in workplaces all the time. The problem is that nobody enforces employment law except the worker/jobseeker, who has to embark on a formal appeal at the same time as working or looking for work.”
Extremely well put. That’s exactly it.
It’s completely wrong that employees have to pay for their own DBS checks, especially when the jobs are often low paid care type work. I know that some agencies offer to pay back the cost of the DBS once a certain number of hours have been worked for the agency, but that still leaves a worker faced with the upfront costs of the DBS check, which if done by the agency actually allows them to charge an administration fee. Given that employment agencies are all about making money, (ever seen what agencies charge clients for staff? In my experience, it’s usually about three times the hourly rate of the worker sent to do the work) I’m sure they will not want to miss out on yet another opportunity to profit further, and there is no mention of any kind of limit on what can be charged as an administration fee. All decent employers would of course readily pay for the check themselves, and would also be offering things like good working conditions and decent pay (i.e. at least £10 an hour for basic care type work) but we all know that companies like that are thin on the ground – though it has always escaped me why these same employers are prepared to pay upwards of £20 an hour for agency staff.
The rate of charges for an DBS check can be found here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/fee-display-on-dbs-certificates
It would seem to be a good idea for the individual worker to apply for their own check, if possible, where they are required to pay, as then they’d at least avoid any admin charges made by agencies. However, if at all possible it would be best to avoid any employer who doesn’t readily absorb the cost of a DBS check as a matter of course.
There is also the DBS Update Service where a worker can register and pay £13 a year so that checks can be made online by employers, and at first sight it would seem like a good idea, but there are so many caveats, such as the employer being able to refuse and insist on a new certificate being gained etc, that I wonder if it’s not yet another government scheme to extract money from us for services we are probably already paying for through taxation.
Having worked in quite a few situations where a DBS check is a requirement, I’ve often thought that this is an area where a relatively simple licensing system should come into play, as many of the jobs requiring such checks are low paid, temporary and part time, and likely to require constant checks to be made as workers seek out extra work to make up their hours and pay. There is no reason I can think of why such a system woudn’t work, as the check is on information held, which is updated all the time, if there is a need – commit a crime, and it gets recorded and so on, so would automatically appear on any check. The system is very clunky, and really could be streamlined so that all checks are at the highest level, as in that way workers would automatically qualify for the most sensitive work. Arguments that there are extra costs involved in providing enhanced checks would seen to be refuted by the DBS Update Service only costing £13 a year, and specifically not provided for the basic check. only the enhanced checks.
Yes good suggestion. As things stand, DBS is another obstacle and I talk with people outside the jobcentre who are literally tearing their hair out – employer says No, jobcentre says No and people go back and forwards and back and forwards… bloody nightmare. If someone’s found work, all aspects of starting work should be made as easy as possible – money up front if they have to wait for the first wage payment, transport costs, clothing costs etc.
I agree with what’s being said here.
My personal view is that the employer should be paying for the checks it wants to carry out. I don’t think the bill should fall to the government, except where someone is genuinely starting self-employment.
We have the same problem in the private rental sector. We have to pay admin fees of hundreds of pounds, including a fee for the landlord/agent to carry out reference checks. The agents can charge what they like because we need a place to live.
It’s really a form of bribery: pay an extortionate fee or you can’t work/live here. It should be illegal.
Exactly, Alison, the employer wants the check so the employer should pay for it. Many unemployed live from week to week and these checks that they have to pay for is just another obstacle in the way of them not getting the job.
I constantly live hand to mouth,not even spare money for bus fare never mind anything else.
I use to work as a passenger Assistant taking behaviourally disturbed kids to school and as a midday supervisor. The passenger Assistant job was a private company the council contracted to. I was already a mds when I started it and they accepted my DBS which was paid by the school. However when my passenger Assistant badge expired I was told I’d have to pay DBS myself. The company regularly bounced paycheques and I was sexually harassed on a daily basis. Before I forked out for the DBS the company folded…
There is another abuse of the law regularly happening, whereby some employers put an incorrectly and illegaly worded declaration on the end of application forms, like “Have you ever had any Criminal Convictions – Yes or No, please provide details”. Theyare only allowed to ask if you have any *unspent* convictions unless the job is exempt from the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. Such jobs would usually mean those that involve coming into contact with the public or working with children or vulnerable adults, or perhaps work of a discretionary nature, and NOT just Industrial factory/Warehouse type jobs.
For many people DBS is just one more obstacle to finding work.
“Urgent reform of Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) regime is long overdue”
Jacob Tas, Chief Executive of social justice charity, Nacro, said:
“Nacro welcomes the Law Commission report on the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) filtering system, and fully supports recommendations for a wider review of the whole criminal records disclosure regime.
“Around 10 million people in the UK have a criminal record. Many are for minor offences, in some cases the result of mistakes made long ago. Ex-offenders can offer a wealth of untapped talent and skills to employers many of whom experience skills gaps and struggle to fill their vacancies. Yet the numerous barriers ex-offenders face as they try to get a job often leaves them marginalised and at an increased risk of poverty, homelessness, family and relationship breakdowns and re-offending.
“We need a criminal records regime that consistently strikes the correct balance between helping people to move on from past mistakes or difficult circumstances, enabling them to make valuable contributions to society, and protecting the public and employers from individuals that may present a risk of harm.
“The current regime is not transparent, too complex and difficult to navigate for the individuals and employers who use it, which presents far reaching consequences for employers, individuals and wider society, which include:
Individuals having no clear guidance about what they are required to disclose to potential employers. This leaves them at risk of providing too much or too little information which can lead to the loss of job opportunities and a struggle to provide for themselves and their families.
