Eff all and total silence from the DWP: update on the JSA Work Skills Courses Are Useless post

Readers of this site will know that I’ve been writing about the so-called “work skills” or “employability” courses that JSA claimants are sent on by jobcentres. These courses are provided by the likes of Reed, A4e and a host of colleges, subcontractors and endless other operators on the take. People signing on at jobcentres tell me regularly that many of these courses are completely useless. The courses last for several days and even weeks, and people end up with things like a certificate in jobsearch, which they feel will be totally worthless in the job market, or find themselves taking part in exercises where they tear pieces of paper up and put them together again to learn teamwork and that kind of thing. People writing in the comments on the last story reported being told to make towers out of drinking straws, or to roll marbles down a tube, and then being told off for doubting the relevance of such an exercise. This is the kind of soul-destroying crap that you have to put up with if you find yourself out of work for any reason.

People must attend these courses if the jobcentre says so. I’ve certainly talked with people who’ve been told they’ll be sanctioned if they say No. This morning I was in Haringey outside the offices of work programme provider Urban Futures (subcontractors to G4S), where people were being marched across the road in a line to some sort of construction course that they a) didn’t want to do and b) seemed to be struggling to get started properly on – a number of people went back and forwards between offices muttering about paperwork problems, registration issues and totally pointless exercises, etc.

Anyway, yours truly has been sifting through guidance and trying to get the DWP to answer questions about these courses – lists of providers, big and small, and contractors and subcontractors, how much providers are paid for each person they take on a course (I’ve heard talk of some hundreds of pounds), the funding that is available and where it comes from, accreditation of providers and quality control (ha ha ha), monitoring of standards (ha ha again) and monitoring of subcontractor standards. I am intrigued to know how much money providers really make out of this stuff.

I also want to know if people on JSA can say No when they’re told to attend a course. They may feel that the course doesn’t suit them or their skillset, or that they don’t want to go on another one, because they just finished an identical one which was totally useless and did nothing for anybody, etc. The people in this story were actually threatened when they complained about the rubbish course they were on. I also want to know what the DWP thinks happens to people who refused to attend a course. (As I say, I know what happens – they’re threatened with sanctions, or they’re sanctioned. Still, it’d be good to know the so-called rules as the DWP sees them). Needless to say, the DWP has refused to answer any of this – emails ignored, requests for calls not returned, etc. This has been going on, or not going on, for weeks, so I sent an FOI. That’ll end up in the long grass under a pile of turds as well, but let’s not worry about that for now. Feel free to keep sending details of your experiences on these courses through. Ditto for any guidance and reporting you can find. I’ve been hunting around. Feel free to join in and to email your stories to me here. The stories people have already sent through are pretty amazing.

“Worried about my 10-year-old daughter being safe in a B&B.” More homelessness stories from Newham

An update on this story: Candice, one of the homeless women I’ve been talking with in Newham and who is quoted below, was offered a place in Canning Town by Newham council today. Yesterday, she was told that she’d be sent out of London to live in Liverpool and that her case would be closed if she didn’t accept a place there. That would have been very difficult for her, because her family live in Newham and help her look after her 17-month-old daughter as you’ll see. Anyway, things seemed to change today when Candice went back to the housing office with a few people from the Focus E15 campaign. Canning Town it is.

———————————–

Yesterday, I spent several hours at the Newham council housing office at Bridge house with a number of women who are homeless.

Two things were noticeable right off: 1) that by the time I arrived at Bridge house at about 11, the waiting room was already full of people who had housing problems and 2) there were a lot of kids in the room. Some of the children were very young: in prams, or pushchairs. Some of the children were schoolage, though. I hadn’t thought about this aspect of things before – that instead of going to school on Monday morning, some kids go to council housing offices and wait while their parents try to sort out emergency housing. That’s surely got to put kids at a disadvantage as far as their schooling goes. I pretty sure there wasn’t a school holiday in Newham yesterday. I certainly asked around.

So. Below are a few interview excerpts which will tell you a bit about life for people who spend a lot of their time at housing offices asking for help because they don’t have a secure place to live.

