Sainsbury's pull out of 'Work for your benefits scheme'

[Maggy J]

Originally Posted by richard1960

Fair enough and you raise some very good points i would think the answer to the qestion of wether these jobs lead to worthwile qualifications will be kept a good eye on by the press.

And those that have spoken out about the scheme have done some good if this is the case.

I do know about banardos main work but wonder if they are full appraised i hope they have been better appraised then the minister chris grayling.

Lets now see how it all pans out.

I'm positive that Barnardos understand the issues for disadvantaged unemployed youngsters.
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/commissi...se_studies.htm
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/resource...p?pid=PUB-1467
http://www.barnardos.org.uk/resource...p?pid=PUB-1361

[Hugh]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

It was the suggestion it was mandatory and that benefit would be removed if they didn't get what they expected from the scheme that made me cross.Also I suspect that all the large companies involved(and charities) will ensure that it is REAL works experience now the public eye is on the scheme not just stacking shelves and make do work..

I still have some reservations such as just how many placements can be offered if jobseekers actually get a job at the end of the placement and a company has less jobs/spaces available as a consequence.There must be a finite amount of actual jobs available especially as there are pockets of high unemployment around the country.Plus I'm wondering how good the 'training' aspects will be and if there are any real usable qualifications to be earned as a consequence.

And yes I do trust Barnados to have the age group concerned interests at heart.They are an organisation who deal with disadvantaged youngsters and know and understand that many 16-25 year olds from broken homes and social care are the very ones who do end up with a poor education and a lack of self confidence and do need a lot of support that is not always available from the government agencies after they are thrown off social care at 16.If they think it can work then I can get behind this scheme.

Funnily enough, the founder of the Big Issue magazine agrees with Barnados.

Times (behind a paywall)

Middle-class liberals should try a spell of unemployment before they criticise workfare

One of the worst places to be is on social security. From above you your paymasters, Her Majesty’s Government, seem ill-disposed to continue with the arrangement for a moment longer than they have to. From above you too, it would appear, vast supermarket-type businesses are desperate to suck the living blood out of you and pay you nothing in return.

Also above you, looking down at you and your predicament, are middle-class liberals who are outraged that you are disturbed in your hibernation from the job market. With great anger they shout that big business is exploiting you and that the Government is using you to boost corporate profits.

I tend to take a worm’s eye view of the situation that benefit recipients are stuck in. By a worm’s-eye view I mean what it’s like being down at the jobless ground level while these big people circulate above you, all full of advice and supposedly looking out for your best interests.

So what would I do if I were to join the ranks of the unemployed again? I would take the flimsiest offer of work even if the advantage was greater for the company that was using my labour than for unpaid me. I would take a punt at this work placement scheme, however impure or contradictory are the reasons why the Government or business want me to do it.

Why? Because life on benefit stinks. And any half-cocked exit plan is better than no exit plan at all. Maybe the work will not lead immediately to a job, but getting up and going to work in the morning must be a step nearer proper work than a step away from it.

Let me give you a few reasons why I would want out of the institutional state-sponsored poverty of social security. First, benefits are a Bastille, a life sentence for too many people. They not only imprison you, limiting your chances of liberating yourself from unemployed life, but they also cage your children, who are less likely to do well in school and get into higher education.

You will die younger and your health will be worse than that of an inhabitant of mainstream society; you will be more drawn to the stimulants of drink, drugs and tobacco; you will be more likely to suffer from mental health problems or end up in prison or excluded from school.

[Gary L]

Aren't Barnados doing mandatory unpaid work placements on the Work Programme?

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by Gary L

Chris Grayling is put on the spot by Channel 4 news with a letter that claimants are sent stating if they don't turn up or fail to start, their money may be stopped.
he suggests it's a letter for some other kind of scheme. but is told that it's a letter that has been confirmed by DWP to be the standard letter they send out.
he just keeps repeating it's a voluntary scheme, it's a voluntary scheme.. and probably said fiddlesticks at the end

http://www.channel4.com/news/catch-u...BENEFITSINT_28

Truly shocking. His arrogance carried on with hard evidence been said to him.

[chris9991]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...pulsory-unpaid

Talk about changes

[martyh]

The jobseeker believes his placement on the mandatory programme was linked to his attitude towards his adviser.

Says it all really .As if an adviser is going to care one way or the other if someone goes on a scheme .Maybe if the claimant had a better attitude or wasn't so paranoid then he may get a job

[Chrysalis]

Age discrimination at its finest. Its illegal yet the DWP does it on a large scale.

martyh have I forgotten something or is there less jobs than unemployed. Also job availability is variable across regions.

I cant stand comments like "just get a job". As if its simple to do.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

Age discrimination at its finest. Its illegal yet the DWP does it on a large scale.

.

what age discrimination ?

martyh have I forgotten something or is there less jobs than unemployed. Also job availability is variable across regions.

I cant stand comments like "just get a job". As if its simple to do.

good job no body said that then isn't it

[Chrysalis]

read the article, it clearly mentions age.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

read the article, it clearly mentions age.

You think it's age discrimination because the schemes refered to apply to 18-24yr olds ?

[Maggy J]

I truly cannot see how make work will actually incentivise anyone whatever damned scheme it is..Unless the end result is they get a job that they receive a decent wage for and it engages their interest.

And no there is nothing wrong in stacking shelves for short periods.If it is all you end up doing then it's not exactly going to engage you or interest you in working for a company in the long run.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

I truly cannot see how make work will actually incentivise anyone whatever damned scheme it is..Unless the end result is they get a job that they receive a decent wage for and it engages their interest.

And no there is nothing wrong in stacking shelves for short periods.If it is all you end up doing then it's not exactly going to engage you or interest you in working for a company in the long run.

I'm afraid that's a luxury only available to a few these days Maggie

[Chrysalis]

it gets worse.

Someone managed to get their own work experience in a field they have experience in, their job centre advisor told them to cancel that work experience and do one provided by the job centre instead or be sanctioned.

Also some over 35s (seems to be age discrimination affecting the older as well as younger) are not happy jobs are been kept for the young only by the job centre.

---------- Post added at 18:01 ---------- Previous post was at 17:58 ----------

Originally Posted by Maggy J

I truly cannot see how make work will actually incentivise anyone whatever damned scheme it is..Unless the end result is they get a job that they receive a decent wage for and it engages their interest.

And no there is nothing wrong in stacking shelves for short periods.If it is all you end up doing then it's not exactly going to engage you or interest you in working for a company in the long run.

if someone is shown what its like to d ajob thats enjoyable or at least offers a decent wage packet then they get to see the benefits. Work experience that does the opposite will just reinforce their belief's work sucks. (assuming its a workshy person doing the workfare).

The problem seems to be quite apparent that the job centre is treating everyone as workshy by default when they hit certian criteria.