Employers losing out on the right skills for their workforce and struggling to fulfil their safeguarding responsibilities to protect staff, service users and wider stakeholders from the risk of harm due to not getting the right information from a DBS check. In addition, with DBS checks currently being requested at times unnecessarily, for a huge range of jobs from tradesmen, to nurses, teachers and taxi drivers, DBS check delays are resulting in potential employees and employers waiting for several months before vacancies can be filled.
“It is clear that the existing criminal records regime needs to change. Nacro has vast experience of supporting ex-offenders into employment and helping employers make informed decisions when recruiting people with convictions, and we are committed to continuing our work with employers, government and other key stakeholders to drive forward much needed improvements.”
https://www.nacro.org.uk/news/nacro-comments/urgent-reform-disclosure-barring-service-dbs-regime-long-overdue/
Three years ago, after attending a compulsory jobs fair organised by the Jobcentre, I was offered 2 months full time work, which would start in one months time. The jobcentre wanted me to sign off immediately but I refused. I was then contacted by the employer who informed me I would have to pay around £50 for a DBS check. I filled in the forms but didn’t send the money as I couldn’t afford it. I then attended a one day induction the day before starting the job. I was told at the induction that I would be working around 12 hours per week (I was informed previously that it would be at least 40 hours per week).
I never received a DBS certificate, and I was sacked after three weeks because my rota was changed without them notifying me.
Life at the bottom is an area infested with sharks – both employers and the DWP.
Wow, that sounds likeit was not worth ever bothering with, a bag of shite. Best not to sign up to anything at any Jobfares, just attend if you have to & pick up a few leaflets to prove you’ve been, but don’t even show or mention those leaflets to the JCP unless they ask.
Job fairs are a joke just full of employers that can only get folk to apply through nefarious means as the usual channels do not cut it.
I do not attend them at all, last one had Avon selling from home, the Army, Navy and sector based work academies who want you to train to 4-6 weeks to push a button.
I told the navy guy, the army guy said the navy was full of shits then left.
Was hoping war would break out at the JCP but nothing was in the news.
Yep, last one I went to had Police & Fire Brigade, & some pub chain recruiting for waiters/kitchen staff for country pub restaurants out in the sticks that no one can get to without a car, & a woman representing a Union who was in the wrong place at the wrong event by mistake, oh & I think there might have been a ‘stall’ (table) for McDonald’s too but I was out of there in 5 or 10 mins. Load of crap.
Sounds like the ones I had to go to. You had to register on arrival, so that they could report back to the jokecentre. The first one I went to was all retail jobs and I was the oldest person there by about 35 years.
One of the people asked me about my retail experience, so I said I have never worked in retail (which is the truth), and she then asked me why I was there. I had to explain that the joke coach said I had to attend or face sanctions.
Life sometimes feels like running around in ever decreasing circles.
I’ve just seen a job ad. for a Postroom Operative, sorting mail (don’t think it’s Royal Mail) but talk about Barriers to work, they want a DBS, a 5 year checkable work history with references, and a Credit background check. Says employer pays for it all though. I won’t be applying as I can’t pass all of that & in anycase the job is out in the sticks & I wouldnt even be able to get there.
No amount of CV schools, interview workshops or whatever they throw at us is going to remove any of those barriers.
Then we have our age as a barrier. Transport costs and distance are another barrier as most menial work is located on the outskirts for the cheap rent.
Lot of jobs I could apply for require your have your own transport due to the location and lack of public transport. It really is a catch 22 situation for many in our situation.
The danger is applying for jobs that are not suitable in order to show them something at the job centre, if they pull you up on applying for a job you could not get to for example, then you can be lawfully sanctioned if that application forms part of your steps and therefore falls short.
I have only found 1 job I could apply for in the last 3 weeks.
There should be a way to sign on and claim benefits without the need to actively seek work unless you want to and those that choose to actively seek work should have an extra £20 per week on top of the regular benefits to help towards the costs.
Then it would be common sense to police them to ensure they are looking for work.
That’s not a bad idea, but rates need to be increased above poverty/hardship level they are at now, say £90 p/w as a basic & £110 p/w for active jobseekers. But like you say, there’s naff all out there to apply for. All the traditional industries have long gone, & if you’re over 50 with no specific skills, no recent work experience or many references, and no transport, it’s hopeless and they should just leave us alone.
Yep the rates are far to low to get even the basic essentials.
I do not think most people understand the difficulties when your single 50+.
There is no other income to rely like you get with a couple. If I were in a relationship and put the heating on we both share the bill, as a single person I have to foot the whole bill.
Same with electricity and food, it all costs more being single.
The only plus financially is council tax reduction but I see non of that in my pocket unless working.
As a single person aged 33, I can tell you that everything costs more if you’re on your own UNDER 50 as well. I can also tell you that there is an expectation out there that “young” single people should share houses with complete strangers. Therefore, the rate of Housing Benefit for single people under 35 is tiny. I have to top up my Housing Benefit by £90 per week in order to cover the rent.
Wow £90 per week was that a mistake ? how can you afford that ? your on benefits?
Yep agreed it is hard for any age group being single on benefits and the numbers are of single households is rising.
How can I afford it? By dipping into a few £thousand of savings from when I did work, to supplement my benefits. By getting help from a local charity. By receiving sick benefit, which is £125 per week – if I were on Jobseeker’s Allowance, I’d be screwed.