One of the women with a child at the housing office yesterday was Charice Thompson. Charice said that she had been in the housing office with her ten-year-old daughter since about 9am. She had her belongings and extra clothes in bags with her. She had a plastic clothes rack with her as well – that was leaning against the back wall in the housing office. Charice said she’d been evicted from the revolting flat she’d been living in for three years for complaining about the standards in the place. She said that the flat had no hot water a lot of the time and that it was so badly infested with bedbugs that she’d ended up with a blood infection from the bites. She was clutching a letter from MP Stephen Timms which asked the council to house her and outlined her health problems. (I rang Timms’ office while Charice was waiting to see a housing officer, because she was concerned that she wouldn’t get to see someone and she and her daughter had nowhere to go last night. Someone from his office did ring me back yesterday afternoon). Charice and her daughter were given an emergency room in a hostel in Ilford at a charge of £196 a week. Her housing benefit would cover a lot of that, but she would still have to meet some costs. Continue reading

Learning difficulties and need support to sign on and avoid sanctions? Too bad.

Back to Kilburn jobcentre this morning for a Thursday signon session with Eddie, the 51-year-old man with learning and literacy difficulties who I’ve been working with as he’s tried to get his fortnightly jobsearch done and avoid sanctions.

The jobcentre was pretty chaotic this morning – understaffed, I think, and tense. Most of the seats in the waiting area were occupied by people who were waiting to sign on. A number of people were pacing around.

Eddie was one of them: “I want to get out of here,” he kept saying to me. “Let’s get it [the signon] done and go.” Eddie hates the jobcentre and he seemed fraught this morning. He said there’d been some sort of fight between a claimant and adviser and/or Security just before I arrived. I knew something was up, because I’d seen four or five coppers climbing out of their car and heading into the jobcentre just as I turned up at about 9.30am. By the time I got upstairs, the police were all hanging around on the first floor in the waiting area and I could see a couple of coppers talking to people in a side room.

They unsettled Eddie. He can barely tolerate being in the jobcentre as it is. He can’t sit or stand still when he’s waiting to see an adviser. He gets up and down and up and down from the waiting area seats. I watch Security’s eyes following him. Eddie’s been signing on for four years and he knows that his chances of finding work through a JCP are zero. I know it, he knows it and everybody here absolutely knows it. Nobody at the JCP lifts a finger to help find him work, which means that he’s trapped at the jobcentre now in a weekly signon loop. If you want my opinon and I’m sure you don’t, I think that the system basically sees him now as work programme/work course fodder. The jobcentre sends people in Eddie’s situation on the work programme and on so-called work skills courses, and providers charge for it all, but nobody does anything practical to help Eddie find the work he wants to do and has done successfully for years. Nothing here is geared to helping people sort their situations out.

Eddie worked for years as a kitchen assistant, but was made redundant four years ago. He wants another job. He really does want another job. He talks about little else: “I could work in a hotel kitchen, or a hospital kitchen. I want to do that job, but they give those jobs to someone else.” There’s nobody to help him to find a job though – nobody to call employers on his behalf, or put him forward as a candidate, or set up interviews, or to talk employers through his literacy difficulties, or to sort out any adjustments that he might need.

The jobcentre should be doing those things for him, but it is not and it will not. I’ve posted before about Eddie’s struggle to apply online for jobs – he finds it almost impossible to navigate around a jobsite or to run a jobsearch and to complete an online application on his own – and I’ve posted below about the problems he has completing a paper application. He finds things easier if someone is around to help him. “I couldn’t hardly read a newspaper when I left school, but the courses I did at the college helped me and they were better.” There’s no doubt in my mind that the jobcentre has given up on Eddie entirely – if it was ever fighting his corner in the first place. When we go in for his signon appointments, advisers glance at his jobsearch record, set a date for his next signon appointment, then wave him goodbye. Today, his appointment lasted about five minutes. The adviser we saw looked utterly exhausted and harassed. Continue reading

Threatened when we complained the “work skills” course was useless: more stories from the jobcentre

Update 19 November:

Talked to the DWP and asked for responses to these questions:

– How charging for these courses works
– The fees that providers charge for these courses
– What sort of quality control the DWP have in place for these courses
– Whether or not attendance on these courses compulsory for people who are claiming JSA and if the DWP instructs jobcentres to sanction people who refuse to attend a course (certainly people are sanctioned for not attending)
– What sort of reporting the DWP does on course attendance, quality, cost and outcomes.

That was on Monday. So far – nothing. Even reminders have been ignored. So – will ring again.

You can see from the comments people have left on this article how ridiculous these courses really are. You also know that someone is making plenty of money out of them.

——————————————————————–

Original post:

One I’ve been thinking about for a while:

Another phenomenon worth touching on when we’re talking about pointless jobsearch activity is the so-called “work skills” courses that JSA claimants are sent on by jobcentres. These are the courses that are provided, if that’s the word, by the likes of Reed, A4e and other of the usual suspects. People must attend these courses if the jobcentre says so. It’ll be news to nobody that people are told they’ll be sanctioned if they say No, and are indeed sanctioned if they say No. You can see that in the transcripts below. (I’m wondering if these courses ARE actually mandatory – or if people can say No and are just told they can’t, as they are told with everything else).

These courses have intrigued me for a while, because from the start, people have told me that so many of the courses are utterly meaningless. One man at the Kilburn jobcentre told me earlier this year that while he was sorting out a support worker job and waiting for CRB checks to come through, he was sent on a course where he was taught to tear up paper for teamwork purposes. “They sent me on this stupid course at Wembley. It was just a two week thing – a waste of time. They teach you how to stick a piece of paper back together as a teamwork thing. They said I’d get certificates for it. I said “there’s no way I’m putting that on my CV. You’re having a laugh.”

I started thinking about this again recently, because I’ve noticed that the JSA claimants I’m speaking with each week at jobcentres are getting angrier and angrier at the absurdity of these courses. It occurs to me that the anger is escalating. People are already furious at being forced to work 30 hours a week for free on community work placements and about the torturous daily sign on process. One guy at the North Kensington jobcentre (you can read more about this below) reported that his course provider took real exception when people on the course got together and said that the whole exercise was pointless. He said that the course provider pretty much got to the “Let’s Take This Outside,” point when people complained. “We got threats from the providers…I had no choice. I had to go on the course, or get no money.” Continue reading

Work focused interviews for people in ESA support group?

Crosspost from Disabled People Against Cuts – please share and send responses to DPAC at @Dis_PPL_Protest and mail@dpac.uk.net:

From DPAC:

“We are getting information that people in the ESA Support Group are being required by JobCentre Plus offices to attend work focused interviews, under threat of benefits being withdrawn if you don’t go.

According to the DWP webpage, if you are in the Support Group “you don’t have to go to interviews, but you can ask to talk to a personal adviser,“ which should mean that they cannot require you to attend.

We are going to look closely at this and do whatever we can to get this stopped, but in order to do that we first need to gather information about how widespread this is, which areas it is happening in and how long it has been going on.

So we are asking for people to come forward if you are in the ESA Support Group and have been contacted by your Jobcentre to attend an interview, we would really like to hear from you, please email us at mail@dpac.uk.net and we will get back to you

We will never disclose your name or personal information without your permission, but we may ask you if we can use your case to campaign against this. If you say no to this we will not use the information in any way, and your information will still help us to understand what is happening.”

DPAC has a template letter you can use if you receive a letter from the jobcentre about one of these interviews. You can find the template here.

Continue reading

Police, daily #JSA sign on and workfare. “It’s like being tagged.”

Back to North Kensington jobcentre yesterday – where that jobcentre’s sensitive leadership called the police as the unemployed workers’ group I was with handed out information leaflets to JSA claimants who must deal with sanctions and workfare. The coppers didn’t seem to care much about the leafleting when they arrived – although they did ask if the group could ring the local police station with advance warning of its next leafleting activity. Which was amusing. Highly. I can’t see advance phone calls to the police and copper-convenient leafleting sessions being organised in a hurry myself. Liaising with the police – particularly before an event – isn’t anyone’s bag and I don’t think there’s any requirement to do it. Jobcentres are just getting very touchy about anyone who might let people on JSA know that there are groups of claimants fighting workfare and sanctions. And that they can join in.

And anyway, the many people on JSA who I talk to want this unemployed workers’ group to keep turning up and challenging jobcentre management. I’ve written before about the concerns that people who attend the North Kensington jobcentre have raised about jobcentre advisers who bully the people they’re supposed to support, and about the pointless, oppressive daily sign-on regime that many claimants there are now subject to. “It’s like you’re tagged,” one woman who must sign on daily told the group yesterday. “You can’t go out of London for a day. You can’t even really go out of your area. You got to be around every day to come in here and sign on.”