Nope, Sourchimp, it’s no mistake. I’m living in a studio flat. The council don’t give a monkeys.
The Housing Benefit rate trebles when I reach age 35.
That is terrible Alison fully understand the situation but how can you keep that up once your savings have dwindled, or are you close to hitting 35 ?
I’ll reach 35 in 16 months now, so I’m doing OK. However, I have been suicidal about my situation for years. I went to the hospital about it because it was affecting me so badly. I have long thought I would be dead by now.
This is why I feel this time I have to vote to get the conservatives out at least Labour with Corbyn show a glimmer of hope.
Not because of Cannabis that war is won already but for all those people who are suffering under austerity and conditionality and those hundreds of thousands who have died already.
Good news is if I vote expect 10s of thousand more abstainers to follow to bolster the numbers for a overall majority.
The silent majority will be heard then we will just go back to doing our own thing and hope our voice is needed no more ! :))
I’m delighted to hear that you will vote Labour this time. I am intrigued, as well, to hear that you have such a large band of followers.
Not followers Alison like minded individuals.
It’s very wrong Alison,people obviously need Housing Ben.nno matter whattheir age.The Tories areout oftouch with reality,or justplain warped & evil.
Quite simply all benefits should be paid at adult rates to anyone over the age of 18. An adult is an adult, is an adult, and once someone has reached the age of 18 and is therefore legally an adult, then the rights, responsibilities and the benefits of being an adult should apply. This increasing infantilising of the population is a gross insult. Perhaps we need something of a national conversation about this, along the lines of what people who are adults should be offered by society. As a base line think an argument could be made that every single adult should be entitled to a place to live that isn’t the rabbit hutch it increasingly is.
Is it, I wonder, because relatively few people in the younger age groups go out and vote, or join unions that they get screwed? It’s noticeable that all politicians, of whatever stripe, are wary of upsetting the pensioner lobby, which has a lot of clout, and comprises largely of a demographic that does go out and vote, and the politicians know this.
A humanist approach would be a good start.
Yes, I think there is a notion nowadays that “young people don’t vote” and that “poor people don’t vote”. Also, I think there is less opposition to policies that “won’t affect me”.
In the past, I think there was a stronger cultural narrative that said “we vote this way because that happened to our community in the past” or “we support our NHS because your gran died because she couldn’t afford to go to the doctor”.
Obviously, it is our responsibility as younger people to care about politics and write to our MPs and do what we can to make ourselves into a political force to be reckoned with. It isn’t easy when working people with children have to compete for attention with retired people who have all the time in the world. However, it doesn’t take much time to vote and I agree we need to do more. The internet helps a lot. I can fill in surveys and email my MP and keep up with political news quickly and easily through the internet.
There is definitely more interest in politics among young people today than when I was a teenager. Many young people do Politics for A Level. Politics wasn’t even an option for A Level when I was at school! I remember my school had a mock election in 1997 and a mock referendum on the Euro/Pound. I’d say that definitely raised awareness about politics. There were posters about Tony Blair’s policies on the toilet doors, for example.
Now that children have grown up watching mum going to the foodbank because the government have cut her benefits, I expect there will be more political engagement among younger people in the future.
Dream on trev, any basic income would be JSA or UC as many know it as now. When I was at school 69 to 80 you were looking at the usual industry work now most of that has gone. It’s shops, bars & restaurants, or IT if you get the qualifications.
They just set up people to be sanctioned, I used to get the better of them by asking for proof of postage and receipt. I was once given an application for an HGV drivers job so I ripped it up in front of him and threw it at him, he then said I would be sanctioned for not applying for enough jobs ended up with the manager and he got my paper and said see you in two weeks. I never saw that person again and never got sanctioned. I used to carry about 8 letters with me to every signing on appointment asking for stuff if they said things like I missed appointments, failed to attend, and so on.
There are quite a few industries round here, staffed entirely by East European workers, presumably recruited by agencies advertising in foreign languages.
When we tried to set up a business a couple of years ago when we were unemployed, we visited a business advisor who also had a recruitment business. He gave us lots of sound advice and seemed genuinely sorry for us given our predicament – late fifties, loads of experience, unable to even get interviews.
He did tell us however, that he regularly got requests from employers, not to send them CV’s of candidates over the age of 40.
When I told the jokecoach that, she simply said that could not happen – because it was illegal.
Yeah right!
I think JCP ‘coaches’ are made to work from a script these days,
and to give is the usual spiel when we tell them the reality of being 50+. Even if they as individuals acknowledge that what they’re told to tell us is a load of garbage, they still have to come out with this rubbish in response to our exclamations of disbelief. It is, of course illegal to discriminate on grounds of age, but so is paying women less than men for similar work, and has been since 1975. but women are still, on average, paid less than men for the same kind of work, and women are still discriminated against when it comes to promotion, or because they tend to have more babies than men.
In times past a Jobcentre advisor would already agree that there is discrimination in the system, and then try to help you get around that discrimination and quite probably take great delight in seeing some prejudiced bastard of an employer getting their comeuppance. How times have changed.
I’ve just been referred to some sort of back to work place called Standguide, don’t know what it entails yet or how long it’s for, given no details. Dreading it.
You know trev when you boil it down at our age they have very little power over us at the jobcentre, there’s no mandatory anything apart from the work and health programme.
I have this ready when they bring up anything else they can offer,
I am effective in job searching techniques such as speculative Emails and visits, directly using employers websites,family and friends
knowledge of all the major job portals such as total reed indeed monster find a job etc.
• Fully understand and able to use all information technologies effectively
• I am able to produce bespoke CVs and covering letters for any job role.