This woman had another problem, too – and it’s one that will ultimately affect you, whether you’re in work or not. The jobcentre centre had just given her a letter which told her to attend a G4S meeting this week about starting a Community Work Placement. Continue reading

24, careworker on zero hours and facing eviction from Focus E15

Update Monday 10 November: Quick update: the eviction was averted. Doughty Street lawyer Jamie Burton came down and was able to negotiate a repayment plan and a review in two months’ time.

—————————————————————-

This afternoon, I spent several hours talking with a 24-year-old woman who is in rent arrears at the Focus E15 hostel and must appear in Bow County Court tomorrow at 2pm to try and stop her eviction from the hostel. If that fails, she’ll be evicted on Tuesday by East Homes. (East Homes is part of the East Thames Housing Group – if you like, give them a shout here @EastThamesGroup to ask them why they think homelessness is an acceptable option for young people who are already struggling, especially with winter approaching). If the eviction goes ahead, this young woman is pretty sure she will be out on the streets. She is probably right. She’s facing eviction from a homelessness hostel, which will make her – err, homeless. This woman suffers from depression. She is young and she is not rich. She’s in arrears and she will be punished. She has nowhere to go if she must leave Focus E15.

“I haven’t got anywhere else, because the only people I know are in the [Focus E15] hostel.” she says. “I want them [East Homes] to give me a month, or maybe two months to show that I can pay some of the money.”

A judge will make a call on that tomorrow. This young woman hasn’t got legal representation yet. She works as a carer on a zero hours contract and couldn’t get away from work on Friday to meet with a lawyer who may have helped. She will rely on a duty solicitor at the Monday hearing and hopes to get from work to court in time to get her story across to one. Such is our charming era.

I looked through this woman’s papers today. The whole situation is a shambles. It seems that as a Focus E15 resident, she once had a support worker who may have worked through some of these problems with her. She says that she went without a support worker for over a year, though, and a new one has only just been appointed. That left her foundering by herself in the usual bureaucratic hell – getting letter after letter about rent, arrears, council tax demands (she’s just sorted out a payment plan for that) and all the while wondering how many hours work and pay she’d get each week from the care agency she works for. She says that from time to time, her depression made it hard to sort her financial problems out. She’s young and she’s had nobody to guide her. A lot of people get into financial trouble when they’re young and discovering how the world works, if “works” is the word for it. Not everyone has wealthy relatives to bail them out. This woman is only 24 now. “I don’t mind admitting that sometimes, I would just think I’d let it [the problems with the money] go.”

A lot of the problems seemed to begin when this woman started work as a carer on that zero hours contract. The new income affected her housing benefit claim. She was responsible for a rent shortfall. Her income varied a lot, though – in a good month, she’d get £700. In a bad one, she’d get less than £100. Managing a housing benefit claim, and benefit claims generally, when you’re on a variable income can be difficult and painful in the administrative sense, and I meet a lot of people who aren’t at all sure what to do about it. This is one of the real problems with our zero hours age. People earn some money one week and very little the next. They don’t know if they can sign on for JSA to cover gaps, or whether they’re entitled to working tax credits, or how their changing income will affect their housing benefit claim. Wage slips need to be sent to councils and average housing benefit claim amounts decided. Big swings in income usually need to be reported to councils as a change in circumstances for housing benefit claims. A great many of the people I talk to have absolutely no idea who to ask for help with any of these things, or even that help might be available. Mix all that in with youth, inexperience, depression and you can see how people get into a mess. Continue reading

30 hours a week at all kinds of jobs on workfare. Your job is next

I’ve got more to add to this story, which I will do over the weekend – here’s a starter for now:

This is a photo of a timesheet from a London JSA claimant who is on a Community Work Placement at a charity called Embrace UK:

1timesheet

The Community Work Placement scheme is one of this charming government’s we-will-make-you-work-for-nothing “concepts” for people on JSA. Instead of finding people proper paid jobs, the government forces people to work for their tiny benefits for 30 hours a week and for up to 26 weeks in a local charity or organisation. This is workfare, pure and simple.

This claimant is a 44-year-old man who signed on a couple of years ago, because he was not able to cover his bills with the money he was making in a small business he wanted to build (he was self-employed). His work programme provider is Urban Futures. Urban Futures is a right bunch of charmers with a reputation for bullying. The company has recently come to the attention of Boycott Workfare and Haringey anti-workfare campaigners. Urban Futures appears to be delivering Community Work Placements in some sort of contract formation with the equally repulsive G4S. I tried to get hold of Urban Futures on the phone yesterday to ask about the concerns re: bullying, their involvement in CWP, how many people they were sending out to work for nothing in local charities and how much their contracts were worth. I gave up after being passed around to several people who didn’t seem to know what I was talking about and/or didn’t want to know and/or finally said the only person I could talk to was out of the office. I may try calling again next week, or I may just visit their Wood Green offices and lie on the floor in reception until someone responds to me. It’ll be Option B at this rate.

Anyway – the man whose timesheet you see above must work 30 hours a week from Monday to Thursday at the charity on workfare. On Fridays, he goes into a local Urban Futures office where he has to carry out his weekly jobsearch activities. He must apply for about 18 jobs on Fridays. Here’s one of the sheets he recently filled in for that.

jobsheet

So.

Two points for now.

The first is that this man’s CWP commitments are cutting into the time he has available to find paid work and to develop his business, which is what he wants to do. He said that the hours he spends on the workfare placement and in the Urban Futures office “prevent me from building my own business. I think I would have found another job much quicker [if I wasn’t on CWP].”

The second point is that he is involved in quite an amazing range of tasks at the charity and he should get a proper wage for all of it. I think sometimes people who aren’t yet affected by these things have a vague (and snobbish) idea that workfare means a bit of weeding in public parks (a job which, may I say, is a real job that also should be properly paid). I don’t think everyone quite grasps the reach workfare increasingly has, or how far into the workplace the government intends it to go.

This charity provides a range of advice, outreach and support services for people in the area. I spoke to the charity yesterday and the person there confirmed the range of work that people on CWP were involved in – and added that people were also working in data entry and administration.

“I’m involved in the sexual health [advice] team and the youth development group,” the man on CWP told me [a comment which, incdentally, piqued my interest re: CRB/DBS checks. The charity told me that people on work placements were supervised by DBS-checked staff or volunteers at all times when on outreach with young people as per DBS guidance. The ultimate responsibility and enforcement of this is a topic I’m particularly keen to pursue with Urban Futures. It is my understanding that providers are responsible for complying. I wonder how many pursue this tirelessly. I asked the DWP about this, but haven’t heard back. More on that soon]. “At the moment, I’m doing presentations for black history. I do presentations for new arrivals, homeless groups and things like that. I’m involved in the marketing team… You need good IT skills and good communication skills. [You need to be good at] public speaking and any sort of project type management, really. I’m doing all that for the JSA. It’s a lot. ”

Indeed it is. There’s an awful lot of work being done here – for free. Paid work as a concept is under real threat – and that’s paid work of all kinds. As this man said to me when we spoke – people in so-called white-collar work may not be particularly aware that “their” kind of job is being done now for nothing. “They’ll have doctors and lawyers on workfare soon,” he said. I wonder, you know. I could see Iain Duncan Smith getting off on that.

Bullying at jobcentres

A few thoughts on bullying at jobcentres:

I get the feeling that there is an adviser at the North Kensington jobcentre who over-enjoys, if I can put it that way, the power that jobcentre advisers have over JSA claimants. We’ve spent a few weeks now talking with JSA claimants outside that jobcentre and a lot of them mention this person. They certainly did last week. Here are three quotes I took. Two of them are from or about people who tried to say No to an instruction from an adviser:

“There’s a woman in there who signs people on. She is bullying people. She is the worst one. She ain’t there today, but she’s really horrible to people and she ain’t doing her job properly. She shouldn’t be working there.”

“There’s a woman in there. She’s a fucking cunt. All the other advisers – I have no problem with them. But she’s saying that she’s going to put me on an IT course, even though I’m signing off soon. Every day there’s an argument with her.”

“Yes, she said that to a guy who is 60…They had cut him off [sanctioned him] for four weeks, because he wouldn’t go on the computer course. But he’s in his 60s, retiring soon anyway. So he’s off for four weeks and they do that to a lot of people.”

So. This is the terrible power imbalance at jobcentres. On one side of the equation, you have advisers with the power to cut off people’s JSA money then and there. On the other side, you have JSA claimants who must hope that staff don’t abuse that power to stop money and/or aren’t under pressure to sanction. It isn’t much of an equation, particularly if you’re on the claimant side of it.