• I am able to use the STAR (situation task action result ) as a effective tool for
interviews.
• I belong to various online support networks and able to use social media effectively in my search for work.
• I have good English and Maths
• I am able to budget and manage my money
• I understand the barriers I face and the solution to those barriers.
that covers all the crap shit courses schemes and scams out there and would be pointless and a waste to public purse to send me.
Yeah,I don’t their help either but the Work Coach (Dole clerk)doesn’t see it like that, it’s a case ofif you’reaapplying for all these jobs but still not ge t ting interviews you must need help. What I need is a new phone!
Know how you feel last phone I had lasted about 1 hour after charging and cracked screen meant I was limited to some letters, only used it to tether to my PC.
Threw it in the end not looked back or had a phone since.
Much calmer without a phone but could not mange without a PC
Sourchimp, it does sound like Trev ought to attend if he possibly can, otherwise it’s very likely he’ll get a sanction. I shouldn’t think a sanction would help his financial situation. He doesn’t sound like he has the financial means to wait out an appeal.
Alison, these are my thoughts, not a verbal command.
I spoke by phone to the guy who runs this scheme and he told me it’s voluntary. The Work Coach never told me anything, she didn’t give me any leaflets or info about it or say whether it was voluntary or mandatory. It’s called ‘Right Steps To Work’ and from what I read on their website it involves all the usual bollocks – writing CV, using computers/jobsearching, interview techniques, and possibly unpaid work placements too. I might be bale to get out of it, but trouble is, even though it is technically voluntary it’s hard to refuse these things as it then looks like you don’t want a job or aren’t trying hard enough. Even though it’s voluntary I still feel like I’m being pressured into doing it.
I know what you mean when you say feel the pressure but this course is a waste of your time so why do it, who gives a shit what they think, it is what you think that counts.
Seriously unless it is a national mandatory scheme and at the moment that is the work and health programme there is nothing else they can force you to do !
You really do have a choice to accept this offer or not.
That’s the point, isn’t it, Trev? You feel like you have to do these things, otherwise the work coach could say, later on, that you’re not doing enough to find work.
It sounds as though many of these Jobcentre courses are not very useful. I know someone who had the same experience when he was on Jobseeker’s Allowance. He was referred to a careers advisor, but he didn’t find it very useful.
I hope this course is better than the rest, for your sake, but I don’t hold my breath.
I find that good courses tend to be available through local colleges.
I was thinking tha t this Right S teps course was jus t for a few weeks, found out today it’s for 12 MONTHS!
I am sure you know already it really is your choice to accept the opportunity or not, but once you sign on the dotted line then you have no choice but to attend.
Obviously I am not against anyone attending or doing anything willingly.
I am actually struggling to think of anything we actually can be mandated to do, there has has been a lot of upper court cases that has blown most of the fake power the DWP think they had away, GDPR also hit them that’s why no work coach access or monitoring on find a job and stops them sharing your data to parasites without your permission and workfare is dead in the water.
The only thing now they can make you do is If they ask you to apply for a job they have found and that is just about it, but that means they have to spend time looking for one that is suitable for you and as you know it is not easy.
Last time I challenged my work coach to find a job I could apply for on UJM they gave up after 15 minutes.
So I declare no change in circumstances tell them the 6 steps I have taken each fortnight and that is it, I do not have to do anything else to be entitled to benefits.
I refuse everything else unless of course if they ask me to apply for a job they have found that is suitable for my circumstances/
Like that report says the regime negatively impacts jobseekers who spend the time trying to keep within the rules attending pointless rather than using the time and energy finding work.
If there are no jobs for us then that is the failure of the government not ours.
It is all service industry now 83% traditional work is gone, give me a 21 point Raschel loom with a Jaquard head and I can knit my way out of poverty.
You could knit/weave some clothes and sell them on the internet.
By the way, what’s the point in calling yourself “rev”?
I was a lace maker not clothing, the looms I worked on were the first ever programmable machines using large punch cards strung together that ran through the Jaquard heads some looms were over 200 years old and most of factory is now in a museum.
Not sure why exactly this was the case but a large proportion of the workers there were Jehovah witnesses and we spent many years debating about religion. And for some reason they were all into home brewing beers/wines. And yet criticised me for growing my own weed.
I used to do a lot of fantasy role playing dungeons and dragon and some stage and film extra work when I left school so enjoy playing different roles.
I decided to change my picture and felt the Rev went well with it, I was going to rename myself Ally Lulya but wanted to avoid the same confusion as last time when I changed the both.
Oh I haven’t signed up to anything yet, not ’til I know what I’m letting myself in for. Am playing it a bit canny at the moment. Weighing up the pros & cons. If I decline to do this voluntary Right Steps bullshit I might get mandated onto the Work & Health prog. instead, which would be worse. I reckon (depending on the circumstances) it would generally be better to be on a course voluntarily, that way they would have less of an hold of power over you. Plus whilst I would be on this course it would pretty much guarantee an easy ride off the Jobcentre for 12 months, after which that’s another year done with and out of the way and I’m one more year closer to retirement. If it’s going to be just a case of calling in at this place maybe once or twice a week to do my jobsearch using their computers instead of the library then that’s not too bad, I can just wing it thru the course whilst fooling the Jobcentre that I’m doing something positive and meaningful. We’ll see. You have to skillfully navigate the obstacles of the Benefits system to your own advantage, it’s a game of strategy.
And whilst we all struggle to get by on next to nothing here’s some food for thought:
“Forty-two people hold the same wealth as half the world, Oxfam says”
Sophie Christie
22 JANUARY 2018
“The gulf between the world’s richest and poorest people is widening, Oxfam has claimed, with a report by the charity revealing that 42 people hold the same amount of wealth as the 3.7bn people who make up the poorest half of the world’s population.
The report, published to coincide with the first day of the World Economic Forum in Davos – which is often criticised for being little more than a talking shop for the rich and powerful – said that 82pc of the wealth generated last year across the world went to the richest 1pc of the global population, while the 3.7bn poorest citizens saw their wealth “flatline”.
Oxfam said it was “unacceptable and unsustainable” for economies to continue to enable a super-rich minority to accumulate vast wealth while hundreds of millions of people struggle to survive on poverty pay.
It called for a rethink of legal and business models that prioritise shareholder returns over broader social impact, highlighting how the “excessive corporate influence on policy-making, erosion of workers’ rights and relentless drive to minimise costs in order to maximise returns to investors all contribute to a widening gap between the super-rich and the rest of society”.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/01/22/forty-two-people-hold-wealth-half-world-oxfam-says/
That was in January Trev, it’s probably even fewer people by now. I remember seeing a figure for those who held half the world’s wealth in an Oxfam charity shop window about three years ago when the figure stood at 85 people, or about the same number that could get on a double decker bus.
Now only a single decker would be needed.
Agencies should be scrapped they are the cause of what a lot is wrong with the world of work at the lower end of the scale.
There should be no middleman wtf they do apart from help keep wages low and poor working conditions/practices .
Meanwhile, Universal Credit and Jobcentre hell continues, here’s the latest from Ashton Under Lyne:
“July 5, 2018
Universal Credit isn’t fit for purpose, but it inflicts endless suffering upon innocent, vulnerable people. ”
https://thepoorsideof.life/2018/07/05/universal-credit-isnt-fit-for-purpose-but-it-inflicts-endless-suffering-upon-innocent-vulnerable-people-this-weeks-blog/
Holding breath could be a General election in October if the conservatives carry on imploding, heck even I might vote labour and break a habit of a lifetime just to get them out.
That’s the thing, voting Labour is the only way to get rid of these cunts.
Too true.
Yippee! Even you, Sourchimp, will vote Labour! Do you think it was Corbyn’s stance on cannabis that swung it for you?
Where would we, Labour, be without our great leader?
Vote Labour, but also put them on warning that big changes are expected. Those of us here could quite easily come up with a list of demands.
The laughingly named ‘Centre for Social Justice’ now has another evil trick up its sleeve, to involve Housing Associations in badgering unemployed tenants into doing back-to-work courses & unpaid work placements in return for having rent arrears written off, presumably the logical conclusion being that those who refuse to comply will be evicted. I’m unable to post a link right now due to this crappy phone.
Sounds absofuckinglutley wonderful where do I sign ………
Sounds typical of the CSJ, constantly trying to dream up new ways of using poverty as some sort of leverage. How the hell can that be ‘socially just’? It’s that bloody Nudge theory again, positively Victorian.
It sounds Medieval to me. Like the serfs farming their little strips of land and giving their grain to the lord of the manor, in exchange for the opportunity to exist.
Perhaps they’ll ask you to review their scheme.
Speaking of reviews……..
I asked for the manager before I signed on and this time the main manager came over and we had a conversation regarding the scary Jobroom.
I explained that my main concern was that staff were informing customers that they HAD to visit the jobroom before singing on and were not being informed in advance that they would be required to do this, also it adds an extra 20 minutes to the sign on process and this was not acceptable.
Again I explained I was only there to sign on, review my steps and make a declaration and not to search for jobs.
He started to rattle on about how I have to look for work and had to go through that room, that was how they are doing it now at the job centre he not could not grasp how I thought I did I not have to do it, it helps you get work you have to actively seek work to get benefits, its just got jobs you might not know about I have had some positive feedback from others, so I cannot see what your problem is at all.
The force was strong in this one !
Well as far as I am concerned your opening yourself up to accusations of maladministration and your totally ignoring internal guidelines.
He looked at me in way as I can only describe as this guy has a screw loose.
I will ask you one question I would like you to answer before I proceed any further.
When I refuse to enter the jobroom will you refuse to sign me on ?
This put him on the back foot for a moment then blurted out again what he said previously. He was Lord of the manor how dare a pleb rock his world
I will ask again,
When I refuse to enter the jobroom will you refuse to sign me on ?
If you do refuse to sign me on under what legislation would you be refusing ?
It was at this point he asked me for my name and NI number then realised who I was having to deal with my previous complaint but he never saw me in person.
Oh right yes I see what your saying your correct you do not have to enter if you do not want to just go straight through and sign on.
So on my next appointment will also be free to make that choice or will I once again be told “I have” to go through the jobroom.
No it is your choice.
Thank you, signed on floated home !
Hopefully he will make changes so it benefits others, I will be taking it further.
It is wrong and needs stopping.
There was about 15 waiting to go through and did not look happy at all, couple of chaps I spoke to were sick of it and others just looked totally stressed.
It is basically a room with all the walls plastered with printouts from find a job, total,reed those we look at day in day out online.
They supposed to be moving towards a paperless office must have a been a few trees worth in there, as civil servants they have a duty to protect the public purse
It is all down to staff shortages and bothering folk.