Some jobcentre advisers are reasonable – they’re trying hard to do an impossible job in an appalling environment. Others are not. As I wrote last week, a lot of the people we meet at the North Kensington jobcentre must sign on daily now – an utterly pointless exercise where people have to travel to the jobcentre every day at a different time, tell the adviser they see that they’re looking for work and then leave again. They also must hope like hell that they see a reasonable adviser each day. Your chances of seeing a vindictive one surely increase when you must go in daily. I think of all this when people tell me that so-called back to work schemes like traineeships are voluntary. I wonder what happens when you try to say “No, I don’t want to/can’t do that” to some advisers and managers at this jobcentre. I think jobcentres should be opened up to spot-checks and scrutiny from campaigners, journalists and MPs, so that we can all go in and find out.

Learning difficulties, signing on for JSA and hoping for a merciful jobcentre adviser

Right. This one goes out to anyone who still believes that there’s a safety net in place. It’s also for anyone who believes that the jobcentre system is still vaguely functional, or that there are checks and balances in it to keep things fair.

This post is an update on a story I’ve been writing about a man with learning difficulties who is signing on for JSA. He sometimes struggles with his jobsearch, because he isn’t able to use a computer to apply for work. He hasn’t been sanctioned so far, because his jobcentre adviser has been reasonable. The problem is that she’s suddenly no longer his adviser. Now, he’s in a precarious position. It is unlikely that he’s the only one.

Let’s start from the beginning:

Readers of this site will know that I’ve been spending time with Eddie (name changed), a 51-year-old Kiburn man who has mild learning difficulties. He also struggles to read and write with any fluency. He has spent most of his life working in general assistant jobs in commercial kitchens and stores, but was made redundant about four years ago. He’s been signing on for JSA ever since. Eddie is desperate to find another job – but he doesn’t think that is going to happen through the jobcentre. Neither do I. That’s because I’ve seen the whole process in “action.” Every fortnight, Eddie goes to the jobcentre to show his adviser his jobsearch papers. He must prove that he’s searched for 14 jobs every two weeks. The adviser checks his papers, sets a time for his next appointment and then waves him goodbye. The whole exercise takes ten minutes, if that. Nobody ever offers to call employers on Eddie’s behalf, or to put his CV forward, or to organise interviews, or to liaise with anyone who might take him on for work. It is incredible to think that some people are now being forced to engage in this moribund process every day. It is unpleasant to know that Iain Duncan Smith believes he’s onto a winner with this kind of “concept.” It is also unpleasant to know that he may well be onto an electoral winner with this kind of concept, given that the “scroungers” line has well and truly taken hold and there’s no political opposition to the destruction of support for people who are out of work.

Anyway – in my last post, I wrote about the problems Eddie had completing an online jobsearch. His jobcentre advisor had told him to choose and apply for at least three jobs online as part of his fortnightly quota. The problem was that Eddie couldn’t use a computer well enough to start this jobsearch (as you can read here, he wasn’t sure what a browser was). He was unable to type in the complex urls that he’d been given – you can see some of them on the list he was given here:

Christmas jobs list

and he struggled to follow the text on the job application pages. He was very concerned that he’d get sanctioned if he didn’t complete the three online applications. I ended up typing his CV and then submitting the online applications for him. When we went to his signing on appointment, we raised these issues with his jobcentre adviser. The adviser freely admitted that she knew Eddie couldn’t complete the online jobsearch – but said that she was unlikely to sanction him because she knew about his learning and literacy difficulties. Unfortunately, as I said at the time, that isn’t good enough. People in Eddie’s situation can’t rely on a forgiving adviser to protect them from sanctions. We’re in a sanctions-driven environment here. Things can change very suddenly. Advisers come and go, or take leave, or go off sick, or move to new jobs. A reasonable adviser can suddenly move on.

Which is, of course, exactly what has happened. Last Thursday, Eddie turned up for his fortnightly signon session, only to be told that the adviser we’d seen two weeks ago wasn’t working on Thursdays any more. (I wasn’t able to accompany Eddie to last Thursday’s appointment, so he went alone. He said he didn’t have a good experience. People often report that they are treated with less respect when they go alone to their jobcentre appointments). Eddie was instructed to show his jobsearch papers to another adviser. He reported to me today that the new person was impatient and told him that he’d need another appointment. Eddie was worried that this meant he was going to be sanctioned. Unfortunately, this new adviser wasn’t prepared to reassure him on this point, or to make a new signing on appointment for him. Continue reading