Forgot to say there was also a non GDPR compliant form they wanted them to fill in with spaces for 5 jobs they had to copy from the wall and hand in, then they would be shouted by the work coach who then marks down what jobs they supposed to be applying for it is a sanction trap
Sourchimp, I’m not sure it’s looking at a few posters that causes people to be so stressed at the Jobcentre. Most of them have to go on the internet daily and look through hundreds of ads on Find a Job. Chances are that the staff at the Jobcentre have decided you must be a bit of a nut and concluded there’s no point in arguing with you.
Alison the majority are on JSA not UC and that is step based conditions(more than 2) not x hours per day like your suggesting.
ill or disabled homeless or suicidal get treated no different, if they can secure a off flow payment they will.
If refusing to be a puppet for the masters makes me a nut job in your view, then yes I am a nut job.
I call it taking back control.
Sourchimp, I am not calling you a nut job. I am merely suggesting that that’s what some people in the Jobcentre might think. You’re probably the only person who makes complaint about looking at a few posters.
Most people on JSA have to use the website called Find a Job on a near-daily basis. For example, Trev on this forum has to use it. Most people find that their money stops if they don’t use it.
Alison clearly you do not understand job seekers allowance act and regulations and that is not an insult but a observation.
You seem to have fooled along with many others that the DWP have infinite powers and folk must bend to their every whim. NOT TRUE
The Law is there for a purpose it protects us from amongst other things Governments they are not above the law.
I do not get sanctioned, I do not have doubts raised, I can tell them to fuck off when they are trying it on with me because I understand my rights.
They do not have the powers they are leading people into believing they have.
They lie and use deception to nudge,bother force people in inappropriate activities and jobs that are not sustainable.
Read the report you will understand it say it all right there.
Perhaps you’re very right, Sourchimp.
Meanwhile, everybody else does all these things the Jobcentre tells them to do. So it isn’t unlikely that the Jobcentre staff might think you’re a bit of a nut…or that you have a problem with authority/other people telling you what to do.
I suppose that could explain why you haven’t had a job in 30 years. Just about every job requires you to do what some twit of a boss tells you to do and most of the time it’s not really in line with the rule book.
If you consider resisting authority the actions of a nut then the Jesus must have been the biggest nut of them all would you not say ?
Sourchimp, it’s not what I think, it’s what other people might think at the Jobcentre. Can you imagine what other people might think in that situation? Not whether they’re right or wrong. Just what they might think.
No Alison what they think does not concern me, why should it ?
If anything they are thinking I do not want to lose my job, this guy is pressuring me, why am I being spoken to like this, there is a glitch in the matrix, mummy.
The reason it might concern you is because you need to understand what they are thinking in order to understand why they might let you out of going to the job room or decide not to sanction you or not require you to use Find a Job. It might not be because they are in awe of your “superior” understanding. It might be that they think you have a disability/don’t quite understand what’s going on.
When people stop disagreeing with you, it’s not always because they think you’re right. Sometimes they think you can’t understand, so they give up explaining.
A good work coach won’t sanction someone who doesn’t quite understand what to do in the first place. If you won’t follow instructions in any case because you think you know best, they might just feel sorry for you.
Do you honestly think that a Manager at the jobcentre who has spent so much time and effort putting this room together and the staff who excitedly run it are going to yield to me out of the goodness of their hearts, that now when I sign and walk straight through to the amazement of all the other customers that they will all not look like idiots.
If there was a micro chance of them putting me in line there and then and would not have hesitated at all to sanction me.
You credit them with having a heart and a conscience they have neither the are a machine, they are borg !
In my view, the most likely scenario is that they have a word with one another and say, “Oh, it’s him again. Yes, we know about him. Just let him do what he wants to do. Yes, he’s a funny one.”
Well in either case , it is win win for me.
I saw it on a website called 24housing.co.uk , under a title of “Housing shake-up could save £3B off Welfare budget” (or something like that). Google it.
I’d be tempted to do a lot more obscene to it than Google it.
Here’s the link:
https://www.24housing.co.uk/news/housing-shake-up-could-save-3bn-on-the-welfare-budget/
I had a support worker from a housing association for a while and he was very good. He helped me to look for work, although my mental health wasn’t good enough to go through with getting a job. He also helped me with things to do with my health and my flat. If housing associations were to do more of that, I would support it.
However, what I am not at all keen on is putting someone’s housing situation at risk because they did or did not cooperate with going back to work. I believe in stability of tenure, not insecure housing. If you can lose your home because you failed to attend a job interview, that is very insecure indeed and lives could be wrecked very quickly.
There’s a very obvious reason why housing association tenants are four times more likely to be unemployed: private rental housing and mortgages are very rarely available to anybody out of work, while social housing is only available to people with severe disabilities or young children to look after.
“while social housing is only available to people with severe disabilities or young children to look after.”
Alison we have been through this it is scaremongering and could put others off from trying.
Social housing is available to all that qualify that doesn’t mean just disabled or families, there is a shortage but if your single there are many flats out there and you have a better chance of getting one than if you need a house.
But as long as you have roof then there is very little chance of getting one.
I think they’ll find that’s not legal. If they want someone to work, they need to pay the Minimum Wage, not require unpaid labour in exchange for a promise to write off a debt. A loan shark could be prosecuted for such a scheme.
Tenants have the right to “peaceful enjoyment” of the flat/house, which means they have the right not to be badgered by the landlord about unpaid work schemes. I could sue my landlady if she required me to do unpaid work for her.
If the rent is being paid by Housing Benefit, there shouldn’t be arrears. The fact there are arrears suggests the Housing Benefit might have missed out a few payments. I would have thought that needed to be put right, rather than tenants being exploited for free labour because the system left them high and dry.
Housing is a right, in my view. A choice about where I work and the right to the legal Minimum Wage and fair terms and conditions are all basic human rights in the 21st century. We don’t live in a Medieval world of serfs and lords of the manor any more. If I choose to volunteer, that is my choice. I have the right to withdraw my labour at any time, without finding the wolf at my door.
Of course, I volunteer for charitable initiatives that provide community services like social activities for older people and the opportunity to participate in a leisurely gardening project. I expect the Centre for Social Justice is thinking of compelling people to work for free for profit-making companies whose business is padding pockets of fat cats, not improving the local community.
The Govt have caused rent arrears in the first place with Universal Credit. First create the poverty then use it as a stick to beat people with.
Many housing associations are already in the business of working as the Tories willing little helpers when it comes to unemployed tenants. The restrictions increasingly placed on tenants increasingly disgusts me, and the increasingly authoritarian approach to management is also a concern.
However, that kind of scheme is so far fetched and ludicrous that it actually carries the seeds of its own destruction. If a tenant has significant arrears, then it would be in their own best interests to sign up, and then be as creatively obtuse on these schemes that they are ineffectual in whatever it is they are trying to achieve. It’s virtual slavery anyway, and ignores a basic rule that humans work best in situations where they are making free choices, in a free society.
“humans work best in situations where they are making free choices, in a free society”
Exactly so we are naturally resistant to authority and this is borne out in the latest research that has been published in relation to welfare conditionality.
http://www.welfareconditionality.ac.uk/publications/final-findings-report/
This is a very good report, Sourchimp.
I recommend others read it.
It is a great weight of evidence that cannot be ignored.
I have been waiting for ages for the findings to be released and it agrees with many points I and thousands of others know to be the truth of it all and now this backs it all up.
Let’s hope all the MPs and the Governmen t read it.
Try again….Let’s hope all the MPs and the Governmen t read it.
It is a great weight of evidence that probably will be ignored, by both the Tories and Labour, and the MSM no doubt, just like all the other reports have largely been ignored.
So that report is this?
https://www.york.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/2018/research/welfare-conditionality-is-ineffective/
Yes that was the link to final report I posted published on the 9th of this month I think.
If you read it they nailed it imo.
Yes,Trev, your link appears to be a press release about the same report.
I thought we had learned that conditionality doesn’t work from the days of the Workhouse, but no, it seems to be a surprise to people even today!
Sorry about this constant stream of comments but I have a question…
Does changing your bank details (for JSA payments) qualify as a change of circumstances that would result in being transferred on to Universal Credit?
No that would not trigger a change, here is a decent list of the applicable changes.
https://www.entitledto.co.uk/help/changes_that_trigger_Universal_Credit
Cheers.
Looks like the Tories are falling apart, which is nice, but Boris is not to be trusted so far as he can be thrown. What a nest of vipers.
*PETITION*
Disabled People Against Cuts demand McVey must go for lies over Universal Credit
https://www.change.org/p/cabinet-office-disabled-people-against-cuts-demand-mcvey-must-go-for-lies-over-universal-credit
With all the Resignations happening lately let’s add McVey to the list.
Why has McVey still got her job? I don’t understand :/
I bet she still tucked in to her usual fry-up down the greasy spoon caff this morning tho. Wonder what’s for tea, a Gregg’s pasty & a battered Mars bar perhaps? Oh the Nouveaux Riche.
Do you really think she goes to greasy spoon cafes? She probably went to an expensive restaurant.
‘Greasy spoons’ in Cheshire ARE expensive restauran ts. It’s very affluent, the stockbroker belt.
Not Stockpor t, obviously.
Not in London either! Builders like greasy spoons. The well-to-do use independent artisan coffee shops.
OK then. Excuse my ignorance!
Apparently, McVey’s neck-of-the-woods isn’t called the “Stockbroker Belt” anymore, it’s now referred to as the ‘Golden Triangle’ , more based on house prices than anything but it’s a reflection of how seriously wealthy this area is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Triangle_(Cheshire)
I’ve driven through there years ago, very rural, green fields, fabulous thatched-roof old country houses dotted about. There are parts of this country that are like another world and that bit of Cheshire is one of them, which is probably why McVey is far removed from reality and doesn’t give a monkey’s toss about Liam Byrne’s constituents being unable to afford socks.
https://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/2018/07/15/daily-misery-of-universal-credit/
https://skwawkbox.org/2018/07/12/video-byrnes-constituent-cant-afford-socks-for-her-kids-mcvey-mocks-as-tories-jeer/
With enough money to buy a house round there, I don’t suppose they need to carry on working as stockbrokers.
YES! If they live in remote, rich-only communities, they will lose touch with the lives of ordinary people. However, the Notting Hill Set could be described as among the most out of touch in the whole country. I didn’t see them volunteering to help their neighbours at Grenfell Tower.
This is another example of how the Tories laugh when they are told about the suffering of the poor. It’s not just that they’re out of touch. It’s that, when they are informed, they do not respond the way that normal people respond. They are devoid of empathy, responding instead like robots. You could programme a computer to run welfare as they do because they do not apply human intelligence or emotion to their decision-making. Instead, they let the system run away with itself, like a runaway self-driving car.
Disability News Service is in dire straits and in need of donations to keep going:
https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/comment-nine-years-of-breaking-important-stories-now-dns-needs-your-help/
“Welfare” in the USA under Trump: An Ipswich Unemployed Action Special.
https://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/2018/07/13/welfare-in-the-usa-under-trump-an-ipswich-unemployed-action-special/
Big protests against Trump, no protests against Tories. Why?
Wondering about that myself.
No IDS baby balloon floating over Westminster, no activistshang-gliding over Chequers. I supposethere’s nothing like an orange Fascist to motivate the pc-brigade.
LAB: 40% (-) CON: 36% (-6) UKIP: 8% (+5) via OpiniumResearch
Tories have lost -6% the largest drop since 2010.
So by my calculation me voting should swing it !
If only the opinion polls were ever accurate…
If only I could post photos and videos of all the funny things I have seen on demos in my time…
– a woman dressed as Theresa May with a cardboard shoe on her head
– a man pushing a chair with wheels on it and a home-made robot in the seat, labelled “the May bot”
– someone dressed as Maggie on the arm of someone dressed as Cameron, with someone dressed as Heseltine behind them
– some people dressed up as police with a plastic kettle on a stick, with a blue light on top of the kettle, all symbolising police kettling protesters…and the real police nearby were LAUGHING and LAUGHING
– a huge pig balloon (bigger than the Trump baby) years ago, when the unions were protesting about pension changes
– every year, there’s a naked cycle ride in London, protesting about cycling conditions: one year, I saw it on my way to work and the protesters had sprayed their naked bodies blue
– many more things I can’t remember right now
My take is It this was the first opportunity to show trump how the people of the UK actually felt about his policies and the large numbers was just the sum of whole who protest all year round about the conservatives.
That and the rising prices of travel and lack of concessions makes protesting in person impossible.
Those who live close to the seat of power seem to have more chance than those up t’up north to express opinions in person.
Usually there are protests in London, Manchester, Cardiff and Glasgow/Edinburgh, all on the same day.
The last big demo here in London was on 30th June this year to mark the 70th birthday of the NHS. Something happens around May every year to protest against austerity/capitalism. Then there are numerous smaller demos, often outside town halls. Everywhere that Jeremy Corbyn goes, crowds turn out and protest austerity.
The problem is that the mainstream media do not cover these events. There is far more media interest in Trump.
I remember there was more coverage of an anti-austerity demo in Iran than there was of our last anti-austerity march here in London!
Also, Sourchimp, trade unions usually organise coaches to take people from home to London for big TUC demos. I’ve seen coachloads of protesters arriving from places like Wales. They park up somewhere in London and make a day of it. If you want to go to a big demo, see if there’s a coach going from your area to London/Manchester/another big city with a big march going on.
LOTS of protests against the Tories, but NO media coverage. Biased media. 100,000 march against Trump and you hear of nothing else. 250,000 of us marched against austerity in 2011. 100,000 of us marched against austerity in 2012. A group of us had a demo outside the DWP headquarters on a Thursday morning about benefit sanctions, cuts to Housing Benefit and the ending of the Independent Living Fund. 100,000 of us marched in support of the NHS last year. That’s just here in London. Good luck finding media coverage on anti-austerity demos outside of London! Journalists prefer to travel the world than travel round good old Blighty.
Poor media coverage, fair point.
Oh I haven’t signed up to anything yet, not ’til I know what I’m letting myself in for. Am playing it a bit canny at the moment. Weighing up the pros & cons. If I decline to do this voluntary Right Steps bullshit I might get mandated onto the Work & Health prog. instead, which would be worse. I reckon (depending on the circumstances) it would generally be better to be on a course voluntarily, that way they would have less of an hold of power over you. Plus whilst I would be on this course it would pretty much guarantee an easy ride off the Jobcentre for 12 months, after which that’s another year done with and out of the way and I’m one more year closer to retirement. If it’s going to be just a case of calling in at this place maybe once or twice a week to do my jobsearch using their computers instead of the library then that’s not too bad, I can just wing it thru the course whilst fooling the Jobcentre that I’m doing something positive and meaningful. We’ll see. You have to skillfully navigate the obstacles of the Benefits system to your own advantage, it’s a game of strategy.
What are you supposed to learn on this course?
How to get a job, basically. All the usual stuff; re-writing your CV, learning how to write a cover letter, jobsearching on the internet, practising interview techniques, etc. all the obvious things that any moron already knows, Plus learning how to ignore any health problems and pretend that no barriers to work exist by applying…*positive thinking*
Perhaps you could find a course that interests you at your local adult college and offer to do that instead? After all, many courses are free if you’re on income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance.
College courses don’t start til September and there’s no Adult Education classes anymore in my area. Besides, the Jobcentre don’t like people going toCollege, they’re only happy with coursesr tha t transfer public money into private companies, as theiR tory masters demand.
That’s a shame.
I’m looking at part-time gardening courses starting in September. I must return my form by 14th August.
I hope people are going to give full credit to #Progress.
Working behind the scenes to push Labour towards victory.
Look at the new poll results.
I think it probably has more to do with the Tories being so shambolic & falling apart at the seams.
Here’s Mike Sivier’s take on it, quoting from the Observer/Graun:
https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2018/07/15/labour-opens-lead-on-conservatives-for-the-wrong-reasons-says-pollster/
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/14/labour-opens-up-biggest-lead-over-tories-since-general-election
The new poll results are great, not that polls are accurate anymore.
Labour hasn’t been doing what Progress wants, so Progress can’t claim credit for a favourable opinion poll.
I think I’ve just realized what the phrase “Hard Brexit” means; it’s hard to be interested in Brexit when you don’t know where your next meal is coming from. Perhaps that’s it. Whilst a “Soft Brexit”, on the other hand, is when you actually have toilet roll.